Loading...
03-14-77 MARC}{ ].4, 1977 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, March 14, 1977, with Mayor James H. Scheifley presiding, and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, City Attorney Rdger Saberson, and Council members John E. Gomery, Jr., David E. · Randolph, Aaron I. Sanson, IV, and Leon M. Weekes, present. 1. The'Lord's Prayer was recited in unison. ' 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States was given. of America 3. Mr. Gomery requested that on Page 5, of the minutes of FebruarY 28, 1977, the word "no" be inserted indicating.that no realtor was involved in this deal. Mr. Sanson asked .that a clarification be made on the same subject whereas if the property is purchased for $135,000, is it to be assumed that the down payment of $40,000 will come from some fund, but not the Utility Tax Revenue? City Manager Mariott replied in the affirmative. Mr. Gomery moved for the approval of the February 28, 1977 minutes, seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. 4.~ There were no items for presentation by Council members. .5.a. Mr. Frank Ellis, 553 Jaeger Drive, Delray Beach, spoke concerning a model home in Tropic Palms. The owner decided he was going to change the structure of the home so he could sell it and put it in the form of a one-homeowner building. Mr. Ellis stated he found out by going to the Building Department, that there were two legal-sized pages of changes that the owner would have to make in order to put this model building in a position, to be sold as a one-occupant home. M~. Ellis further stated one of the neighbors within 100 feet of said property saw men working on the property, and told the men there were building restrictions in Delray regarding working on Sunday, but the men continued to work until 5:00 P.M. Mr'. Ellis presented Council with 8 pictures of the property in ques- tion. City Manager Mariott stated that he will investigate this matter and contact Mr. Ellis. Mr. Sanson requested that City Manager Mariott obtain a written statement for Council as to the situation and the condition of the 3-story housing development in Tropic Palms. Mr. Sanson stated several individuals have asked him about this. 5.b. Mr. Irwin Kresser, 234 N.E. 17th Street, spoke and said he was not sure whether the problem he wants to present is City or County property. The property in question is on West Atlantic Avenue near Publix Market, and. Military Trail. Mayor Scheifley replied that this is County property. City Manager Mariott stated that he would see that the proper individuals received~the informa- tion. 6.a. There were no items presented for items not on the agenda. 6.b. City Manager Mariott recommended approval of the follow- ing budget transfers: Amount From TO $500 General Fund Contingency Parks & Recreation Account (Appraisal-Lane 901-710-410 Adjacent to Miller Park) 665 General Fund Contingency Miscellaneous Services Account (Movie Projector 827-490 Safety Program) 600 General Fund Contingency City Council Account (Awards-Atlantic 901-111-508 Football) 7,000 General Fund Contingency Beach Bathhouse Account Account (Additional funding 901-731-610 needed for $65,000 total) 7,500 General Fund Contingency Parks & Recreation Account (Ins'tallation of Pompey Park Budget two wells authorized by Resolution No. 44-76 adOpted January 10, 1977 25,000 Police Budget City Attorney's Budget Elimination of four jailer positions (George Clemens Settlement) Mayor Scheifley asked City Manager Mariott if he could give Council an idea as to how much will be left in the Contingency Fund after the transfers are made; the City Manager said at this time he cannot, but he will develop a report. Mr. Sanson referred to Resolution No. 44~76, and said he was not clear as to whether the wells were for.general water or the sprinkler system; the City Manager replied they are wells to be used for irrigation purposes. Mr. Weekes moved that the transfers be authorized as recommended, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. 6.c. City Manager Mariott recommended that Council authorize the construction of a parking lot on the south side of Worthing Park at an estimated cost of $7,000, with financing to be provided as follows: Amount From To $3,500 Police Department 428 Public Works 2,500' Christmas Bonus 490 'Public Works 1,000 (Presently in Budget) Public Works 7,000 This was discussed at the March 7th Workshop meeting~ Mr. Sanson asked if the parking lot would come under the authority of the Downtown Development Authority. The City Manager replied that it would not. Mayor Scheifley asked how any monies could be taken from the Christmas b6hus. The City Manager stated that it appears now tha~ there will be at least $2,500 in that budget that would not be needed. The Christmas bonus, like other budget appropriations, is an estimate; now, several moDths after the making of the budget, ~t is determined this amount can be freed. The City Manager advised -. -~'9 additional parking spaces will be provided. Mr. Gomery moved for the construction of a parking lot on the south side of Worthing Park at an estimated cost'of $7,000, with financing to be provided as outlined in the preface of tonight's Agenda, seconded by Mr. Weekes, said motion passing unanimously. -2- 3/14/77 147 6.d. City Manager Mariott recommended that Council authorize t--~beautification of the municipal~parking lot in the vicinity of N.E. 1st Street and th~-F.E.-C~--Rail~oad at an estimated cost or $18,500, with financing to come from unbudgeted interest earnings of the Capital Improvement Construction Fund..- This-was-discussed at the March~7th Worksho~'meeti~V ..................... Mr. Sanson asked if this incl~de_s s~rinkler_systems;.. the City Manager replied that it~did. .. .......... Mr.'