Loading...
08-22-77 371 AUGUST 22, 1977 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was held in the Council Chambers at 7:03 P. M., Monday, August 22, 1977 with Mayor James H. Scheifley presiding, and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, City Attorney Roger Saberson and Council members Robert D. Chapin, Aaron I. Sanson, IV, and Leon M. Weekes, present. Councilman David E. Randolph was absent. 1. The Lord's Prayer was repeated in unison. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was given. 3. ~? ~ Mr. Weekes moved for the approval of the minutes .of the regular meeting of August 8, 1977, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Sanson stated that under item 6.~. of the minutes, page 5, second paragraph, it states that "Mr. Sanson recommended that the City send· a letter.......", it should say Mr. Sanson moved that the City send a letter ...... "; under Item 8.c., page~8, first paragraph where it is stated that the development would bring in approximately 7,000 people - Mr. Sanson .stated he meaht to say.5,000 people, which would be more accurate. Mayor Scheifley stated he thinks it would be self-destructive and would change the essence as to what was discussed; under Item 8.d. in the caption of the ordinance it says .the ordinance is amending Section 29-12 SC (Specialized Commercial) District - Mr. Sanson stated his understanding was that carpet cleaning facilities was being added as a permitted use in the LI and MI Districts. The City Attorney stated he would check...this and get back. to .Mr. Sanson. 4.a.1.. Mr. Chapin stated he was pleased that Caption Kilgore sent. a memo around in the Police Department for Energy Conservation and pleased to learn that the .City does have an Energy Conservation Program adopted on November 26, 1973. He stated he wo~ld like to see Delray pioneer in Energy Conservation in the public sphere and he would also like at some future time, for the City to consider the Basic Energy Conservation Code which has been adopted by the National League of· M~nicipalities. 4.a.2.. Mr. Chapin stated .he was impressed in his readings during his absence in the last two weeks, of several communities who engaged in Long Range Capital Improvements Planning Projects - some 'as part of their City Charters and some as part of their Budgetary pr.ocess. This has not been done in Delray on a specified program basis;. Mr. Chapin stated he would like at a future workshop, to discuss the feasibility of a Long Range Capit. al Improvement Program to benefit the efficiency in planning, to benefit the efficiency of the. community and hopefully to benefit the taxpayers in the long run. .~.a. 3 Mr. Chapin stated it was interesting, · while on vacation that people who knew he was from Delray, but did not know he was a councilman, asked two questions about what is happening in South Florida; (1) how are you handling the zoning and the tremendous growth problem? He was fortunate and pleased to say the City had adopted a Land Use Plan and hopefully, in November, 1977 the City will adopt the first update of that Land Use Plan; (2) does South Florida have sufficient water? Mr. Chapin stated he felt relatively competent in saying the City has adequate capacity at the .present time, but is concerned about the capacity in the future; at present, the City is more concerned about the treatment of the water. 4.b.1. Mr. Sanson stated in response to Mr. Chapin's comments on Capital Improvement Program, he thinks that is an excellent sug- gestion and feels that in past years the City has had discussions about, long range capital improvement programs but they have been superficial and unrealistic in nature. This would be a good thing for the.Administration and Council to develop a good, solid, far- reaching plan and have the budgets prepared to realistically implement 372 that plan. Mr. Sanson stated that this is one thing he feels this year's proposed budget is lacking; he feels there is an excessive number of large capital outlays for programs that could be put to- gether on a staggered basis and perhaps the City will not have to suffer the tax increase that he sees coming this year. 4.b.2. Mr. Sanson stated that in an August 12th article in. the Palm Beach Post which dealt with an all day workshop session held by the Palm Beach County Commission where they were allocating some $16 million dollars for road and bridge projects, he was quite curious to see that one of the priority projects is going to be $200,000 allocated to widen Seacrest Boulevard to three lanes from 8th Street to Bethesda Memorial Hospital. There was quite a dis- cussion on this last year when they wanted to widen Seacrest in Boynton and rumors had it it was going to happen in Delray and there were a lot of citizens worried about it. Mr. Sanson stated as far as he Could ascertain, at that point, there were not many citizens of Delray living along Seacrest Boulevard that' were very excited about the idea of Seacrest Boulevard being widened and Council saw little need for it. Mr. Sanson stated he feels it might be wise to get a confirmed report on thiS and decide whether or not Council would like to express themselves about this project one way or the other. 4.b.3. Mr. Sanson asked if the City Attorney and the City Manager could get a status report on the parking restrictions on A1A so this issue could be resolved, and the signs could be posted and in effect by the time the tourist season arrives. 