Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
08-14-78
AUGUST 14, 1978 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was held in the Council Chambers at 7:00 P.M. Monday, August 14, 1978, with Mayor Leon M. Weekes presiding, and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, City Attorney Roger Saberson, and Council members Robert D. Chapin, Charlotte G. Durante, Aaron I. Sanson, IV, and James H. Scheifley (arrived at 7:04 P.M.), present. 1. The Lord's Prayer was recited in unisono 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of American was given. 3. Mr. Sanson moved for the approval of the Regular Council Mi- nutes of July 24, 1978, with the City Clerk's office rewording or deleting the last paragraph on page 12 to make that paragraph more clairvoyant, and for the approval of the minutes of the Special Meeting of July 17, 1978, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Mr. Chapin and Mr. Scheifley abstained because they did not attend those meetings. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. 4.a.1. Mr. Sanson noted that in looking at the zoning ordinance changes that have been done in the last few weeks, he wondered if there will be a point at which the zoning code will be readopted as amended, or will it be continued with the additions. The City Attorney stated it will probably be readopted in total when Council adopts the comprehensive plan under the Comprehensive Planning Act. 4.a.2. Mr. Sanson read an editorial regarding the situation that has been occurring in the City of Delray Beach relating to the water treat- ment controversy. This article appeared in the Condo News, one of the larger newspapers in the northern part of Palm Beach County, on August 2, 1978, written by the editor. The title of the article is "More Bureaucratic Garbage". Mr. Sanson stated he is glad to see that one newspaper realizes that much of what you read about is what the situation is - a charade. 4.a.3. Mr. Sanson stated he would like comments or some attention from the City Manager and Council on an article from South County Cable; an article based on some comments made by the City's new director of Parks and Recreation, Mr. Winters, concerning Atlantic Dunes and Anchor Park. Mr. Sanson expressed concern about some of Mr. Winters' comments. Some of the comments were sort of setting policy for this Council and someone should communicate with him to perhaps straighten him out on this. The first comment Mr. Winters made was that the park would be open from 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. and,'in fact, Council had said the park would be open from sunrise to sunset which, in the winter time, would be well before 8:00 P.M. Mr. Sanson noted that Mr. Winters also stated that he had not made a decision as to whether picnic tables would be erected at that park. Mr. Sanson stated that as far as he under- stands, no one intends on having picnic tables located at Atlantic Dunes Park. 4.b. Mr. Scheifley noted that the Mayor of Miyazu, Japan, sent him some beautiful Japanese material to make a Kimono and an obi but tonight, at 7:00 P.M., the friends of Morikami met at the Chamber of Commerce building in Delray Beach, and he gave this material to the friends of Morikami to be put in the museum or to be used in some way in the public interest; that is the reason he was late in arriving. 4.c. Mayor Weekes noted that he recently had the pleasure' of accepting two awards on behalf of the City of Delray Beach; one is to the City from the National Little League of Delray Beach for completion of Miller Park in time for them to hold their season here. The second plaque the M~yor received was for Lem Brawner who, nt the ~ime, ¥~s the acting City Engineer; this was in appreciation of Mr. Brawner's many, many hours of work over and beyond the call of duty in an effort to get the park completed and, at the same time, save the City several thousands of dollars in the construction of that park. 5.a.1. John Gotlinqer, 1710 South Ocean Boulevard, Delray Beach, stated that earlier this year they heard that the City would be getting water from Boynton Beach, if necessary. His water pressure is still low and part of that water coming from Boynton Beach was to bring that pressure back up and he would like to know when that is scheduled. Also- whether or not the City will get the new water plant. Mayor Weekes stated that the modification of the three filter. hopefully, will increase the City's capacity of 3 million gallons per day which would be sufficient to enable them to increase the pressure without having to buy water from Boynton Beach, which has certain inherent negatives involved in it, particularly pricewise. Upon question bY Mr. Gotlinger, Mayor Weekes noted that one of the filters is being modified today and he would judge that it would take maybe 30 to 45 days to test it and get it rated. Once that is done, they can proceed immediately to modify the other two filters - probably 60 to 90 days for all three filters. 5.a.2. Mrs. Willanzheimer, 2809 Spanish Trail, Delray Beach, stated she would like to know why the city is giving away the road leading to the bridge to Boca Raton. The bridge was built a couple of years ago just for this purpose; there are a lot of people who use that bridge very conveniently in order to get to Boca and avoid the traffic on U.S. No. 1o It was built with state funds and now the developer gets all the benefits, taking over the road and and tearing down the bridge. She stated she is protesting this action and would like for the road and bridge to remain as it is. Mayor Weekes advised that the City is not going to tear down that bridge; there is some question as to the owner of the bridge, and he has asked that this be researched because he was told it was given to the City. He noted that the City has no intention of tearing down the bridge, however, abandoning the right-of-way approaching the bridge has essentially the same effect because it will no longer be a through- way. In arriving at that decision, he can only speak for himself as a member of Council, and his decision was that taken on the whole, the best interest of this City was served'by allowing the proposed project to go forward, as proposed, inspite of the fact they will have to give up that right-of-way. 5.a.3. O.F. Younqblood, 210 N.W. 6th Avenue, Delray Beach, stated he received a license some time ago to sell homegrown palm trees and shrubbery and it was suggested that he might do better if he can get permission from city Council to advertise a few Saturdays from 9:00 A.M. until 6:00 P.M. on the corner of Atlantic Avenue and 4th Street. The City Attorney advised the zoning and specific aspects of Mr. Youngblood's request need to be checked out because he wouldn't be prepared, right now, to answer whether he could or could not. It was suggested by the Mayor that Mr. Youngblood work with the City Attorney to get an answer as to the legal aspects of his request. - 2 - S/14/78 Mr. Sanson noted that when Mro ~Randolph was on Council, he tried several times to appeal to Council to stop that practice and, as far as Council understood, the selling of fish, vegetables, etc., was illegal. Mr. Youngblood stated that, if it does not work for se!lin~, perhaps he can just advertise - have some shrubbery around and give out cards to purchase the shrubbery at his home. 6.a.1. The City Attorney reported that Council has been given copies of two contracts pertaining to the purchase of the Country Club. One contract is for the exercise of the option on tract one, which is the bulk of the Country Club property, and the other one is 5.9 acres which currently covers the second green and the third tee. Mr. Sanson noted that he has no disagreement with the purchase of this Country Club but he-does not understand why it was not an announced item on the agenda. This is an item to some degree of contro- versy; it is an item that many members of the public are very interested in and would perhaps like to have comment on and by not having it on the public agenda, with no announcement or publicity, they are not given the right to come and comment on the action tonight, if they so desire. If it is Council's desire to proceed tonight, he will be making a motion that they not do that, that this be tabled, if need be, for a special meeting. The City Attorney referred to the contract entitled "Agreement for Sale and Purchase" which pertains to the bulk of the Country Club. On page 2, he pointed out that the purchase price which was agreed upon is $1,400,000; paragraph 2 refers to the closing date and provides that the city will close within 10 days of receipt of the funds in the sale of the bonds, which the City is using to finance the sale. It should not be earlier than October 15 and not later than March 20, which would be the last day that the City could close legally under their option rights. The city Attorney noted the next paragraph provides that in the event that the City fails to perform the contract within the time specified, ~that the sum of $140,000 or 1~ of the purchase price will be forfeited as liquidated damages. In the event that the seller is unable to perform, then the City may seek specific performance of the contract, which is to compel the seller to convey title. The City Attorney stated there are two reasons he is drawing Council's attention to this: (1) because of the amount of money that is involved, and (2) in this particular situation, this is a standard provision in most real estate contracts; however, this particular transaction is not what he would term a standard transaction, as such. The liquidated damages are in lieu of what would ordinarily be damages that a party might sustain for a default in a buyer's failure to perform. He noted that in his negotiations last week, he told Mr. Koch and Mr. Kelly, who is Mrs. Harris' son-in-law, that he would present this to Council and, as far as he is concerned, it is a business judgment as to whether or not Council go forward with the contract with that clause in it or not. He stated he felt that there was some question as to whether or not they would actually sustain damage in the normal view of contract damages in this context; the property in any event, would be tied up until March 20, 1979, because that would be the last date upon which the City could have ordinarily exercised option. Therefore, if the City fails to close on March 20, the seller is in no different position than they would have been in had the city not exercised the option to begin with. To that extent, he thinks it is highly unlikely that there would be damage in the context of the law of sale. There are other damages they may have which have resulted because of the publicity surrounding the sale relating to the drop off in membership, employees leaving, etc. - 3 - 8/14/78 The City Attorney stated he just wanted to inform Council of this clause and, if they feel it is warranted, it wiii be included in the contract; this is probably the most important clause in the contract. In the prorations, this provides that the e×isting golf course memberships will be refunded and memberships terminated as of ~ate ~f closing and there is going to be an insert after the word "refunded" just to indiemte that they wiii be refunded by the seller. Under paragraph five which is the rimk of loss provision, this is 9oin9 to be reworded somewhat so that the seller may restore the improvements if done by closing, if not, the seller will take the property as is together with the insurance proceeds. The property is currently insured for 8~ of its replacement value under a co-insurance requirement and the City wiii be able to take the proceeds; they will name the City as a "loss payee" under that policy and they will also agree to continue to maintain that in effect until the closing. He will also check with the City's insurance consultants to see if they can cover the difference as far as the actual coverage. As far as the existing personal property, they would not agree to permit the City to use the existing equipment and personal property on the golf course currently being used for any period of time after the closing. They will remove all personal property within 30 days after closing at their expense. All utilities, rents, and other items of revenue will be pro- rated as of date of closing; the only lease applicable to the property is the lease referred to in paragraph J on the second page, which is $1.00 a year lease provision. On page 2 of schedule A, there is a list of some of the personal property that is going to be included, or the fixtures that are going to be included, as part of the sale. Also, a memorandum has just been passed to Council from the Director of Finance which has a list derived from a recent visit he had with Mr. Kelly at the Country Club, as to additional items to be included, other than those listed in this paragraph. On the next page of schedule A, an arrangement was worked out with the seller whereby the City would change the legal description to exchange an equivalent number of square feet so that the existing encroachments from each party would be cured. In regards to this, Mrs. Harris has asked that the particular area where the encroachments exist, that the exchange of property be surveyed, which it will have to be in order to make the exchange accurate and that the parties split the survey cost. In any event that it's necessary that the 5.9 acres be surveyed as well and the expense split equally in regard to that. They have also asked that they receive the right to use the road, which currently is on City property, which goes from Congress Avenue through the golf course in a westerly direction, out to Homewood Boulevard (only a portion of it encroaches on City property). They would like to be able to use that for 90 days after the closing. - The City Attorney stated that if Council is agreeable to the contract, as it is, that they authorize it with the comments he has made and, also, further authorize the finalization of the contract by the City Attorney's office in conjunction with the Administration to finalize the details because there is going to have to be made some minor adjust- ments when they actually get down to the signing of the contract. Mr. Scheifley moved that the City Council give the City Attorney authorization to conclude this agreement with the seller of the Country Club as proposed, including his comments subject to working out some of the minor details with the Administration and that it be done as soon as possible. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Sanson moved that the final consideration of these agree- ments be scheduled for a special meeting to be held Wednesday night, 7:00 P.M., so that proper public notice could be given to the actions Council is about to take, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously with the amendment that Council also consider the contract for sale and purchase next Wednesday at the special meeting. Before roll call, Mr. Chapin stated that the City Attorney has requested that this Council make a business judgment regarding the second paragraph in item 2 on page 2. Mr. Chapin noted that he is well aware that in the contract for the purchase and sale of real estate, a liquidated damages clause is a normal, standard arrangement to protect the seller's deposit which is normally 1~; however, as the City Attorney pointed out, and he fully concurs, this is not a standard purchase and sale agreement but rather an exercise of an option granted to the City twenty-one years ago. It ~ rare, indeed, that an option of a liquidated damages clause be included where the City has a right to exercise this option. To protect the taxpayers, he would be very leery and would vote against any provision calling for a liquidated damages clause where the City has a right to exercise the option; therefore, he would strenuously object to the inclusion of that paragraph, other than that with a few minor details he considers technical, as opposed to substantive, he is prepared to approve the agreement. The City Attorney stated it would help if the rest of Council could give him an opinion with regard to the second paragraph on page 2, item. 2. It was the consensus of Council to go along with Mr. Chapin~s statement. At this point Mr. Sanson stated he would amend his motion to include the contract for sale and purchase for formal action at the special meeting to be held Wednesday night. The roll to the motion was called. 6.a.2. The City Manager stated it would probably be appropriate if Council would determine whether or not they wish to take action and make official input with regard to the 208 Facilities Plan, which has been discussed at various times, especially in connection with the duties and responsibilities of the Sewer Board. Mayor Weekes stated this came to his attention that the cities have been given an opportunity to have input into this management study as to the lead agency for the 208 pro- gram and, so far, only four cities out of 37 have responded. The question that comes before Council tonight is, does Council, as the City of Delray Beach, wish to make a response and, if so, what kind of response. The response has to be delivered to the Area Planning Board by Wednesday morning. The Sewer Board opted for something called an option 6 which was to have the South Florida Water Management District act as the lead agency. Mayor Weekes stated he was told that that is not a viable option, that the South Florida Water ManagementDistrict has no desire and will not undertake that, therefore, the Citizens Advisory Committee has recommended a modified option 3. The original option said the lead agency would be the five county commissioners; as modified, that includes the addition of four elected municipal representatives to be appointed by the Municipal League, a representative of the Soil and Water Conserva- tion District and a representative of INCON in the north end of the county, which would give an eleven man board. The Mayor stated that the options they have are to do nothing, to adopt one of the options, or send a letter telling them Council is unable to accept any of the options. - 5 - '8/14/78 Upon question by Mr. Scheifley, Mayor Weekes stated that Mr. Startzman does not like option three and feels that this is some- thing being forced upon the City~.. Mayor Weekes stated he thinks Mr. Startzman admits that option 6 is not a viable alternative and there really isn't one they can say they really like. ~ Upon question by Mr. Scheifley, Mr. Sanson stated he was lukewarm to Option 6 that the Sewer Board put forth but felt that it was the best they were looking at but it certainly wasn't the panacea. If that is not acceptable, he could not go back to the other five and the latest option put forth, would not be viable either, if for no other reason than the fact that the Board of County Commissioners, right now, cannot actively participate and does not actively participate on all the boards that they have to serve on. Their workload is too great and he cannot see where they would find the time to take on anymore in a responsible manner. Mr. Sanson questioned whether the attitude of the South Flo~ Water Management District is that they don't want it or can they actUaIly not take it. He stated his understanding was that if they are "ordered to do it" they are going to have to whether they like it or not. Mayor Weekes stated he couldn't answer that question but he feels they are the logical ones because they have the expertise to do it. Maybe Council should go ahead and accept it and if enough people pursue it that somebody will see that they do it. Mr. Scheifley moved that a letter be written saying that none of the five options presented are agreeable and Council is still of the opinion that the lead agency should be the South Florida Water Manage- ment District, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.a.3. The City Manager informed Council that he has a small related item to item 6.j of tonight's agenda that he would like to bring up after item 6.j. has been considered. Mr. Scheifley moved that the City Manager's item be discussed after the discussion of item 6.j., seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.a.4. The City Manager reported that the budget calendar calls for workshopping the budget during next week and he would like to know whether Council will be available for meetings on Wednesday and Thurs- day nights, August 23 and 24, 1978. It was concensus of Council to meet next Wednesday and Thurs- day nights for the workshop meeting on the budget; however, Mr. Sanson stated he will not be able to attend on Thursday night. The meetings are scheduled to begin at 7:00 P.M. 6.b. The City Manager reported when Council approved the Cody & Associates, Inc., pay plan study on May 5th, funding was not provided. It is recommended that transfer of funds for this study be made as follows: FROM TO AMOUNT General Fund Contingency 364-800 City Hall 160-315 $4,500.00 Water & Sewer Fund 424-800 Utilities Administration 1,500.00 Contingency TOTAL $6,000.00 - 6 - '8/14/78 Upon question by Mr. Sanson~ the city Manager stated that, originally, he wrote Council a memorandum saying that they were planning to workshop the pay plan and he mentioned a date of August 21st. He later discovered that Mr. Palagrino would not be available on that date, as he would be on vacation. The workshop was then rescheduled for Sep- tember 5th as Mr. Palagrino would be back from vacation. Mrs. Durante stated she thinks that if the pay plan study had really been worth the money it would have been good to workshop it be- fore the budget, but it is really of no use at all. She stated she does not think that Council needs to workshop it. The City Manager stated that although he did not advocate having the study made, he does not entirely agree with Mrs. Durante. He stated he has seen a number of pay plan studies and he knew about what to expect. Mr. Sanson moved that the transfer of funds that is outlined in the preface of tonight's agenda under item 6.b. be made, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.c. The City Manager reported it is recommended that Council authorize payment of $8,055.97 to Lyons Construction Company, which amount is the city's share of the cost of paving and installation of a sanitary sewer on Dotterel Road. The total cost of the improvements was $76,366, with $68,280.03 of this amount being paid by the developers. Mr. Chapin moved that the Council approve the payment of $8,055.97 to Lyons Construction Company for the City's share of the cost of paving and installation of a sanitary sewer on Dotterel Road, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.d. The City Manager reported it is recommended that Council authorize advertising the sale of surplus City property in accordance with established procedure by ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved that Council authorize advertising the sale of surplus City property, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Said motion passed unanimously. Before the roll call, Mayor Weekes asked what type of pro- perty it is. The city Manager stated that it is miscellaneous property from several departments. Mrs. Durante asked if Council could get a list of those pro- perties so they will know what they are selling. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. The roll was called to the motion. 6.e. The City Manager reported that Council should designate, by motion, the City's voting representative for the Florida League of Cities Convention to be held in Hollywood, October 19-21, 1978. Mr. Chapin moved that, in the spirit of history, the Mayor be authorized as the City's voting representative for the Florida League of Cities Convention, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Scheifley questioned where the convention is going to be held in view of the fire at the hotel which was burned to the extent of $1 million. The City Manager stated he does not know yet whether they are going to change the location but as soon as he learns, he will notify everybody. - 7 - :8/14/78 6.f. The City Manager'reported that Council, at the July 3rd workshop meeting, decided that consideration of approval of a Stipula- tion Agreement between the City and Auto Certified Repair Service, Inc., should be deferred and brought back to .the agenda when all Council mem- bers wOuld be present. Mr. Chapin noted that the City has been sued by this firm as a result of the City's denial to grant a rezoning request by a majority vote of 3 to 2. When the Board of Adjustment lacked jurisdiction, the law suit was initiated and now the City has been given the opportunity tonight to settle that law suit on terms which he-feels are favorable both for the City, the neighboring property owners, and the subject property owner. This is a City pocket surrounded by County land and it is his understanding based upon information received from the City Attorney and the City Planning Director that the property surrounding - the property, at least on three sides, is zoned by ~the County as commer- cial contrary to City's Master Land Use Plan adopted by this Council unanimously in November, 1977. If the court opposes the zoning, the zoning will remain as is, the property will continue as is, and he does not feel that is in the best interest of all the residential ~families who live to the west of this subject property. On the other hand, if the court finds that the City zoning is arbitrary and contrary to good zoning practice, the court could overthrow .the City's residential zoning and, therefore, require the City to zone this property commer- cially. The City will be forced to accept that as a matter of law and that would set a bad, in his opinion, zoning precedent for that area. It would put the city in line with the County area and his feelings are the area is not fully established as to which way it will proceed, whe- ther it is multi-family residential or commercial. In his opinion, it would not make sense for the City to proceed to a trial they face the risk of losing and he does not think there will be much to be gained. Based upon the inherent risks of litigation, time and expense involved, and based upon his experience as a lawyer, this proposed settlement is in the best interest of all concerned and has no detrimental effects either in the settlement itself or what some might think might be an unfortunate precedent to deviate, to violate the integrity of the City's zoning code. Mr. Chapin stated he thinks it's time for the problem to be re- solved and the residents in the Tropic Palms area deserve to maintain their residential neighborhood and the