-Gomery moved for the beautification of the municipal parking lot in the vicinity of N.E 1st Street and the F.E.C. Rail- road at an estimated Cost of $18/500, 'with financing to come from unbudgeted_interest earnings of the Capital Improvement Construction Fund, seconded by Mr. Sanson, said motion Pa~slng unani~0usly. 6.e. City Manager. Mariott recommended that Council authorize the landscaping of the (westward) extension of the_Beach'Bathhouse property at an estimated cost of $3,00G, with financing to come from unbudgeted inter~st earnings of the Capital Improvement Construction Fund. This was discussed at the March 7th Workshop meeting.~ ~ '- Mr.-sanson m~v~d for _the a~thorization ~-~he landscaping of the (westward) extension of the Beach Bathhouse Proper.ty_.at-an estimated cost of $3;000, with financing ~'come from unbudgete~- interest earnings of the Capital Improvement Construction Fund, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion_ passing unanimously.. . 6~f. :--:- City-Manager Mariott ~ecOmmenaed ~h~ ~o~h~'i~-aut~'i~e the transfer of appropriations in the current year's budget f.rom~ the Christmas BonUs, Social-SecUrit~,~Reti~em~nt'con{rlbutions, Group Health and Life Insurance premium and Workmen's Compensation Insurance premium accounts to. the various departmental budgets to complY With the new Uniform ACcOUnting Syst~--f0r-'~lo~id~ municipali- ties. The-new'accounting'sYstem~is-to become_fully operational on O~tober 1, 1977. The making of the transfer~_duri~ th~s fiscal year priDr to October 1st will permit the City~t© make a smooth transition to the new-system and will-eliminate a IOt_0f~confusion that would otherwise result at next budget making time When it would be necessary to make the transfers if not done prior to that time. Mr. Gomery moved that Council authorize the transfer of appropriations in the current year's budget from the Christmas Bonus, Social Security, Retirement Contributions, Group Health and Life Insurance premium and Workmen's'Compensation Insurance premium accounts to the various departmental budgets to comply with the new Uniform Accounting System for Florida municipalities, seconded by Mr. Weekes, said motion passing unanimously.-'Before roll call, the following .discussion was had. · Mr. John 6otlinger, 1710 S. ocea~;-So~ieva~d, 'commented on . the budget transfers requested, and questioned where the City suddenly' finds these funds in the City Budget. City Manager Mariott stated that there is no relation whatever between the action on this Agenda item in making transfers from about'5 budget appropriations to the various departmental budgets throughout the budget; that is merely the moving of money and not an increase and not a decrease in money. At budget making time, there were certain revenue sources and certain estimated dollar amounts that would be available to go into the balancing of the budget. Since that time, the City has had things happen; many_ of them were bey. ond the control of the City, and some of them at th~ Federal Government level. Secondly, the Federal Government has instituted a new Federal Grant Program since the making of the present'~budget that permits the City to free up the $40,000 to apply towards the.purchase of land. Mr. Sanson stated that on Page 100 of the.City Budget, there' is $194,500 that was reserved in the budget for Contingency Account; that has been there since the beginning of the budget, through all the Public Hearings, through the discussions with the unions, and through the discussions as to whether or not the City should fire lifeguards. Mr. Sanson stated he computed that there is approximately $16,000 that has been allocated that has come out of the Contingency Account. -3- 3/14/77 That is what it is there for. The other $25,000 was from the ~elimination of four jailer positions w~hich were budgeted for a ~full 12-month period; this has been used to settle the lawsUit. Th~ remaining money totals $7,000; $1,000 is presently in the budge~ and that leaves $6,000 and that :night be the only two areas that might be suspect one for $3,500 from the Police Department Budget and the $2,500 from the Christmas Bonus. He would have to. believe as City Manager Mariott has said, if that is the only cushion he would allow himself, it isn't that bad. The City Manager stated when the budget was made, there was a possibility the jailers would be eliminated during the year, but it was not known for sure, and to be on the safe side, full year budgeting was provided. The $3,500 was for food for the prisoners. Mr..Sanson advised Mr. Gotlinger that the City Manager will provide a report on the balance in t~e General Contingency Accoun~ - ~ Mr. Paul Friend, 1320 S.W. 20th Terrace, questioned the propriety of t~ansferring $25,000 out of funds ~hat were earmarked for Public Safety in order to pay a lawsuit that was not a result of some deficiency in public safety. City Manager Mariott informed Mr.~Friend that the City has'provided funds for the EMT Program from another source. 6,g. city'Manager Mariott recommended, as discussed at the March 7th Workshop meeting, that Council authorize execution of a three- year contract with May, Zima and Company for performing the City audit for fees as follows: $19,000 for 1976-77; $21,000 for 1977-78; and $21,000 for 1978-79. The Financial Advisory Board concurs with this recommendation. ~ ~ ~ity Attorney Saberson stated that the fee quoted is an ~im~d f~e in the letter from May, Zima and Company regarding the .~h°rt form agreement. Secondly, he asked that Council consider the possibility of a 60-day termination clause that either side could terminate the contract on 60 days notice if they felt that their ~interest so dictated. Once this 3-year commitment' ls entered into, the City will not be able to withdraw from it. Mr. Sanson moved that Council authorize the execution of~a three-year contract with May, Zima and Company for performing the City audit for the estimated fees as outlined on the Agenda under Item~6.q., contingent' upon a 60-day mutual termination clause being inserted into the contract, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. The City Manager recommended that Council declare a · nuisance to exist on the following properties'and in compliance with Chapter 15 of the City's Code of Ordinances, direct the City Clerk to comply with the ordinance in abating these nuisances: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION CITY CODE S50' of N300' of E. 135' 15-3 of Block 20 50 N.W. 5th Avenue Fenno Subdivision 15-3 Block 2, Lots 10 to 12 less State Road 806 right-of-way 10-15 N.W. 9th Avenue' 11-849 W. Atlantic Avenue 12-845 W. Atlantic Avenue ' ~Mr. Randolph moved that Council declare a nuisance to exist on the properties listed above, and that the City Clerk be directed to comply with Chapter 15 of the City's Cod~ of Ordinances, seconded by Mr. Gomery, said motion passing ~nanimously. 