4.b.4. Mr. Sanson noted that some time ago, Council tabled the adoption of the Board of Adjustment new Rules and Procedure becaus~ of a change to be made and to his knowledge, the change has not been made and the rules have not been finally adopted. The City Manager stated he would check this out and get back to Council. The City Attorney stated that regarding parking on A1A, he received a communication from the Department of Transportation office in Ft. Lauderdale a couple of weeks ago indicating they would not implemen~ the request. The City Attorney added he is going to try to get back with the Director and see if this could be.worked out. 4.c. Mr. Weekes stated 'he is very happy to see the vacationers back. 4.d.1. Mayor Scheifley stated he would like to thank Mr. Weekes for fulfilling his responsibilities for the past month and he would like to thank Mrs. Arnau for handling .the meeting as the Acting City Manager. 4.d.2. Mayor Scheifley proclaimed August 26, 1977 as "WOMAN'S SUFFRAGE DAY". Mayor Scheifley proclaimed August 28, 1977 as ANN VERITY DAY. He stated she is 80 years young, active in..tennis, and he will read the proclamation in detail and present it to her at a function on August 28th, at the Lion's Club. 5. John Graham, owner of Western Auto Store on First Avenue, and spokesman for some of the small business people, spoke regarding the ordinance passed abandoning the small business from displaying merchandise outside of their business. He stated they are very unhappy with that decision and disappointed that after the last workshop he thoughf~C~uncil was going to be for them instead of against them. He stated he was one of the first notified,about 4 weeks ago, to get their merchandise in and to this date there are some business owners who still have not been notified and he would like to know why. The City Manager stated he would imagine there are a number of such violations in town and that everyone can't be notified - 2 - 8/22/77 simultaneously, but the department is busy enforcing that ordinance and have cited a number of violators. Mr. Graham stated they feel they are being discriminated against because it seems that this is for lawn mowers, bicycles, etc., and not for automobile dealers or the produce businesses. He stated that in checking his lawn mower sales he is off by 58% compared to last year and this is due because of having to bring in his display merchandise during the months of May and June which are the busiest. Mr. Weekes noted that this is the problem he foresaw when Council, by.a majority vote, decided to leave this ordinance as it was. He stated he has asked for the City Manager to schedule this for workshop at an early date, and he trusts it will be Monday night. He asked the City Manager to see that this is placed on the agenda for next Monday night's workshop meeting as it is important enough to the merchants of this City that if you have to carry the workshop over into a second evening or recess it to continue at a later time, it should be brought up as soon as possible. Mr. Graham stated he would like to have more time than next week to give the rest of'the people who are on vacation to be back in town. The City Manager stated his main reservations or hesitancy on committing for next Monday night is due to the'fact that presently scheduled for next Monday night is the budget, but he would prefer to postpone that for another week or so in view of recent developments, and if this can be done, then Mr. Graham's matter can be scheduled. The City Manager stated he thinks the budget' can be rescheduled, which should really be done to give the Administration a little more time on some of the studies that it is involved in. Mr. Graham stated that last Friday, his picture was in the paper, which was taken before he realized it, and Channel 12 was trying to get into this. He told them to stay away as he would like to settle this with the City Council; it was none of his doing to have them come in. 6.a.1. The City Manager stated that Mr. Collins has requested ~hat agenda item 9.e. not be acted on tonight; his attorney is to work with the City's legal department in attempting to come up with a solu- tion in that matter. It is recommended that Council skip this item. 6.a.2. The City Manager reported that next Monday night is not a night for a regularly scheduled workshop meeting, it being a 5th Monday. If Council is willing to do so, he suggests that there be a regular workshop meeting next Monday night. The Mayor stated that the Council should make an effort to do so because one workshop was skipped. Mr. Sanson stated he thinks the Financial Advisory Board is planning to make a presentation that night. The City Manager stated he is going to see about rescheduling that part of the meeting because of a number of other things that should be done. Mr. Chapin stated he was planning to spend that evening on what he thought was going to be a budget meeting to tie up about half a dozen loose ends, but if that can't be done and there are other items of business that can be cleared up then he would be happy to attend. Mr. Chapin stated he believes members of Council would like to address budget matters either the 29th of August or Tuesday, the 6th of September and.it should not be postponed any further than that because of the deadline of October 1st. The City Manager concurred with this. Mr. Sanson stated he feels that it is important to con- sider suggestions from the Financial Advisory Board Report and from members of Council; there would be some additional questions raised - 3 - 8/22/77 about the budget that will entail some study, some reports being given back to Council by the Administration as to why certain alloca- tions were made or some expenditures, etc., and he does not want to get in a position where all of a sudden there is not enough time to get the answers back and having consideration given to them before they can finally adopt the budget. It was agreed that Council will meet next Monday night, August 29, 1977 for a regular workshop meeting. 