only way that will be done will be to enclose many of these commercial areas, which are now open-ended To upgrade that entrance to Tropic Palms and that area of town, which is growing, he thinks the City is best served by entering into the stipulation, reducing the risk of losing the law suit, reducing the City's expenses and the cost of defending it. Therefore, he sincerely urges Council to vote for the approval of this stipulation. Mr. Scheifley stated he thinks Mr. Chapin has made an excellen~ argument and has outlined the situation and he agrees with everything he says except for his conclusion. Everything he stated about the solu- tion is correct, however, there is a better solution. He thinks it has been within the last few weeks that they received a communication stating that the County is definitely going to zone the area north and south of this area as commercial, completely disregarding the city's Land Use Plan and wishes of the City. It was his understanding several years ago, that it was generally thought that the County was going to adopt the City's Land Use Plan as a mini-plan in the Master Plan in Palm Beach County and they have refused to do this. In view of the lack of coopera- tion of the County in zoning these areas, he thinks Council should face up to reality. The proper solution is to rezone this property commercial so it can conform with the two pockets to the north and south because the County is adamant, they are uncooperative and the Council might as well face up to reality; then it will be a clean deal and they can go ahead and enlarge their garage the way they would like to in conformity with the existing zoning. Actually, What the city is doing is spot-zoning in the midst of the County zoning if this is not rezoned commercial. - 8 - 8/14/78 Mrs. Durante stated she has said before that she could not support this stipulation because she thinks it really erodes the City's non-conforming use ordinance. She would like to see some consideration given to rezoning that area considering the fact that the County land surrounding it is zoned for commercial. If council is going to allow that business to continue by granting it the right to expand under the stipulation, you're not really doing anything to convert that area to residential, so why keep that zoning residential if you are going to allow an expansion of a non-conforming use this way. It is not that she is against that operation but there is no way, she will support anything thing like this - that is going t© erode the non-conforming use. Upon question by the Mayor, Mrs. Durante stated she supports Mr. Schiefley's recommendation to rezone this property. Mr. Chapin stated that the Planning and Zoning Board unani- mously once and unanimously twice, recommended that this property remain at multi-family RM-15 to serve as a buffer to the property owners to the west. He stated that if Mr. Scheifley feels that the time to coordinate the City's Land Use Plan with the County's Land Use Plan is the proper way to resolve this problem, he suggests that Council take that matter up under item 8.b. on tonight's agenda which is Resolution No. 71-78 requesting the County to amend its proposed Land Use Plan to conform with the City's existing Land Use Plan so that 17 unincorporated areas will be consistent with the City's Plan. His concern is that the business is there and the business has a right to be there and he doesn't want to do anything to put it out of business so the logical thing to do is recognize that it is there and permit it to continue. He does believe that the Land Use Plan is not definite whether it will someday be commer- cial or whether it will someday be residential and he is not willing to tip that scale now and have it go contrary to the unanimous recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board. This the reason he supports the re- commendation of entering into the stipulation. It is a measure which will uphold the integrity of the City's Land Use Plan and it's an opportunity to project the residential character of that area so as to protect the residential character of the homes to the west. Mr. Scheifley stated to Mr. Chapin that while they were both on vacation, some things have happened but if his information is correct, he is expressing the view of the Planning and Zoning Board. His under- standing is that they oppose the stipulation and if there is to be a change, they would prefer a change in zoning to the stipulation. Upon request by Mrs. Durante, Mr. Kotulla, Director of Planning and Zonin~ stated that the Planning and Zoning Board unanimously agreed that they were not in favor of this stipulation; however, he thinks that one, possibly two, members expressed the desire that perhaps it should be zoned commercial; it was not unanimous that it should be rezoned commercial. They did not want to talk about rezoning it because it is in litigation. Mark Manafo, 1378 Audubon Boulevard, President of Tropic Palms Homeowners' Association, Delray Beach, stated that it was never a ques- tion that the residents of Tropic Palms would not like to see the Certified Auto people be allowed to expand their business. The big con- cern by his residents was that they did not want to have the bridge to their community, which is what this land serves as, zoned commercial; the residents are in support of the stipulation, they do not feel there is an integrity question, they would like to see them expand their business but the main point the residents had against this was the inte- grity of the zoning of that whole front bridge. They are definitely opposed to rezoning that property to commercial. - 9 - 78/14/78 Mr. Sanson stated he will not support this stipulation and he doubts if he will support the rezoning but, if Council is g~ing to rezone, he would hope that it will be done on the aspect of approaching it as to the entire section of what you have as residential being put over to commercial. He stated he appreciates the arguments and he agrees with them but he feels that the stipulation is an expedient way and really not the answer; what should be faced is whether or not Council wants to rezone the property. Mr. Scheifley suggested to Mr. Manafo that he make his feel- ings known to the County because Council has no control of the property to the north and south. Mr. Sanson stated that after all of the discussion and hours they have spent on this, he basically has come down to one principal - aspect of this case that has really made him come to the conclusions he has and that is the gentleman who owns this business and property now, bought it under the existing circumstances. He stated he would probably have an entirely different attitude towards this if, in fact, they had been subjected to City changes as the owners. Mr. Sanson. stated he cannot justify in his mind this aspect that they bought the "pig in the poke" and they knew what they were buying and now they want to change the rules of the game in mid-stream and he just can't have sympathy or em- pathy for that. Barry Roderman, an attorney representing Auto Certified, the Plaintiff in the action against the City, stated he thinks the facts have been laid out carefully before Council and he agrees with Mr. Chapin in his opinion, as an attorney and member of the board and he feels that Mr. Saberson, the City's Attorney, who drafted the proposed stipulation to settle this law suit, recommendation and stipulation should be re- spected by the Board. In 1957, this property was deeded with a restrictive covenant setting forth that it was to be used commercially. Around January, 1977, the City passed a zoning ordinance at a time where the restrictive covenant was still in effect. The purpose of that pro- perty along the Florida East Coast Railway tracks was to be used commercially. One of the things we hear about is that the City is giving Auto Certified something that they did not have before. Mr. Roderman stated he does not believe that is accurate; they have always used this property in a commercial sense whether you call it non-con- forming, or used in accordance with commercial standards, they have used it the same way. They have been repairing automoblies in that 50 foot space to the immediate north of the building where they have requested the permit to allow them to enclose, with a concrete block structure, their building so that they can work indoors. They are not changing the use and they are not going outside the scope of a non- conforming use; all they are asking for is the right to build a small addition to their building. By denying their extension, the city has a building that has been growing older, that should be improved; if anything, he thinks that Tropic Palms and all the residents would be proud to drive down that street and see a building that conforms to the rendering that Council has seen several times in the past. They are going to extend that building, paint it, conform with all the City codes,' put landscaping in and beautify that corner. They are certainly in favor of the City eventually zoning that area commercial to conform with the County use but the immediate problem is his client has a unique hardship. Since he has started this request for permission to construct his building, construction cost, especially electrical, has doubled; as a result of not having the structure up in time, he has lost, pro- bably in the area of $10,000 and this is a poor way to reward a man who has acted pretty well as a business man in this community. The owners of Auto Certified have applied for SBA Financing, they got the commitment and that's being held up; they can't work like they Should be working in an enclosed structure so they are losing money as a result of that. Mr. Roderman stated he would say go ahead with the zoning in the future but tonight the City Attorney took a great deal of care and .~ - 10 - ~8/14/78 spent a lot of time with him to put together a stipulation that makes a lot of sense. The City is not giving'~nything; the City is receiv- ing - they are receiving the savings of a substantial amount of money that might be the result of a law suit and you are receiving a beautiful piece of property by some people that have proven to you that they are quite reputable and are.well liked by this community. He asked that Council again think about this before they vote and hopefully give them that stipulation. Upon the question by Mr. Chapin, the City Attorney stated his recommendation is that the City execute the stipulation and it's been amply pointed out that the stipulation really serves the interest not only of the City but of the land owner and of the people most nearly affected by this who are the people in Tropic Palms. With that kind of a stipulation and with it meeting that kind of criteria, the stipu- lation far exceeds any results that you would get out of a law suit, even if you win. Mr. Chapin moved that, based on the advice and recommendation of the City Attorney, the stipulation with Auto Certified Repair Ser- vice and the City be entered into by the city. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Schiefley stated he would like to respond to Mr. Chapin in that he certainly is right in a lot of technical matters but he would like to remind Mr. Chapin that they have a seven member Planning and Zoning Board who devotes all of their time to this question and he certainly respects their advice when it comes to a specific zoning question. Mr. Sanson noted that the changes that were made by this Coun- cil in January, 1977, were to rezone the property to a lower residential category and the change from commercial to residential took place back in 1972 and this was the point of his remarks; that they bought the property after that change was made - when they bought it, it was zoned residential and they should have known at that point what their rights would be in terms of wanting to expand the business. Mrs. Durante moved that Council not accept the stipulation agreement between the City and Certified Auto Repair Service, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - No; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - No. Said motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. 6.q. Upon request by the City Attorney, Mr. Chapin moved that item 6.g. be deleted from tonight's agenda, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.h. The City Manager reported that as was discussed at the August 7th workshop meeting, Council is to give consideration to a request for a waiver of the six month waiting period stipulated by ordinance so that application can be made for development under the City's new SAD ordinance. (Paul Hoffmann) Mr. Scheifley moved that the request be granted, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Cha- pin - Abstained; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote with Mr. Chapin abstaining. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson asked if this was a unanimous decision of the Planning and Zoning Board; the city Manager stated that this did not go to the Planning and Zoning Board but it was unanimous decision at Council workshop. - 11 - .