6.i. City Manager Mariott stated that because of the abolishment o-~ the Municipal Court, the City terminated all of its jailers. -4- 3/14/77 The Palm Beach County Sheriff's officu wii1 permit the City to house prisoners at the Palm Beach County Jail at a cost to the City of $10 per day per prisoner who have been given jail time by the Judge for violation of a City ordinance. The cost is expected to be minimal; perhaps $500 a year. City Attorney Saberson stated there are several ~inor revisions; the first paragraph in the fourth line indicating that they will be held for violations of Municipal ordinances was worded before to reflect that there was still a Municioal Court. Secondly, under Paragraph A, which refers to incarceration for a long Period of time, and the City assuming any liability for that. Language was added "which was authorized by the Municipality". If the City authorizes incarceration for a 10ng period of time, the City would be responsible for that. In Paragraph 4, it refers to any-injury or accident that may occur to the prisoners; the City .would be responsible for that unless the Sheriff's office has been negligent. The City Attorney added, "or has been guilty of intentional wrong doing." Mr. Sanson remarked that the Agreement does not address itself to transport of prisoners; he questioned how this would be handled administratively. City Manager Mariott replied that he does not know how this would be handled administratively. Mr. Sanson further questioned if this would be a City responsibility; if so, what kind of manpower is that going to take? City Manager Mariott replied that he did not know. City Attorney Saberson stated that there is a provision in the Agreement concerning transporting prisoners if they have to be somewhere other than in jail. Mr. Sanson asked what the current situation is in regard to changes that have been made in the Police Hall. He noticed they had taken out the Courtroom facilities. He asked if this would be done also with the jails, or will they be left for emergency purposes. City Manager Mariott stated that some revamping of the jail quarters later on may be done; this is a future plan. He further stated that the City's being able to convert the former Courtroom into direct Police use greatly alleviates the crowded condition and makes far less demanding the fact that . the'City convert the jail. facilities to office and storage room space as is hoped to be done, but it is not necessary.to do it right away. Mr. Gomery moved that the City enter into an agreement with the Palm Beach County Sheriff's office to house prisoners at the Palm Beach County Jail at a cost to the City of $10 per day per prisoner, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. 6.j. City Manager Mari°tt stated that the following bids have ~een received for nine 4-door sedans for the Police Department: Bidder Quotation Ft. Pierce.Dodge, Inc. $35,319.28 Ft. Pierce Jack Nicklaus Pontiac, Inc. 36,092.34 Delray Beach Hauser Motor Company 37,069.63 Delray Beach Adams Chevrolet Company 36,373.99 Delray Beach . City'Manager Mariott stated that these are the net bid figures with vehicles to be traded in having quotes made for the purchase of them by the dealer in each of the above instances. He further stated there will be a difference of $20 per car in the case of the Ft. Pierce quotation depending upon whether the City picks up the automobiles or if they are delivered to the City. The difference in price between Ft. Pierce Dodge and Jack Nicklaus is a total of $773..06, if the City picks up the cars in Ft. Pierce~ If they are delivered, the difference will be $593.06 less by purchasing them from the Ft. Pierce Dodge dealer. It is recommended that the award be made to Ft. Pierce Dodge, Inc., on the terms outlined. -5- 3/14/77 150 Mayor Scheifley questioned the City Manager as to whether the service would be the same as it would be locally if these cars were bought from Ft. Pierce. The City Manager replied that the local Dodge dealer is supposed to supply the service if the cars are bought in Ft. Pierce. The cars could not be taken to Ft. Pierce for servicing at that distance, and have it worthwhile. The difference per car is $65.89. Mr. Sanson asked the City Manager if the purchase' of these cars has anything to do with trade-ins; the City Manager said several cars will be traded in. Mr. Randolph said it has been his experience that in the maintenance area, dealers have the policy of taking care of their own. The dealer is committed to servicing the car by law, but when not purchased at that particular dealer, the service will-not be premium service. He felt the City should go to the second lowest . bid; it is a local dealership and maintenance would be better and faster. City Manager Mariott stated tha~ he questioned one point made by Mr. Randolph; the comparison of the service that Mr. Randolph has received in the past insofar as having a car being serviced at a dealership that had not sold him the car. Mayor Scheifley asked City Attorney Saberson whether there was freedom of choice. The City Attorney replied that anytime that the City receives bids, you have. the opportunity to take a bid other than the lowest bid if it is thought"there is a legitimate public-interest reason for doing so. Mr. Sanson said the bids are close enough that he feels the local dealer should have an opportunity to benefit; however, if this is done as a practice, why even bother to take bids. City Attorney. Saberson stated that by doing this once, the City is not establishing a policy