6.a.3. The City Manager stated he has received a request from Mr. Cannon that Council consider ratification of the Sewer Board Budget that was adopted by the Sewer Board at its last meeting. Mayor Scheifley stated that on Thursday, three. Council members were present, along with Mr. Randolph and it was passed unani- mously by both the City Council of Boynton Beach and Delray Beach City Council and since it was approved then, there is no reason why it shouldn't be disposed of tonight. Mr. Weekes moved that Council ratify the budget for the South Central Regional Waste Water Treatment Disposal Board, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.b. The Assistant City Attorney reported on the Gipper-Be~ch Bathhouse. He stated that on the basis of the estimates that were submitted for stablization of that portion of the north wall repre- senting the addition to the main building and repairing of cracks oD that portion of the wall and those on the north quarter of the west wall and painting the wall area would cost approximately $3,000. Aetna Casualty Company, which is the insuror of George Lumston, Inc.,~the City's contractor, has taken the position that their insuror was not negligent and the Gipper building was not damaged by the demolition work, but that the condition of the building is the same now as it was pr%or to the beginning of the demolition work .... Steve Schieck, the adjustor for American Druggist, the City's Insurance Carrier, takes the position that the primary responsibility rests upon the contractor Lumston and possibly the company from whom Lumston rented the crane. Mr. Schieck, at this time, would limit the American Druggist contribution to $500'and he has contacted Mr. Sprott, the attorney for the Gipper and informed them of his decision; a copy of the estimates were also mailed to Mr. Sprott. The Assistant City Attorney advised in talking with Mr. Sprott this afternoon, he stated he would inquire of the owners of the Gipper as to whether they would consider making the repairs now and pursuing all parties collectively for reimbursement; no further word has been received in this regard. The City Attorney has some recommendations that he would like for the Council to consider and thinks is most appropriate that: (1) the City Attorney be authorized to consummate a settlement of the controversy for an amount not to exceed $3,000.' With respect to this possible recommendation, such authorization would probably undermine the present insurance adjustment work that is going on and the City might not receive any insurance money if this recom- mendation is pursued; (2) the City authorize that a written offer settlement for a set amount be made to the owner of the Gipper property to settle the contro- versy for an amount not to exceed $3,000 conditioned upon accep- tance within one week from the time the offer is mailed or delivered; (3) if such an offer or compromise is made, but not accepted, the City Attorney should give the owners of the Gipper Property 30 days tQ make whatever repairs or stabilization they deem necessary on the north~wall of their building, after which period the City shall proceed with the construction of the bathhouse. Mr. Chapin stated his thought would be that the Council pursue alternative number three. When this came to COuncil approxi- mately three weeks ago in a workshop meeting, they all agreed that this - 4 - 8/22/77 375 was an '~ffs~ance problem; the City wanted to be a good neighbor, and proceed with the construction of the bathhouse to beautify the problem which has been nagging that corner for approximately ten or eleven months. With both insurance companies taking a no-responsibility attitude, the only course of action, particularly When no reply has been received from the owners of the Gipper through their counsel, would be to immediately notify them that the City will commence con- struction and hopefully the matter will be resolved by the insurance companies for the contractor and the City with the Gipper. Mr. Weekes stated he thinks the third alternative is the most prudent; there is a question of whether or not there is liability on the part of the contractor, but he cannot see any question of liability on the part of the City - he does not think the City was negligent and to offer up to $3000, even though it may be expedient in moving that project forward, does not seem right. Therefore, he con- curs with Mr. Chapin's comments. Mr. Sanson stated he has no objections to this either, and believes that if the City gave any money at all, they would lose all control over any aspects of collection from the insurance company. Mr. Chapin's comments about trying to be a good neighbor and letting them have 30 days to get the matter straightened out on their end is proper on the