%8/14/78 6.i. The City Manager reported as discussed at the workshop meet- ing on August 7th, it is recommended that Council approve an amendment to the contract between the City and State Department of Community Affairs relative to the City's eligibility for Planning Grant Funds. Mrs. Durante moved for the approval of this amendment to the contract between the City and the State Department of Community Affairs, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney stated that in regard to that he would also request that Council approve the amendment to the underlying contract to which this relates which is the one with Candeub, Fleissig and Associates who is performing the work for the City under the Department of Community Affairs Agreement. Mrs. Durante moved for the approval of the contract between the City and Candeub,Fleissig and Associates, for an extension of the contract, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously, o ~i~ ~ 6.j. The City Manager reported that the Palm Beach County. Solid Waste Authority adopted its 1978-1979 fiscal year budget on August 9, 1978, which calls for a refuse transfer plant fee of $12 per ton. Para- graph 14 of the city-Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority contract dated June 7, 1978, provides that the City may cancel said contract within 21 days after notification by the Authority of ~he bid award for operation of the transfer station and haul from the transfer station. The Authority rejected all bids received (because they were exorbitantly high) and decided that the Authority would operate the transfer plant and haul from the transfer plant to the landfill. Since the budget adopted by the AUthority is based on a transfer plant fee of $12 per ton, the maximum amount specified in paragraph 12 of the City-Authority con- tract, is recommended that Council pass a motion instructing that the Authority be notified that the City has determined to not cancel the contract (which notification would permit the Authority to expedite actions it must take to make the program operational on November 1, 1978, as scheduled). Upon question by the City, Manager, Mayor Weekes stated he agrees with this and as a practical matter the city of Delray Beach does not have another viable choice. To fail to go along with this would mean Council would have to go out into the market and buy a number of packer trucks to direct haul to the Lantana site and it is just a prac- tical impossibility plus the fact that the cost figures that the Solid Waste Authority has come in with are within the realm of the figures set forth in the contract. Mr. Sanson asked if the $12 per ton quaranteed for the future or to what extent are they assured of the $127 The City Manager stated that the rate and the establishment of the rate and the changing of the fee is covered by specific provisions in the contract already executed between the city and the Solid Waste Authority. The City is no worse off now and no different now than when~ this Council approved the con- tract - the City is not giving anything away. Mr. Sanson asked what is the current situation with the City of Boca Raton and, if they decide not to participate, how would that affect this situation. Mayor Weekes stated that what the situation is this very minute he could not say because it seems to vary from hour to hour and day to day. He stated he is hopeful they will make a formal decision tomorrow night - they have a workshop and a special meeting set for tomorrow night. As to the impact, there are some cost figures; if Boca Raton-goes with the Solid Waste Authority, the estimated cost would be $6.79 per ton plus a $4.00 tipping fee which would be $10.79; if Boca'Raton does not go, the Cost would be $7.55 plus a $4.00 tipping fee which would be $11.55. These are the actual projected costs and the Solid Waste Authority is proposing a $12.00 charge until they can get established because they would rather have an opportunity to reduce the - 12 - 8/14/78 fee than to start at a lower fee and have to increase it. The City Manager stated he was a little concerned whether Boca Raton will go along with this and he called Tim Hunt and asked him the same question Mr. Sanson is asking. Mr. Hunt told him that definitely the Solid Waste Authority will honor the contract between Solid Waste Authority and Delray Beach at $12 per ton even without Boca Raton. Mr. Chapin moved that this Council reaffirm its contract with the County Solid Waste Authority, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson asked that on this contract, does the City Manager foresee any need for increased garbage and trash rates for the people of Delray? The City Manager stated he is not advocating any at this point. The roll to the motion was called. Mayor Weekes stated he would like to remind Council that in 1980, the original contract with County Sanitation expires and at that point and time, this City will then start to pick up everything that has been added to the City in the last ten years; this will include, High Point, Chatelaine, Rainberry, etc., and it is going to increase the waste flow from the City by at least 50 to 75 percent. 6.a.3. The City Manager stated the related item he wanted to add to the agenda at this point is the fact that the contract the City now has with Southern Sanitation provides that upon the conclusion of their work for the City, the refuse disposal site, they are obligated to remove all their equipment from the premises. Southern Sanitation has an agreement with the Solid Waste Authority, therefore, he is recommending to Council that they pass a motion waiving that particular requirement of the contract so that they will not be required to remove their equip- ment and the Solid Waste Authority will have to bring it back in. The City Manager stated he has been requested to ask that Council do that by Tim Hunt. Mr. Chapin moved that that request be granted on the premise that the equipment in question is purchased by the Solid Waste Authority, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Said motion passed unanimously. 7.a. Mayor Weekes acknowledged the minutes of the Beautification Committee meeting held on July 5, 1978. He noted there are two items which~call for Council action: one is to repair the wall at Anchor Park that runs parallel to A1A, which is in a state of disrepair. The City Manager noted that this is in process and he expects to report back to Council shortly on that; two, the last paragraph of the minutes, the City Manager stated he thinks that has been taken care of. The Beauti- fication Committee is commending the people who sponsored that musical affair and they are making a suggestion with regard to the letter written by Nancy Adams and that has been responded to. The Mayor stated that for the benefit of the public, the City Manager's comments were in regard to relocating the fireworks display on the 4th of July to alleviate traffic congestion, which has been generated in the Lake Ida area, and move the fireworks display to another site, preferably along the beach where there is now a number of off-street parking spaces. 7.b. The City Manager reported a communication has been received from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council dated August 7, 1978, requesting comments relative to the deepening of the Intercoastal Waterway. A copy of a letter dated August 8th from the City Manager to - 13 - 8/14/78 the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council stating that this project had been reviewed in relation to the City's interests and for the following reasons it would not be in the best interest of Delray Beach for the waterway to be deepened, has been given to Council: (1) The character of the Intercoastal Waterway would tend to shift from recreational to commercial if deepened. (2) The additional boat traffic would increase the number of bridge openings which would delay vehicular traffic. (3) The City's utility crossings under the Intracoastal Waterway would probably have to be adjusted. Council may either concur with the City Manager's letter or state its disapproval. The deepening of the Intracoastal will be from Ft. Pierce to Miami. Mr. Scheifley moved that it be the concensus of the City Counci to concur with the City Manager's letter and its contents in connection with the deepening of the intracoastal, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson stated that the letter they re- ceived really did not address the pros and cons as to whether it should be deepened but whether or not substantial sums of money should be spent to conduct this sutdy. This was confirmed by the City Manager. Mr. Sanson stated that every year this agency tries to do this and every year they have been told "no" and he feels that the deepening of the. intracoastal in the Delray Beach area would substan- tially increase the pollution problem and the environmental degradation of the intracoastal. Mr. Chapin stated his own personal feelings would be to strengthen the negative response and there seems to be no need for the deepening of this canal because in this area, there is no commerciali- zation and it seems that the overwhelming majority of the people in this community wish to maintain a quiet residential community and beau- tify it as much as possible and to encourage commercialization of that would be contrary to the wishes of the people. There is no need for it because there is no commercialization on the intracoastal waterway from Palm Beach to Fort Lauderdale; that would be the basic reason plus the fact brought out by Mr. Sanson that it may affect the environment, to strengthen the negative response. Mr. Sanson stated he has no problem with Mr. Chapin's sug- gestion that the letter be strengthened and maybe clarify that they are also opposed to this expenditure of tax money to conduct this study. - At this point, upon question by Mr. Scheifley, it was noted that the suggestions made by Mr. Sanson and Mr. Chapin are amendments to the motion. The roll to the motion was called. Mayor Weekes suggested that the City Manager dictate such a letter tomorrow for him. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. 7.c. A communication has been received from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council dated August 4, 1978, requesting comments relative to the Department of Commerce Coastal Zone Management Plan Continuation. Council received a copy of a letter dated August 8th from the City Manager to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council stating that the development of a Coastal Zone Management Plan for the State of Florida is consistent with the City's adopted plans and policies and that the program will have no adverse effects on the local natural or economic environment and there is no duplication between the efforts of the proposed program and those of any related local projects or programs. - 14 - 8/14/78 Council may either concur with the City Manager's letter or state its disapproval. Mr. Sanson moved to concur with the city Manager's remarks, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 7.d. A communication has been received from the Area Planning Board dated July 26, 1978, requesting A-95 Clearinghouse review and comments relative to the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Countywide Economic Development Planning and Coordination. Council re- ceived a copy of a letter dated August 8, 1978, from the City Manager to the APB stating that the establishment of a vehicle for coordinated Economic Development Planning in and for Palm Beach County by utilizing the existing resources of the APB and the Economic Council of Palm Beach County is not inconsistent with the City's adopted plans and policies and this proposal will have no adverse effects on the local natural, social or economic environment and there is no duplication between the efforts of the proposed program and those of any related local proj.ects or programs. Council may either concur with the City Manager's letter or state its disapproval. Mr. Sanson moved to concur with the City Manager's recommenda- tions, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 7.e. The City Manager reported that a communication has been re- ceived from the Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach requesting permission to solicit funds from September 1st through September 4th, 1978, approval of which is recommended by the Solicitations Committee. 'Mr. Chapin moved that this request be approved, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Said motion passed unanimously. 8.a. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 70-78, vacating and abandoning the east 110.0 feet of a 20-foot alley located adjacent to Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, Delray Beach Heights Extension, just north of S.W. 10th Street at S.W. 17th Avenue is before Council for passage consideration. Russell and Axon has requested the abandonment in order to locate a raw water well in the alley. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 70-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH FLORIDA, VACATING AND ABANDONING THE EAST 110.0 FEET OF AN ALLEY 20 FEET IN WIDTH LOCATED ADJACENT TO LOTS 1 - 2 - 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1 OF THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS DELRAY BEACH HEIGHTS EXTENSION A; PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 83, AS RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESERVING HOWEVER A 10-FOOT EASEMENT, FIVE (5) FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE ALLEY BEING ABANDONED FOR UTILITY PURPOSES. (Copy of Resolution No. 70-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 70-78, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, the following discussion was had. Mrs. Johanna Amadeo, stated she owns these lots and acquired them through a debt and she feels that if this alley is abandoned, she won't be able to do much with the lots. Upon question by the City Manager, - 15 - .8/14/78 she stated that she is opposed to the abandonment of the alley as she will not be able to do anything with the additional 5 feet she will be acquiring. The City Attorney explained that the City is retaining a 10 foot easement down the middle of the alley, therefore, there will be 5 feet that would accrue to the property owners to the north and 5 feet to the south and on the western end of the alley, the City is reserving the entire 20 feet for the well that is going to go in there. The City Attorney noted that Mrs. Amadeo owns Lot 4 which has frontage on two other streets, 16th and 17th streets. Upon question by the Mayor as to what is the municipal purpose to be served by abandoning this alley, The City Manager stated utility purposes; it is needed in connection with the water expansion. The Mayor then asked if the City could do that without abandoning the alley. The city Attorney advised the engineers felt that the alley had to be abandoned because the west end of the alley will be completely taken up with the well - it will take up the entire 20 foot by 20 foot area at the end of the well so its usefulness as an alley, as far as going completely through from east to west, will no longer exist. The City is abandoning the east 110 feet of the alley and reserving the 10 foot utility easement over the center line and, as to that portion on the east 110 feet, he imagines these are going to be underground utilities and that part of it can still be used as an alley. Mayor Weekes asked about abandoning the alley at the westerly end where the water well is going to be. The City Attorney replied that they can do that if it is Council's desire. It was noted that it would not help Mrs. Amadeo to do this because the alley would not go all the way through; it was also noted that her lot is the only one that has an alley and she has a convenience there that will be taken away that no other lot there has. The City Manager stated that with Mrs. Amadeo's property fronting on two streets, where most properties have frontage on just one street, that that would be sufficient frontage. Mrs. Amadeo stated she really did not know because the lot is very narrow. At this point, the roll to the motion was called. 8.b. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 71-78 request- ing the County to amend their proposed Land Use Plan to reflect the City's Land Use Plan designation for the 17 unincorporated parcels of land within the municipal limits of the City is before Council for pass- age consideration. Council, at the July 17th workshop meeting, instructc the City Attorney to prepare the resolution. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 71-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REQUESTING THE COUNTY TO AMEND THEIR PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN TO REFLECT THE CITY'S LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION FOR SEVENTEEN (17) UNINCORPORATED PARCELS OF LAND. (Copy of Resolution No. 71-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) - 16 - 8/14/78 Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 71-78, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. S~id motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Chapin stated that this resolution is an effort on the part of this community to try to coordinate its land use plan with that of the County. Mr. Sanson stated that he concurs with Mr. Chapin's remark that it is going to take some personal attention on the part of this Council to follow through on this. He asked the City Attorney when the City will re-do its land use plan for the 20 parcels, to conform with the County's Plan. The City Attorney advised that the date for the adoption has not been set. Public hearings still have to be held and the Planning Department and the Planning and Zoning Board are still in the process of reviewing. They are trying to proceed as quickly as possible. At this point, the roll to the motion was called. 8.c. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 37-78 relative to annexing a 14,451.8 square foot parcel of land located in Section 8-46-43 at the southeast corner of the intersection of N.W. 9th Street and N.W. 8th Avenue subject to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District is before Council for consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. (This Ordinance was passed on 1st Reading at the July 10th meeting.) Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Read- ing, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 37-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T~IE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 37-78 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. Scheifley moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 37-78 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.d. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 42-78 relative to annexing a 28.11 acre parcel of land located in Section 25-46-42 west of the E-4 Canal, between Germantown Road and the L-37 Canal subject to R-1AAA (Single Family Dwelling) District is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July 10th meeting. Prior to consideration of - 17 - .8/14/78 passaqe of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Readinq0 a public hearina has been scheduled at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance l.fo. 42-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELP~AY BEACIt, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO 57{E CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PARCELS OF LAND. LOCATED 'IN SECTION 25, TO~NSHIP 46 SOU%/t, RANGE 42 EAST, WHICH LAIRD IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAiD CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 42-78 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. Mrs. Durante moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 42-78 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Durante - Yes; Mr. San- son - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.e. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 44-78 amending Chapter 2 "Administration'' of the Code of Ordinances relative to adopt- ing the standard forms for the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act is before Council for consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July 24th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Read- ing, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 44-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, "ADMINISTRATION" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2-17.01 (D) (2) (a) AND 2-17.01(E) (2) (a) TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMA- TION REQUIRED UNDER THIS SECTION BE ON THE CURRENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FORM APPLICABLE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Copy of Ordinance No. 44-78 is on file in the official Ordinance Book. ) The city Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A pub- lic hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 44-78 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. San- son - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes; Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. After roll call, Mr. Scheifley stated that he learned that the members of Council that were here in his absence had a difficult time - 18 - 8/14/78 with this item. He has heard the terms "farce" and "fiasco" and he thinks although it may have been a farce, it was probably not in the best interest of the citizens and taxpayers of this community° It seems to him that in judging a professional's qualifications that one man should enter into a room, give his qualifications and then be excused; do it on a one to one basis rather than the way it has been done. If that can be done legally, he thinks it will preserve the interest of the City. Mr. Sanson stated that since that night he has contacted some individuals to supply this Council with 'copies of materials, mainly, criteria forms that are used in other places throughout the state that would perhaps alleviate some of the lack of direction that the City seems to have. The Mayor suggested having a workshop session for that pur- pose and have them in the conference room and ask them to come in one at a time. If they want to stay, it cannot be prohibited, but, in good grace, they would then leave and the next person would come in. 8.f. The City Manager asked Council to skip item 8.f. and come back to it to give the attorney time to do a little further research on it. This was agreed on. 8.g. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 47-78 amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances amending Section 29-13 CBD (Central Business District) to allow canopies, marquees and covered walkways to be placed over the ten foot front setback is before Council for consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July 24th 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. 47-78: 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 29-13 CBD (CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) (E) TO ADD A PARAGRAPH TO PROVIDE THAT CANOPIES, MARQUEES AND COVERED WALKWAYS MAY BE PLACED OVER THE TEN (10) FOOT FRONT SETBACK; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Copy of Ordinance No. 47-78 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. 47-78 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.h. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 31-78 amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to swimming pools is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the July 3rd workshop meeting. - 19- ~8/14/78 The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 31-78: 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 29-1"DEFINITIONS" TO ADD SWIMMING POOLS; AMENDING SECTION 29-5(N) BY ADDING A SUBSECTION (4); AMENDING SECTIONS 29-6(P), 29-7(P), 29-8(P) BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION (4); AMENDING SECTIONS 29-8.1 (R), 29-8.2 (R), 29-8.3(R) BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION (10) RELATING TO SWIM- MING POOLS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. The City Attorney stated that this is the ordinance that he informed Council at a workshop meeting the other day that was prepared without the clause in the ordinance restricting the authority of the Board of Adjustment to grant variances. The City has gradually over the last couple of years continually eroded and narrowed the jurisdiction of the Board of Adjustment so that it really cannot perform~the function for which it was created and that is to act as a safety valve for the literal enforcement of City ordinances when the enforcement of an ordi- nance would create an unusual or unique hardship as defined in our code. In those instances, the Board of Adjustment is allowed to grant relief rather than to compel the property owner to go to court for that relief. It has a unique function in terms of this ability to grant this relief from Zoning Code requirements. It is specifically provided in our code for that purpose as it is in the codes for all cities that he knows of and he thinks it is contrary to the concept embodied in that function to continually narrow the jurisdiction. It is for that reason that he did not include that provision in the ordinance and will be re- commending in the near future that some of the restrictions that have already been imposed along those lines be removed. Mrs. Durante moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 31-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - No; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. Mr. Dan Kotulla, Planning Director, stated that originally Nathan Miller of Woodlakes came in and stated that because of the size of the duplex structures they were building on lots, they would not be able to provide swimming pools given the 25 foot setback and, as such, they requested that the zoning ordinance be amended to allow swimming pools to be constructed within these setbacks within certain limitations. The Planning and Zoning Board felt that there was no problem in allowing swimming pools providing a few things: they were inground and no screen enclosures of any type would ever be allowed because if you allow screen enclosures to be constructed, then you are, in fact, really reducing visual setbacks or in essence, making a development too intense. Mr. Sanson asked if there is any requirement on the City's part to not require some type of fencing. Mr. Kotulla stated that a fence is just a mass of 6 foot around it. When you get into screened enclosures, you are getting some- thing that is more opaque on all four sides plus a roof. Visually, there is more impact with a screened enclosure than there would be with a 6 foot fence. Mr. Sanson stated that he was amazed that the Planning and Zoning Board recommended this ordinance. He feels that setbacks serve - 20 - 8/14/78 a very valuable function which is to keep the peace, the tranquility, a buffer area of neutral zone between neighbors. He can see lots of things go into setbacks way before a swimming pool that would not affect the neigh- bors as a swimming pool would, principally, the aspect of the noise particularly the children, than perhaps patio areas around the pool. At this point, the roll was called to the motion. 