that the local dealership will always receive the business, regardless of any other relevant factors that might be important in reaching a decision. Mayor Scheifley stated there are other factors more important than money. Mr. Sanson said he was trying to weigh whether a'Pontiac is a~better car than a Dodge; if so, should the Police Department ~ feel that the citizens are better served by having a better car, then he feels $500 is a small price. City Manager Mariott clarified that' nine vehicles are going %o be traded. Mr. Weekes moved that Council accept Jack Nicklaus Pontiac bid for the nine Police vehicles, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. Mr. Sanson stated he supports the motion on the basis that economically, the City stands to benefit considerably more than $500 difference in price. Also, on the basis that it is inferred that Pontiacs will better suit the Police Department than Dodges. 6.k. City Manager Mariott stated that he would like to skip over the 6.k. Item pertaining to the lease agreement for use of the West Palm Beach Auditorium because sufficient information has not been develoPed since the last Workshop meeting to warrant Council consideration. Mr. Randolph moved that Item 6.k., be tabled, seconded by - Mr. Gomery, said motion passing unanimously. 6.1. City Manager Mariott stated that Council should give consideration to the reappointment of Thomas E. Woolbright to a four- year term on the Building Code Appeal Board, ending February' 12, 1981. He is willing to accept reappointment if this is Council's wish. Mr. Weekes moved that Mr. Woolbright be reappointed to a.four-year termwith an ending date of.February 12, 1981, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing.unanimously. · 6 m. ~City Manager Mariott stated that Council may either take action ~t this Meeting or refer to a Workshop, the reappointment of Preston Wright as a regular member of the Board of Adjustment to a term ending March 15, 1980; appointment of John Henderson as a regular member .(replacing Robert Kinkead) to a term ending March 15, 1980; appointment of Robert Kinkead as an alternate member (replacing John Henderson) to a term ending March 15, 1980; and reappointment of William Romberger as an alternate member to a term ending March 15, 1980. · ~r. Kinkead has suggested that he be appointed as an alternate member and Mr. Henderson be appointed as a regular member, which is agreeable with Mr. Charles Toth, Chairman of the Board of Adjust- ment. - 6 - ~/14/77 151 Mr. Sanson moved that %his item be referred ~.o Work,hop, seconded by Mr. Gomery. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - No; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. 7.a. City Manager Mariott stated that a communication has been received from the Delray Beach National Little League, Inc., requesting permission to solicit funds from April 1st through April 3, 1977, approval of which is recommended by the Solicitations. Committee. Mr. Sanson moved that permission be granted to the Delray Beach National Little League, Inc., to solicit funds from April 1st through April 3, 1977, seconded by Mr. Gomery, said motion passing unanimously. 7.b. City Manager Mariott stated that a communication has been received from the Delray Beach Playhause, Inc., requesting permission to solicit funds from April 4th through April 17, 1977, approval of which is recommended by the Solicitations Con~ittee. Mr. Gomery moved that permission be granted to the Delray Beach Playhouse, Inc., requesting permission to solicit funds from April 4th through April 17, 1977, seconded by Mr' Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. 8..a. City ~Manager Mariott stated that Resolution No. 18-77 requesting permission from the Palm Beach County Board of Commissioners to rezone Lots 60 and'61, Delray Beach Shores from RM (Residential Multiple Family) (County Zoning) to RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling District) (City Zoning) has been prepared for Council consideration. Council at its regular meeting on February 28th, requested the City Attorney to prepare the resolution. . The City Manager presented Resolution No. 18-77. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REQUESTING PERMISSION FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM-·' MISSIONERS PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 171.062, TO REZONE LAND ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH FROM THE COUNTY ZONING CLASSIFICATION RM (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY) TO THE CITY'S · ZONING CLASSIFICATION RM-6 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT). (Copy of Resolution No. 18-77 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Weekes moved for the passage of Resolution No. 18-77, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. ~omery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 ~o'0 vote. 8.b. City Manager Mariott stated that Ordinance No. 2-77 is · relative to annexing property in the southeast corner of the inter- section of 1-95 and Linton Boulevard, Section 29-46-43, subject to. SC (Specialized Commercial) District. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the February 14th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and Final Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 2-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,~ FLORIDA ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, CERTAIN LAND, NAMELY A IARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH. RANGE 43 EAST,PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF 1-95. AND LINTON BOULEVARD, 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. 