part of the City and this should not be extended or 'ask for anymore delays. Mayor Scheifley stated he does not see how the City is involved in this and as Mr. Weekes stated, it is a matter between the contractor and Gipper. Mr. Sanson stated that he does not see why the City Attorney and the Assistant City Attorney are involved in this because this seems to be between the insurance company and the Gipper owners. Mayor Scheifley stated he thoroughly agrees with Mr' Sanson, but this is one of those things where the City is involun- tarily involved, it couldn't be avoided and the City has to make clear its position. Mr. Weekes moved that the City pursue the third alterna- tive es outlined by the City Attorney's office in proceeding with the Deach Dathhouse and the problem with the Gipper property, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call the Assistant City Attorney stated that in the event the City proceeds to pour the slab for the new bathhouse and the pressure grouting work has not been done on the north wall of the Gipper, they would like authority to put sleeves in the slab to facilitate that pressure grouting work. Mr. Weekes suggested that Council wait and cross that bridge when they get to it. 6.c. The City Attorney reported tha~ Council should consider whether or not the City should participate in a lawsuit that is being prepared on a national level by the National Institute of Municipal Law to challenge the Federal Legislation which was adopted in 1976, mandating that all local governments participate in unemployment com- pensation programs. The Statute is another example of Federal encrouch- ment into an area that has traditionally been thought to be exempt- from Federal control; it is a test case th&t is brought to test the limits of the National League of Cities vs Usery, which the National League of Cities brought several years ago challenging the extension of Fair Labor Standards Act Amendments to local governments; the National League was successful in invalidating those amendments. The estimates they have received from both the National Institute and the Municipal Finance Officers' Association, as to the additional cost to a city the size of Delray Beach, would be approximately $105,000 a year. This estimate is based upon an assumption that the cities to which it applies are not now participating in any unemployment com- pensation fund. Delray, at this time, is required by State law to participate i~ an unemployment compensation program for which the City pays $20,066 a year. There is an $85,000 difference between the - 5 - 8/22/77 37,6 estimate of Federal cost and what is actually paid at this time. The City Attorney stated that he thinks NIMLO's estimate is a little high but the City will definitely be paying coverage for employees which are not now covered such as temporary employees, part-time employees, contract work employees, etc; also, the Federal government is discontinuing its 50% participation in extended unemploy- ment compensation benefits this year, that it has up to this time paid to local government employees. This is another cost that the cities may have to bear in the event that these amendments are upheld~ The primary benefits to the City in participating is that (1) a tem- porary injunction will be applied for and in the event the request for the temporary injunction is successful the City will not have to make any payments into the fund until such time the validity of the law is determined, which probably will not be for at least three years; (2) it represents an opportunity for the City to participate in challenging legislation that really goes to the heart of the whole system, Federal as opposed to local control and for this reason the City should consider it. Therefore, he recommends the City participate as a plantiff in this ligitigation. The cost to the City is $2,500; the cost for each city or county that participates is based on the population of the participant and if the population is less than 50,000 the cost is $2,500. In addition to this the City will be executing an agreement which would require the City, if requested by NIMLO, to ~send the Chief Financial Officer to Washington to testify in a case as to the financial impact in Delray Beach and it would also require some Administrative time to assemble the factual information needed to include in the complaint. At the present time there are approxi~ mately 1,000 local governments participating in the case as named plantiffs and five or six states that are now named plantiffs in the. litigation. Mayor Scheifley asked how many Florida cities are involved in this; the City Attorney stated he did not know - he could not obtain a quick estimate. The Mayor stated that if there are more than 40 or 50 cities involved out of 500 or 600 cities in Florida, it seems that this is something that the Florida League of Cities ~hould participate in because they represent all the cities. In addition to that, the County Municipal League should contribute as a sta~e organi- zation to represent all the cities. The City Attorney advised that the way the litigation has been structured is that each individual government agency must participate as a named party. They feel.that the impact of the case would be greater if pa~ticipatian is in that fashion rather than like the National League of Cities case where-the National League was actually the plantiff. Upon question by Mayor