8.i. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 48-78 making Emergency Ordinance No. 25-78 a permanent ordinance, amending Chapter 27 of the Code of Ordinances by repealing Article II, "Wells and Sprinkler Systems" relative to potable water is before Council for consideration on First Reading. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 48-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, MAKING PERMANENT, EMERGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 25-78, AMENDING CHAPTER 27 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY REPEALING ARTICLE II, "WELLS AND SPRINKLER SYSTEMS" AND SUBSTITUTING THEREFOR A NEW CHAPTER 27, ARTICLE II, PROVIDING PROCEDURES, REQUIRE- MENTS AND STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTING AND USING WATER WELLS FOR POTABLE AND NON-POTABLE PURPOSES WITHIN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR PERMITS THEREFOR; PROVIDING FOR PERMIT FEES; PROVIDING FOR CONNECTION TO THE CITY WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OF POTABLE WELLS IN CERTAIN INSTANCES; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Scheifley moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 48-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mrs. Duranteo Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yesl Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yesl Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mr. Sanson stated, before roll call, that in the interest of something the City has continued to strive to do over the years to make City services, as much as possible, pay for themselves, he sees that throughout this, permit fees, for drilling, driving wells and so forth are only $3.00. It seems to him that a $3.00 figure is exceptionally low. The City Attorney stated that this is First Reading and those figures could be changed, if need be, before Second Reading. At this point, the roll was called to the motion. 8.f. Mayor Weekes asked if Council wants to come back to Second and FINAL Reading of Item 8.f. The City Manager stated that he and the City Attorney have discussed this item and recommend that Council defer it from tonight's meeting so that it can be taken a closer look at. The Mayor stated that Ordinance 46-78 will not be considered tonight on Second and FINAL Reading. 8oj. The city Manager reported that Ordinance No. 49-78 relative to rezoning and placing land presently zoned RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District in RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District, located in Section 29-46-43 south of Linton Boulevard, between Lindell Boulevard and S.W. 4th Avenue is before Council for consideration on First Reading. The Planning and Zoning Board at ~ meeting held on January 20, 1978, re- commended by unanimous vote that the subject property be rezoned from RM-15 to RM-10. The affected property owners have been notified pur- suant to Section 166.041(3)(C), Florida Statutes. Council discussed the - 21- 8/14/78 rezoning at the June 12th meeting and agreed to have the ordinance pre.- pared. Second and FINAL Reading and public hearing will-be held at the meeting on September llth. The city Manager presented Ordinance No. 49-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM-15 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT, IN RM-10 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT, A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 29-46-43, LOCATED SOUTH OF LINTON BOULEVARD, BETWEEN LINDELL BOULEVARD AND S.W. 4TH AVENUE, AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1977" The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 49-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. U?on roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mrs. Durante -Yes; Mr. Sanson- Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.k. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 50-78 relative to rezoning and placing land presently zoned RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District in PRD-4 (Planned Residential) District, located in Sections 29-46-43 and 30-46-43, on the west side of Lindell Boulevard between Linton Boulevard and Dotterel Road is before Council for con- sideration on First Reading. The Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on January 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the subject pro- perty be rezoned from RM-15 to PRD-4. The affected property owners have been notified pursuant to Section 166.041(3)(C), Florida Statutes. Coun- cil discussed the rezoning at the June 12th meeting and agreed to have the ordinance prepared. Second and FINAL Reading and public hearing will be held at the meeting on September lltho The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 50-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRA¥ BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM-15 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT, IN PRD-4 (PLANNED RESI- DENTIAL) DISTRICT, A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 29-46-43 AND 30-46-43, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LINDELL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN LINTON BOULEVARD AND DOTTEREL ROAD, AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1977". The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 50-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mrs. Durante -Yes; Mr. Sanson- Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.1. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 51-78 relative to rezoning and placing land presently zoned R-1AA (Single Family Dwell- ing) District in PRD-4 (Planned Residential) District, located in Section 29-46-43 on the north side of Audubon Boulevard between 1-95 and Lindell Boulevard is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. The Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on January 20th recommended by unanimous vote that the subject property be rezoned from R-1AA to PRD-4. The affected property owners have been notified pursuant to Section 166.041(3) (C), Florida Statutes. Council discussed the rezoning at the June 12th meeting and agreed to have the ordinance prepared. Second and FINAL Reading and public hearing will be held at the meeting on September llth. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 51-78: _ 22 _ 8/14/78 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED R-1AA (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT, IN PRD-4 (PLANNED RESI- DENTIAL) DISTRICT, A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 29-46-43, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AUDUBON BOULEVARD, BETWEEN 1-95 AND LIN-DELL BOULEVARD, AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1977". The city Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 51-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mr. Sanson stated that since Council has had its previous dis- cussion on this item which would prove to be somewhat controversial, he has had some conversations with the developer and tried to, as much as possible, see if the City couldn't, so to speak, alleviate the con- cerns of the residents of Bass Creek. He reported that the developer was more than receptive and indicated that any requests brought to him by Mr. Manafo or any residents of Bass Creek, would be adhered to and taken under adoption, the principal one being to assure that across the street from the entrance to Bass Creek there would be single family homes. He has put that assurance in writing to Mr. Manafo. The resi- dents of Bass Creek should not have any indication that there would be multiple family units abutting their property. Mr. Manafo stated that Mayor Weekes was kind enough to defer this off the Council agenda for a month while they, the homeowners of Bass Creek, sought some conversations with Mr. Schmidt with the aid of Mr. Sanson. The Homeowners Association currently has in its possession a beginning to what they think will be a settlement of this issue but he has been requested by the members to advise Council of a couple of points that they would like to see done. The decision that was made to pass this motion was explained to them as being for the good of the City, as a whole, and utilization of that rationale against the unified appeal of those residents who were most directly affected. When the Council votes to accept this issue, please do not offer them, the residents, the rationale that you do it for the benefit of the City as a whole, rather he urges Council to put more faith in those people who come to Council with issues. No person, no matter what the length of residency in a town or city, should receive the treatment and lack of respect and availability of information that their portion of the community was subjected to, especially when this City and its Administration is capable of so much more. His point, in reference, is Mr. Frank Carey. He has displayed excellent skills in community relations and as a zoning administrator. He thinks that they are going to be able to negotiate a settlement with the developer. He asked Council to consider that: (1) they have never been offered, after repeated requests, the reasons why parcel 3 should be rezoned standing on its own. The other thing is (2), how many members of the City Council after numerous requests, listen to the Planning and Zoning tape. Mr. Scheifley stated that they have about 6 Boards that have tapes and every issue is important to someone. We cannot sit here eight hours a day doing nothing but listening to tapes. Mr. Manafo suggested that each member of Council take an operational area of the city and learn as much as possible in that par- ticular ~rea. They feel lucky that they had Mr. Sanson come to their support in this issue. The Tropic Palms residents do not want to see this passed but they don't feel they are going to get any kind of justice, or fair tre~ment from the City by going to court and arguing with it so _ 23_ ~8/14/78 they have, therefore, resorted to the word of the developer which in this case they are willing to accept. At this point, the roll was called to the motion. 8.m. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 53-78 repealing Ordinance No. 46-75 relative to off-street parking is before Council for consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the August 7th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 53-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 46-75 AND ENACTING A NEW ORDINANCE RESTRICTING THE HOURS OF PARKING ALONG STATE ROAD A-1-A BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 1:00 A.M. AND 7:00 A.M. TO ONE HOUR PARKING BETWEEN THE CENTERLINE OF CASUARINA ROAD DE- SIGNATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS SLD MP 9.328 ON THE SOUTH TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF BEACH DRIVE DESIGNATED AS SLD MP 10. 358 ON THE NORTH AND TO PRO- HIBIT BETWEEN SAID BOUNDARIES ALONG STATE ROAD A-1-A DURING ALL HOURS T~IE PARKING OF VEHICLES PRIMARILY DESIGNED, CON- STRUCTED OR USED AS TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT LIVING QUARTERS, VEHICLES EXCEEDING 8,000 POUNDS GROSS WEIGHT, AND VEHICLES UTILIZING MORE THAN ONE STANDARD SIZE PARKING SPACE; PROVIDING THAT SAID DESCRIBED VEHICLES BE PARKED IN DESIGNATED OFF- STREET PARKING LOTS; PROVIDING DEFINITION OF VEHICLES; PRO- VIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF: PROVIDING FOR CODIFI- CATION; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the passage or Ordinance No. 53-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mrs. Durante -Yes; Mr. Sanson- Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.n. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 54-78 amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to gasoline sta- tions is before Council for consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the August 7th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 54-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDI- NANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 29-1(38) "DEFINITIONS" RELATIVE TO ELIMINATING THE WORD "PRIMARILY" FROM THE PRESENT DEFINITION; 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. 54-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, the following discussion was had. Mr. Scheifley stated that he seconds this motion with the understanding that this is going to make it tougher to put gasoline stations in food convenience stores. - 24 - 8/14/78 Mr. Sanson stated that he agrees with Mr. Wallin. He thinks that the ordinance was perfectly clear ~in the first place. Mr. Wallin voted against this ordinance for that reason. Mr. Sanson disagrees with the City Attorney's analysis of this and when he asked the City Attorney about it, he indicated that it was more Mr. Shandy's decision than his own. The City Manager stated that, on the other hand, it doesn't hurt anything. Attorney Saberson stated that it seems to him that, if Council adopts this ordinance, it will accomplish or further accomplish that which you are trying to do anyway so it doesn't hurt anything to adopt it. At this point, the roll was called to the motion. 