2-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) .. - 7 - 3/14/77 The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertiscd in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach. There being no objections, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Sanson stated that located on the land are two buildings which should have been condemned; the buildings are now being used by transients to sleep in. Mr. Sanson said he does not know if Mr. Brennan is going to tear the buildings down; the buildings were there on County land before Mr. Brennan's land was annexed. Mr. Sanson asked what legal right the City has to have the buildings torn down. City Attorney Saberson replied by saying that if the buildings present a safety problem, they should be torn down. In the event that they present a problem in terms of being nonconforming, they can continue to exist. Mr. Sanson stated if the City could not force the developer to tear the buildings down, then the City should do it. Mr. Brennan has agreed to tear the buildings down. Mayor Scheiftey said as soon as the ordinance is effective, the administration can send an inspector out and, if they are in violation under Chapter 15, some- thing'can be done about it. City Manager Mariott ~stated it will be checked out to see if they are in violation. Mr. sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 2-77, on Second and Final Reading, seconded by Mr. Gomery. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.c. City Manager Mariott stated Ordinance No. 8-77 is to ~-~ presented for passage consideration on Second and Final Reading. This ordinance, if passed, will annex property at the southwest corner of the intersection of N.W. llth Street and N.W. 5th Avenue, Lot'4, Block 5, amended plat of Lake Ida Gardens, subject to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the February 14th 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. 8-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LOT 4, BLOCK.5, AMENDED PLAT OF LAKE IDA GARDENS, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 192 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 8-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City.Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach. There being no objections, the ~ublic hearing was closed. Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 8-77, on Second and Final Reading, seconded~by Mr. Gomery. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows~: Mr'. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.d. City Manager Mariott stated that there will be a First Reading and Public hearing on Ordinance No. 1-77 relative to rezoning a parcel of land in Section 9~46-43 at the N.E. corner of U.S. No. 1 and N.E. 8th Street from ~-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to GC (General Commercial) District. The holding of this public hearing is made necessary by Section 166.041, Florida Statutes. Council, at its.regular meeting 0]% January 10th reque~_t~d the CitY~ Attorney to prepare the ordinance. Council ordinance on First Reading on April 25, 1977. ]Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on second and final reading, a public hearing has been scheduled 'to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 1-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM-15 (MULTIPLE F~ILY DWELLING ' DISTRICT) TO GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) SAID LAND BEING IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF U.S. #1 AND N.E. 8TH STREET AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1976". 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.' There being no objections, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Gomery moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 1-77 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.e. City Manager Mariott stated that there will be a First Reading and Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 7-77 relative to rezoning the Chatelaine Subdivision, Section 12-46-42 from R-lA (Single Family Dwelling) District to R-lAB (Single Family Dwelling) District. The holding of this public hearing is made necessary 5y Section 166.041, Florida Statutes. Council, at its regular meeting on January 24th, requested the City Clerk to give proper notJ~ce to property owners ~n Chatelaine in accordance with the Home Rule Act that will eventually lead to rezoning. Council is to con- sider passage of this ordinance on Second and Final Reading on April 25, 1977. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 7-77: · 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) TO R-lAD (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT) PLAT NO. 1 CHATELAINE IN THE SE¼ OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS · RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29, PAGES 94 AND 95, OF THE ~PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND . AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1976." 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. Robert Rogers, 3612 DeGien, Chatelaine, spoke and related to Council that he and other residents petitioned Council to establish a new zone, R-lAB, and to rezone Chatelaine to that new zone in the past. He stated Mr. Capra bought the forty vacaot lots, and built two models; the models met the requirements of the R-lA zone which was in effect at that time but did not conform to the deed restric- tions of 1200 square feet. Mr. Capra's intention was to build the small homes in with the resident's larger homes, all of which except for 21 homes, exceeded 1500 square feet. It was estimated'that these small homes would decrease the value of the existing homes by approximately 20%. When this became evident, the residents petitioned to establish zone R-lAB, setting 1500 square feet minimum floor area. Mr. Rogers stated that the protection of the value of the homes was the only reason for those petitions. Mr. Rogers passed out a Summary Sheet to Council indicating that 14 homeowners have no objections to the rezoning; 2 homeowners refused to sign the petition. His conten- tion is that small homes in lower priced brackets should be built in small home subdivisions, and not in larger, more costly homes. 