8.o. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 55-78 amending Chapter 29, "Zoning"~of the Code of Ordinances relative to variances is before Council for consideration on First Reading. This was dis- cussed at the August 7th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 55-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRA¥ BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDI- NANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 29-24 TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION (H) RELATIVE TO NOT REQUIRING A VARIANCE FOR NON-CONFORMING ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mrs. Durante moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 55-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes~ Mrs. Durante- Yes~ Mr. Sanson- Yes~ Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson stated that he is still not totally sure that he understands the implications of this so he is going to vote yes tonight but don't be surprised if he votes no the second time around. The City Attorney stated that they had people applying for building permits, say for instance, that they were in a commercial district and they had an existing nonconforming setback on a building that was already there and they wanted to add on to the building but not increase the nonconformity, the Building Department was taking the position that they had to go to the Board of Adjustment to get a vari- ance for their already existing nonconforming setback before they could get a building permit to add on to the building. What this says is that it is not necessary as to an existing nonconformity as a condition of getting a building permit for you to legitimatize those existing non- conformities as long as you do not expand or increase the nonconformity. At this point, the roll was called to the motion. Mr. Scheifley left the Council Chambers at 9:34 P.M. 8.p. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 56-78 amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to PRD (Planned Residential Districts is before Council for consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on August 7th. - 25 - 8/14/78 The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 56-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T~E CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 29-8.1(R) (2)PRD-4, 29-8.2(R) (2) PRD-7 AND 29-8.3 (R) (2) PRD-10 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, TO ADD A SUBSECTION (e) RELATIVE TO ALLOWING DUPLEX DWELLING UNITS WHEN "T" CUL-DE-SACS ARE USED; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 56-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mrs. Durante -Yes; Mr. Sanson -Yes; Mayor Weeks - Yes. said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 8.q. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 57-78 relative to annexing a 9.31 acre parcel of land located in Section 30-46-43 at the southeast corner of the intersection of Germantown Road and S.W. 22nd Avenue subject to RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District is before Council for consideration on First Reading. Council, by passage of Reso- lution No. 46-78, requested the Board of county Commissioners for permission to rezone the land to be annexed from County zoning classification AG (Agricultural) to the city's zoning classification RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District. Permission from the Board of County Commis- sioners to rezone the subject property to City zoning classification having been received, Council may consider passing the ordinance on First Reading. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 57-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNI- CIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 57-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 8.r. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 43-78 relative to rezoning and placing land presently zoned R-la (Single Family Dwell- ing) District in LI (Light Industrial) District located in Section 20-46-43 at the southwest corner of the intersection of Swinton Avenue and South- ridge Road is before Council for consideration on Second and FINAL reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July 24th 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. 43-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED R-la (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT, IN LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT, LOTS 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 4, SOUTHRIDGE, PLAT NO. 1, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 38 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, - 26 - ~.8/14/79 057 FLORIDA, SAID LAND IS IN SECTION 20-46-43, AND IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SWINTON AVENUE AND SOUTHRIDGE ROAD, AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1977". The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mayor Weekes stated that before he opens the public hearing, he would like for the members of the Council who are not here to return to the room because this is an important issue and there will be dis- cussion on it. Mr. Sanson stated that for the same reasons he stated previously that a member of his family is involved on one side of this issue, he excuses himself from this discussion. At 9:40 P.M., a two minute recess was taken. The meeting re- convened at 9:42 P.M. at which time Mr. Sanson left the Chambers and Mr. Scheifley returned. 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. Jim Smith, Pastor of the Grace Baptist Church, stated that his congregation is the closest church involved with this territory. They have adopted long range planning for a total ministry dealing with about 18 areas based on the fact that this is to be a residential area and many different races and ethnic groups and cultures are involved. They have made plans that will greatly enhance Delray Beach and the ministries to the entire area. They have been involved now for over 3 years. They would like to see the area maintained as a residential area withoUt industrial encroachment. They understand that there are a number of residents of the area that feel the same way. An encroachment of industry would seriously curtail and it would seriously lower the entire approach to this entire community. So, as far as he and the church are concerned, they would like to see it maintained as a resi- dential zoning. Mack Schwartz stated that he is taking Ida Schwartz's place because she is under doctor's orders not to attend tonight. They are only asking for a fair compromise for all the owners and the lots. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are to be zoned light industrial. This includes the building, the gas station and all the gas pipes. Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 are for single family homes. These lots shall remain for single family homes. There are single family homes after lot 10. In 1978, the assessed value of the lots is 250% more than in 1977. Each lot was assessed at $424.40 for the opening of Sterling Avenue. This zoning will reduce the value for the single family homes. Mr. Green, in violation, still has 40 and 50 foot cranes there. Leon Jackson, 301 Southridge Road, stated that he lives approximately 300 yards from where the rezoning will take place. He would prefer for it to be for single family zoning. There is a total of 10 lots involved and the first 6 could be zoned light industrial but the remaining should be set for residential. Charles Cook, 321 Southridge Road, stated that he owns lots 17, 18, 19, 24, 25 and 26. He has lived at 'his present address for 2 years and in the City of Delray Beach for 6 years. If only living in your home for 2 years doesn't allow you to have an opinion about what the community should be, he would like to know how long the Council feels one should live in a community before he is allowed to have an opinion that counts. _ 27 _ :,8/14/78 Mayor Weekes stated that you should be allowed at any given time as long as you are a resident of this commUnity. Mr. Cook noted that a statement had been made that a mere 2 year resident was opposing this and apparently Mr. Green has been there somewhat longer than that. He feels that his opinion should count as much as anyone else in the community regardless of the length of time he has resided there. He will go along with the first 6 lots being light industrial and the other ones as being residential as a compromise with Mr. Green. Mr. Schwartz stated that in 1973, Ida Schwartz bought 21 lots, which were zoned single family, for her daughter who is a widow, and there have been plans drawn up to build these houses. That's 21 lots against 10. Yolanda Vazquez, 102 N.E. 1st Avenue, stated that as a former owner of Lots 2 through 7 of the Southridge section, she would like to keep that area residential. Ruth Struble stated that she is a property owner and, in the many discussions about the petition to rezone Lots 1 through 10, Block 4, to light industrial, all discussion centered around their approving of the rezoning as related to Lots 11 and 12 in Block 4. However, she feels that this affects the entire neighborhood. In the early part of 1976, she had occasion to be in the Planning and Zoning Board offices and in discussing the Southridge area, the director stated he would never support a petition for rezoning in this area because it was single family residential and the property owners were anxious to keep it that way. Later on that year, she offered to buy 7 lots on Sterling Avenue with the contingency that Sterling Avenue would be paved. After many months working with the former City Engineer, Mr. Fleming, and the support of other property owners, she came before the City Council to petition the paving. In September 1976, Resolution 65-76 ordered the City ~anager to prepare the plans. It was adopted December 13, 1976. It was arranged to have water and sewer lines installed at the same time as the paving. All this effort was made with the knowledge that this was R-lA Single Family Dwelling. When this was accomplished, Stockton, Watley and Davin Mortgage Company was contacted to see if FHA and VA commitments for construction loans could be obtained with the present facilities accomplished and the zoning. They said it was possible. Be- fore contact could be made with any builders, this rezoning petition was begun. On June 20th of this year, the Planning and Zoning Board meeting during the non-public portion, this very same man who spoke to her in 1976 said he was supporting rezoning Lots 1 through 10 to light industrial. She feels that before Council can adopt this rezoning it must address itself to these issues: (1) the petitioner retained his existing use of the property when it was zoned single family residential in 1973. This was valid as long as he continued to use it for his busi- ness. (2) If anyone listens to the tapes of the June 20th Planning and Zoning Board meeting and the July 24th City Council meeting, it will seem obvious that each person on this board and Council was committed to grant the rezoning. She wonders if they could have felt obligated because of the $300 filing fee paid by the petitioner. If so, why cannot these offended people be allowed to pay a like fee in their own behalf. Both sides would then be considered on an equal basis. (3) Every homeowner is entitled to security in the knowledge he is going to be able to raise his family in a residential area without being affected by the vacillations of the City Council. Ronald Sales, attorney for Mr. Green, stated that the pro- perty, which is the subject matter of the petition, is located at 1200 So Swinton Avenue. It comes to the City Council with the favorable recommendation of the City Planner for light industrial zoning and with the favorable recommendation on a 4 out of 5 vote of the City Zoning Commission. It is bounded by the Maule Industries on the south, on the east by the Plymouth Pool Company Shops, on the north by Dixie Boulevard, _ 28 - 8/14/78 on the west by a single family residence. The property is improved and has been for 25 years with a 4,000 square foot (100' by 40') concrete block building with a subterranean gas tank and a radio tower. The property was zoned to an industrial use category until 1973 when it was rezoned to a single family use category. It would make little sense to split the zone on so small a piece of property and to zone part of it to a light industrial use, as was suggested by some of the protesters. The more persuasive point for the rezoning of the property is that the property is confiscated as a single family residential use. It is im- proved with the building, the value of which building exceeds the value Of the building lots and it would be required to raise the building thereby confiscating the property if the lots were in their residential zone. The point is that the zoning does not comport with the actual user. The lots which underlie his client's building are not desirable for single family use in that they are adjacent to railroad tracks and adjacent to a Readymix Batch Plant and adjacent to the industrial shops of a Pool Company. He asks that Council make part of its record the recommendation of its Planner and the recommendation of its Planning Commission and he requests that the ordinance be adopted on Second and FINAL Reading. In response to a question from Mr. Scheifley, Mr. Green stated that he is absolutely not planning to sell the building to Mr. Walton. He has had two valid sales contracts in the past in excess of $100,000 providing that the zoning was changed. He pursued that end. One of those contracts was with an electrical contractor and the other one was with a roofing contractor. He failed to meet their time schedules and so those contracts are null and void. Mr. Scheifley asked Mr. Green if Lots 1 through 6 are zoned industrial and the other four are zoned for single residence family, how would that affect him. Mr. Sales stated that that wouldn't make any sense at all. That would render the property useless. He is not even sure that the building doesn't occupy more land. They don't know what land underlies the building. He didn't come prepared to speak on that. He came pre- pared to address himself to the adoption, or not, of an ordinance to re- zone the whole tract, because historically the whole tract was zoned to that category and because one can't have a commercial building without some land surrounding it. Joe Atkinson stated that he lives here and makes his living here and industry happens to be one of the things you have to have in a town to make a living. Mr. Green stated that the building lies on Lots 1 through 5. In response to a question from Mrs. Durante, he stated that those are not his cranes that are on the property. In the last three months, he has spent 75-8~ of his time in Central America in Honduras and when he heard there were cranes on his property, he contacted this Mr. Walton, immediately upon his return, and ordered him to remove the cranes from his property. That property certainly will be put up for sale as a total unit but nobody in the crane business with any sense at all would buy it. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Scheifley stated that he feels that this property should be zoned industrial so that Mr. Green can use it and sell it; however, he has a great deal of sympathy for the people who live in single family residencies down there. No one has given him any indication that the 6 lots can't be zoned for industrial so that the building can be sold and used and the other four can be used for single family residence. He - 29 - 8/14/78 0¢0 would like to hear a discussion by the members of Council as to why this isn't a practical and viable solution to make everybody happy. In response to a question from Mr. Sales, Mayor Weekes stated that it would become nonconforming because of the district boundary line ordinance which requires a 60 foot setback from the single family residential zoning, so at no point, regardless of what happens here, could it be built closer to the property line of the abutting property. The Mayor further stated that he was opposed to it when it was rezoned in 1973. He thinks it was a mistake and he voted against it at that time and he was in the minority by a 3 to 2 vote. He feels that it should.be zoned light industrial. There is industrial on two sides of it; there is a building situated on it. We are changing it from MI to LI which will prevent the use of it for crane services and it has been represented, as factual, that the property was under contract for sale to a crane service. If it is, they will not be able to use it for that purpose. He is prepared to change it back as it was in the beginning. Mr. Chapin stated that he agrees with Mr. Scheifley that the owner should be allowed to use that building and he thinks that that is the consensus of all the people. The question remains as to what to do about the 4 lots to the west. He is in favor of permitting the owner to use his property for whatever valid purposes permitted under this limited commercial use, LI. In regard to the 4 west lots, if it turns out that they cannot be used for any other purpose other than the proposed LI, he will vote for that but if the facts turn out it could be used with a requisite setback parking requirements, etc., for lopping off 2 or 4 of those lots, he would consider that. Mr. Chapin moved that in the interest of obtaining all the facts so that Council can make an intelligent, informed decision, they postpone the Second and FINAL Reading of this proposed ordinance for two weeks. Mayor Weekes asked if that is a motion to table. Mr. Chapin said, yes, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Scheifley Yes; Mayor Weekes - No. Said motion passed with a 3 to 1 vote. Mr. Sanson returned to the Chambers at 10:28 P.M. 9.a. The City Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on July 18th, recommended by unanimous vote that the conditional use, site and development plan approval request for Lake Ray Tennis Club, located in Section 29-46-43 on the north side of Dotterel Road between Lindell Boulevard and Jaeger Drive, be approved, subject to the following: 1. Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his July 13th memorandum. 2. Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as : stated in his July 5th memorandum. 3. Comments of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their July 12th minutes. 4. Availability of water. 5. A time limitation of 18 months be set for development of the project. This was discussed at the August 7th workshop meeting. - 30 - 8/14/78 Mrs. Durante moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board subject to the comments as outlined in the preface to the agenda, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes~ Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. Mr. Sanson stated before roll call that it is his under- standing that it was agreed'upon by Council that part of the provision of the site plan approval would be that he would never light the tennis courts on the east side. Mr. Scheifley stated that there is a question as to whe- ther they have the legal right to put that as a condition. Roy Rogers, representing the Tartan Development Corporation, stated that the developer has no intentions of lighting those lights which are in those courts immediately alongside the road and, there- fore, opposite the housing complex, Town and Country. In the six tennis courts that are around the clubhouse itself, the lights are the negative impact type. They only light the tennis courts. Mr. Scheifley added the provision to the motion that the lighting be limited to the six interior courts and excluded from the perimeter courts. At this point the roll to the motion was called. 9ob. The city Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on July 18th, recommended by unanimous vote that the site and development plan approval request for Palms of Delray, located in Section 29-46-43 east of Jaeger Drive, between Dotterel Road and Curlew Road, be approved, subject to the following: 1. Comments of ~he City Engineer as stated in his july 10th memorandum. 2. Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as stated in his June 13th memorandum. 3. Comments of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their June 14th minutes. 4. Availability of water. 5. A time limitation of 12 months be set for development of the project. This was discussed at the August 7th workshop meeting. Mr. Chapin moved that Council accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board for this project, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. - 31 - 8/14/78 Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Hrs. Durante Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.c. The City Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on July 25th, recommended by unanimous vote that the final plat approval request for Pine Trail Subdivision, Section iV (Rainberry Woods), located in Section 12-46-42 on the south side of Lake Ida Road, between Military Trail and Barwick Road be approved, sub- ject to the following: 1. Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his July 20th memorandum. 2. Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as _ stated in his July 5th memorandum. 3. Availability of water. Mr. Scheifley moved that Council give final plat approval for Pine Trail Subdivision, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.d. The City Manager reported that an application has been received from Kirk Sullivan to annex a 23.5 acre parcel of land, subject to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District. The subject property is in Section 7-46-43 and is located on the west side of Davis Road between Lone Pine Road and Lake Ida Road. Since t~is request for R-1AA zoning is in con- formance with the City's Lane Use Plan and County zoning for this area, approval of the annexation is recommended. This property is presently zoned in the County as RS (Residential Single Family). It is recommended that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the ordinance effecting the annexation. Mr. Chapin moved that the City Attorney be given such authori- zation for this property, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.d. The City Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on July 18th, recommended by unanimous vote that the conditional use, site and development plan approval request for Banyan Tree Village, located in Section 21-46-43 on the east side of U.S. No. 1 between S.E. 10th Street and S.E. 12th Street be approved, subject to the following: 1. Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his June 27th memorandum. 2. Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as stated in his July 5th memorandum. 3. Comments of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their July 12th minutes. 4. Availability of water. 5. A time limitation of 18 months be set for develop- ment of the project. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on August 7th. - 32 - 8/14/78 Mr. Sanson moved that the conditional use, site and develop- ment plan approval request for Banyan Tree Village be approved, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.f. The City Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board at a meeting held on July 25th, recommended by unanimous vote that the final plat approval request for Spanish Wells (Phase II), located in Section 25-46-42 on the south side of Linton Boulevard, between Military Trail and Dover Road be approved, subject to the following: 1. Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his July 24th memorandum. 2. Comments of the director of Public Utilities as stated in his July 20th memorandum. 3. Availability of water. Mr. Chapin stated that he doesn't think he has ever voted against a final plat approval before but he sees comments from the Assistant City Engineer and he would indicate that Council should not vote for it until at least a variety of items are taken care of. He is inclined to support the City Engineer and not vote for it until these items are taken care of. Mr. Sanson stated that he feels the same way. The City Manager stated that the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board is subject to several items and that is one of the things that it would be subject to. Mr. Chapin moved that Council approve this subject to the conditions set forth in the memorandum by Mr. Schreiber dated July 24, 1978, seconded by Mrs. Durante. The City Manager stated that the motion should be contingent upon the three items. Mr. Chapin added that his motion be subject to the three items covered in the preface of the agenda, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mrs. Du- rante - Yes: Mr. Sanson - Yes~ Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed unanimously. 10. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize payment of the City's bills. Mr. Scheifley moved that Council approve the payment of the City's bills, seconded by Mrs. Durante. The motion passed unanimously. General Fund ............... $1,203,616.78 Federal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund .... 90,000.00 Cigarette Tax Fund ............ 21,105.00 Utilities Tax Fund ............ 111,500.00 Special Projects Fund ........... 9,483.63 Beach Restoration ............. 436,102.29 Federal Public Works Fund ......... 34,283.04 Water and Sewer Fund ........... 507,453.60 ll.ao Mr. Sanson stated that there are several residents on the area of Germantown Road that want City water and sewer and they don't know how to go about it. Apparently, he can't seem to get any answers as to just what it would entail. The City Manager stated that he would get back to him on this matter. - 33 - 8/14/78 Mr. Chapin moved at 10:45 P.M. for the adjournment of the meeting, seconded by Mrs. Durante. The motion passed unanimously. ATTEST:.. MAYOR The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach and that the information provided herein is the minutes of the meeting of said City Council of August 14, 1978, which minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Council on ~. ~?~., /~ 7~ . / City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the minutes that you have received are not completed as indicated above, then this means that these are not the official minutes of 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. - 34 - 8/14/78