154 Mr. Ray Capra, builder in Chatelaine, spoke and said the majority of the lots he bought are 65' x 100'. All the remaining lots are 75' x 100'. The 21 homes are nonconcorming uses; the homes are on 75' x 100' lots. When the homes .of 1509 square feet are built, Mr. Capra stated he is at the outmost on the setbacks. There are 25 lots that, if an individual wants a h3use from Mr. Capra at the City's requirements, with a pool, he must tell them he cannot build it. He further Stated that he has lost five customers because of this. W~at. the. City. is asking~for is impossible. Robert Steele, 3511 Montresor Avenue, spoke and said he moved into Chatelaine recently. He did not want a pool as there was a Clubhouse. Stephen Beyer, attorney for Mr. Capra, said that the 43 lots are the smallest lots remaining in the subdivision. He said it would seem pointless to require, the smallest lots to have the largest. houses as the green area would be taken away. The Public hearing was closed.' Mr. Sanson asked Mr. Carey if the Board 'was unanimous' on the conclusion to rezone. Mr. Carey answered that it was.. Mr. Sanson questioned City Attorney Saberson concerning the second opinion given by Mr. Vance relative to whether or not a clause can be inserted providing exemptions for the nonconforming homes. Mr. Sanson said Mr. Vance's conclusion on the front page is vague, and it is his interpretation that Mr. Vance is saying that perhaps it can be done, but Mr. Vance is not sure. City Attorney Saberson said that what Mr. Vance is saying is that if you have an ordinance of general applicability throughout the City that gives some type of relief for being made nonconforming, that would be perfectly proper, but to pass an ordinance zoning a specific area in the City and granting only relief in that area would be legally improper. Mr. Sanson asked Lhe City Attorney if he feels that if 'this Council takes the action to perpetuate this rezoning, it has taken sufficient measures to research the legality of this issue. · City Attorney Saberson said Council hired Mr. Vance to answer the legal questions involved; Mr. Vance has written memorandums to Council regarding various subjects that have arisen in connection with-the rezoning. Council has enough legal memoranda to support its decision. Mr. Sanson mOved for the passage of Ordinance No. 7-77, on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Sche±fley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. '8..f. City Manager Mariott stated Ordinance No. 12-77 is relative to annexing property south of Gulfstream Boulevard between U.S. No. _ 1 and Dixie Highway, Section 4-46-43 subject to the GC (General Commercial District). Council requested the City Attorney to pre- pare an ordinance effecting the annexation at its meeting on February 28th. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 12-77: 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 4, 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 ZONIN3 THEREOF. The City Manager read the caption of the. ordinance. Mr. Sanson questioned the City Attorney, and asked that when a piece of commercial property is annexed in after the sign ordinance was passed, will those pieces of property have to adhere to the sign ordinance? 155 The City Attorney replied that they would be brought in as nonconforming signs. Mr. Sanson asked if at the end of the ten year period, they would still have to conform and take down signs; the City Attorney answered in the affirmative. The City Attorney said once the time period in the ordinance begins to run, it is a ten year period'from the effective date of the ordinance. Mr. Sanson stated it seems to him that it could end up nine years from now with a lot of problems from this sort of thing, and if the sign ordinance is amended to specifically state that any properties annexed in from the time of the o~iginal adoption of that sign ordinance would have to comply also. The City Attorney said it would be possible to make the annexation itself conditional upon that and could be done with each annexation that is a concern. City Attorney Saberson was asked to research the matter for discussion at workshop. Mr. Weekes moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 12-77 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Gomery. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.g. City Manager Mariott stated Ordinance No. 13-77 amending Chapter 23A "Subdivisions" of the Code of Ordinances is relative to waiving the sidewalk requirement on one or both sides of streets has been prepared for Council consideration on First Reading. Council, at its meeting on February 28th, requested the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance effecting the amendment. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 13-77: AN ORDINANCE OF'THE CITY.~COUNCIL~OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 23A "SUBDIVISIONS" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY REPEALING SECTION 23A-9 .(6) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF A NEW SECTION 23A-9 (6) RELATIVE TO WAIVING THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT ON ONE OR BOTH SIDES ~F STREETS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City. Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Gomery. moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 13-77, on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr.'Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.h. City Manager Mariott stated that Ordinance No. 14-77 relative to amending Chapter 3"Signs and Billboards" of the Code_~/ of Ordinances, has been prepared for Council consideration. These changes were recommended by the Sub-Committee appointed by Council to study the pre~ent sign ordinance. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 14-77. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 3 "SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS" OF THE CODE O? ORDINanCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY AMENDING SECTION 3-7 TO PROVIDE APPROVAL BY ALL APPLICABLE CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD OF THE SIGNS' STRUCTURAL DETAILS, MATERIALS, COLORS, LOCATION AND AESTHETIC QUALITY;· RE- PEALING SECTION 3-13 "AESTHETIC REGULATIONS OF SIGNS" AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF A NEW SECTION 3-13; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Sanson questioned what Council was trying to accomplish, since he was not present at the last Workshop meeting. City Manager Mariott replied that this was discussed at several prior meetings. It was the ordinance that was recommended by the Sub-Committee' appointed by _Council to draft 'the ordin~u'~ce. -' '~- · City Attorney Sabers0n/Stated that the ordinance makes n© change in the existing ordingnce; it-i~_ just_D_clarifying Ordinance. .~-~.:~ ........... ~.,:. ..... ~,~... ...¥ .::-. .-. - - M~'Sanson moved for ~he. passage of_Ordinance No. 14-77, on Firs~ R~ading, Seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll. Call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.i. The City Manager stated that Ordinance No:..15-77 repealing Chapter- 15 6~-the Code Of Ordinances relative to landscaping has been prepared for Council consideration on First Reading. This was _ discussed at-the March 7th Workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance N0.'i5777: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAy BEACH., FLORIDA, PROVIDING MINIMUM ......STANDARDS REQUIRiNG-LANDSCAPING OF CERTAIN ~_._AREAS, INCLUDING SETBACK, YARDi AND OFF~STREET _-PARKING AND~OTHER VEHI.CULAR:USE-AREA~:..IN CONNECTION WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING AREAS OR OTHER VEHICULAR USE AREAS. (EXCEPTING --' - 'i~'CONNECTION WITH SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS), TO BE APPLICABLE IN DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA; ___ -REQUIRING such LANDSCAPING-TQ_BE SHOWN._ON ..... ..[.'['.LPLANS FOR BUILDING PERMITS-AND PLANS FOR PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT PARKING AREAS AND OTHER ' VEHICULAR USE AREAS; PROVIDING THAT THIS ~-.~ _.~ .... : ~: ORDINANCE.~REPEALS CHAPTER 15C.-~OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,_:.FLORIDA, ~a-x.:~.__r__- ...... AND REplAcES THE PROV-!~IONS_:THEREOF.WITH THIS - .----~ORDINANCE; PROVIDING_A_PENALTY-CLAUSE;-~ROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;.-PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ~..-+._ - - . _- - z__ :_: z'-=:_.. The--City Manage~ read the caption of the ordinance. City Attorney Saberson stated that in Section 1, where it says 4F & 4H, it should read 5F & 5H. :In Section 5A, the number that is 3B should be 4B. On Page 5, F5, Section 4, should be Section 5. The page that is numbered'.5, at the bottom of that and continuing over to Page 6, this was a change he made. It is a provision that involved the CAB being permitted to relocate interior !andscaping~ meaning,.wi ~thin the.interior-of the parking area. He.stated that in-going over-the ordinance, that there had to be some type of limitation as to how much they can relocate, and to limit it somehow so that it is not just a blank check that they could relocate any amount; therefore, Council'should insert something. _Mr. Gomery.suggested 50%; one half _ for each side. --Mr. Gomery moved for thg. passage of Ordinance No. 15-77, on First Reading with the figure 50 placed in the blank at the top of page six, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council' voted as follows: Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson -.Yes; - Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.- Befb~e r0fl ~a.ll, Mr.. Sanson stated in Section 5 on Page 2, under the areas of A&B, Installation and Maintenance, he felt there should be v~rbiage speaking to the fact.that if, in the process of development, a tree that is marked as one that should remain, is damaged to the point of being destroyed, that the developer should be forced t~ substitute another tree of like kind,'if possible. Secondly, there is no verbiage, in regard to sprinkler systems, stating that if someone does not maintain the shrubbery properly, and it dies, they are forced to replace it. Mr. Gomery said there is a provision that states a person would be subject to a fine. . - 12 - 3/14/77. 157 Mr. Sanson questioned the City A~torney regarding P~ragraph B, on Page 2, and asked if the language i~: clear enough to make an individual understand that they are responsible for maintaining the landscaping to the same degree as when the project was built. City Attorney Saberson said that in the event that something were to happen to the landscaping other than just being run down, there is a question whether or not someone could be compelled 'to replace it. Mr. Ron Oprzadek stated that any landscaping that has been put in as part of requirement of %he City Ordinance, has to be maintained; therefore, the Board would have the authority to come in and compel those individuals to replace it. In most cases, there is a hedge problem; the ordinance says there will be one year to have the hedge filled in. Mr. Sanson asked Mr. Oprzadek if there was a vacant piece of land, and there were 25 trees that it was designated had to be preserved, and during the course of construction, 5 tre~s were killed, what happens? Mr. Oprzadek answered that with the present ordinance, there is not much that can be done as far as protecting the trees during construction. 8.j. ·'City Manager Mariott stated Ordinance No. 16-77, amending Section 2-33 (B) of the Code of Ordinances relative to applications for permits to be reviewed by the Community Appearance Board has been prepared for Council consideration on First Reading. Ordinance No. 16-77 amends the CAB Ordinance in order to be consistent with the new amendments to the landscape ordinance which provides that all construction permits involving landscaping will be reviewed by the CAB. This was discussed by Council at its March 7th Workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 16-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 2-33 (B) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH RELATIVE TO APPLICATIONS .FOR PERMITS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD AND ADDING THE REQUIREMENT THAT EVERY APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR NEW CON- STRUCTION OF PARKING AREAS OR OTHER VEHICULAR USE AREA WHICH INVOKES THE LANDSCAPING' REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 15C OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES .OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH SHALL .BE PROCESSED THROUGH THE COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD FOR APPROVAL; · PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE;' PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Gomery moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 16-77, on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted'as follows:.Mr. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph.- Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes~ The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.a. The City Manager reported that the Planning and Zoning Board has recommended against rezoning the property owned by Mr. Grover Collins located in the vicinity of the southwest corner of Congress Avenue and West Atlantic Avenue from R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District to SC (Specialized Commercial) District and RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling)District to SC (Specialized Commercial) District. This was discussed at the March 7th Workshop meeting and at a prior Workshop meeting. The consensus of Council at the March 7th Workshop meeting appeared to favor the development plan proposed by Mr. Collins if a technique can be developed that Will assure development of the proper~y in accordance with that plan. The City Attorney's memo to Council dated March 1, 1977 dealing with this subject was discussed at th~ Workshop meeting as well as other possible means of granting Mr. Collins' request that his development plan be approved. It was decided at the Workshop meeting to put the matter on the Agenda for March 14, 1977 Council meeting for the purpose of considering a formal vote. - 13 - 3/14/77. Mr. Gomery questioned what the. best possible route was legally. City Attorney Saberson replied that assuming Council wants to restrict the uses that the proper'ty is put to, Council should consider a planned com~ercial-type district or special public interest type district. Mr. Sanson asked Mr. Collins what is happening on the piece of land now, with all the construction and rock. Mr. Collins replied that they are filling; 175,000 yards of fill. Mr. Sanson said he does not think the question deals with whether or not~ Council wants to rezone the property SC; the question is whether or not to investigate the possibility of setting up a special zoning category specifically for this piece of land that would limit the uses of it to what Mr. Collins is proposing. Mr. Randolph stated that the City has a zoning (SC) which fits the bill on the area sho~n on the map. The applicant has shown that he will do whatever he could do, and to tell Council that he would not put on the property, anything that should not go there. He has even offered deed restrictions which the City Attorney said is no~ possible. Mr. Gomery felt this was a borderline case. He thought Council was in favor of trying to use the best legal method to permit wha~ was shown would be built, but to try to protect the City in the future against any change. Mr. Randolph stated if there is that much objection to the theatre portion in the. permitted use of this ordinance, it should be withdrawn if that is the reservation. Mr. Randolph stated he does not want to see a service station or adult theatre in the area, but he does want to see a bowling alley there. Mr. Weekes suggested accepting an SC zoning of this, with a commitment .and understanding from the owner that he would agree to a rezoning to some kind of a planned commercial district to encompass what he proposes to build, as soon as such a district could be put together. City Attorney Saberson stated he cannot provide an answer at this moment. Mr. Gomery said he does not question Mr. Collins in his intent'and good faith; he is fearful of when a property changes hands, and the City has suffered as it has in several cases. There were changes in the past when the recession hit and property changed hands two, three, or four times; the worst areas that had been developed. If Council goes to a zoning district, and the property is sold, it comes under the ordinance of the zoning district. Mr. Collins suggested conferring with the City Attorney an~w.hoever will draw up the plans, and tell him what they do or ,.d~F~6t want, because if the bowling alley is lost, there is no ~inancing for bowling alleys. Mayor Scheifley stated that in City Attorney Saberson's. research, there should be some provision that it be binding for who owns the property. This would lock in just this property, but it would be possible to use the same type of technique in o~her commercial districts . Mr. Weekes moved that the CitY.Attorney be directed to investigate setting up a planned commercial district for that area, to encompass the uses which Mr. Collins proposes to put there, and to report back as soon as he can, seconded by Mr. Gomery. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr.. Gomery - Yes; Mr. Randolph Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. - 14 - 3/14/77. 159 10. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize p.~eDt, of the City's bills. .~ ' ' Mr.._W~ekes moved that Council authorize payment of the Ci%y~s~bi~ts-, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously.- -- General Fund ............... $635,911.43 Water and Sewer Fund ........... 331,952.95 Special Assessment Fund ......... 8,861.45 ~ ~ ~ ~Cigarette Tax Fund ............ 19,840.00 ~ lity Uti. Tax Fund ............. 54,075.85 .... · ~_. r. Special Projects Fund .......... 574.00 ....... 7~? Improvement Trust Fund .......... 44,922.42 -~-cc~ =~.~ ~Federal Revenue Sharing Fund ....... 51,750.00 _~' ~--rs Lowson Blvd. & W&S Project Fund o. .... 60.60 ..... Mr. Gomery moved for the adjournment of the meeting, se~°nded'by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. The meeting ~as adjourned at 10:00 P.M. City Clerk APPROVED: - 15 - 3/14/77.