Scheifley, .the City Attorney stated he does not know how many other cities in Palm Beach County are involved, but he knows definitely that'West Palm Beack is now involved in support of this case, Boca Raton and Lake Worth are not, and he did not know · about Boynton Beach. Mr. Weekes stated that he would assume that this would apply to each and every city throughout the United States since it is a Federal action; the City Attorney commented that the injunction that is being requested would not, it would only apply to the named plantiffs Mr. Weekes asked if the law that they are trying to overturn applies to all cities throughout the United States - the City Attorney answered yes; therefore, he assumes that all cities throughout the United States are being asked to participate in this legal action. The City Attorney stated he would say that all cities who are members of either the National League of Cities or the National Institute of Municipal Law are being requested to participate. Mr. Weekes stated that if you take all the cities throughout the United States and even at one half of one percent participated to the degree that is outlined, the defense fund would amount to millions of dollars. The City Attorney stated the defense fund originally requested $300,000 total and they are now cal- culating the amount of refund the local governments would be given because of the fact there is more participation than they anticipated. - 6 - 8/22/77 377 Mr. Weekes stated that this does not seem to be equitable; if they were asking for $500 he would okay it, but $2,500 for a city the size of Delray Beach in a national action is totally out of line. Mayor Scheifley stated that he still thinks the Florida League of Cities should be the one carrying the ball for this, even to the extent of financing it if it is something for the mutual benefit of all the cities. Mr. Sanson commented that if the Florida League or the Palm Beach Municipal League were to take the ball for the cities, whatever the cost would be, they would have to dock the cities and increase dues, or a special assessment, so the cities would still end up paying. He stated he does not know whether the cost is equitable or not but he would think that if they get more money than they need they would then refund money to the cities on the same percentage basis. It is important, at times like this, for Council to act positively towards the request. This 'case requires unity of action, solidarity and the results and benefits that would come back, personally, will many times over pay back the legal fees that would now be expended. This subject topic has been discussed at the National League meetings, it is clear that it is inequitable, it is ~lear that the City is needlessly spending monies that could be put somewhere else; therefore, he has no objection to joining the suit. Mr. Chapin stated he has mixed £eelings in the matter. If the City is asked to participate it is about 10¢ for every resident in this community per person and the City would stand to benefit from the three year period a possibility of financial savings of $85,000 a year as opposed to those who don't join. The equities upon population seems relatively fair, but on the other hand it becomes kind of burden- some to always be joiners. He sees this as a one time proposition and a possibility of some proportionate reimbursement; therefore, he would support the City Attorney's recommendation. Mr. Weekes stated that apparently they have already collected over $1 million for the defense fund and are still soliciting participation by the cities, so one would have to believe that in the end they will have substantially over $1 million for what they judged to be a $300,000 case. He'stated he agrees with the philosophy behind j.oining, but the amount they are asking the City to participate in dollars is totally inequitable. Mr. Sanson asked if there Would be any use in contacting somebody personally involved in 'this. The City Attorney stated he has talked personally with some of the Attorneys involved and the trustees of NIMLO have already met and decided that there is going to be a refund, but they have not decided how much it is going to be or'when it is going to be; this was something he had been receiving a lot of correspondence on and he was-aware this litigation was going on. He looked into it and felt he should bring it to Council and let Council make a choice as to whether they wanted to participate or not. Mr. Sanson stated that hopefully the.City will receive a refund, but even if they do spend the entire $2,500 and this case is won, the taxpayers of Delray will receive back many times over their 10¢ contribution. Mr. Sanson moved that Council authorize the City Attorney to submit the agreement and attach a check for $2,500 with the money coming from the Contingency Account, seconded by,Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - No; Mayor Scheifley - No. The motion died with a 2 to 2 vote. Before roll call Mayor Scheifley asked the City Attorney how urgent this is as far as time is concerned. The City Attorney . answered that the deadline is September 1st and it will take Mr. Weber, the Finance Director, the time between this meeting and that date to get the information assembled and in. - 7 - 8/22/77 378 6.d. The City Manager reported that there are certain lands ~n the City that the City contemplates rezoning. The City is not legally obligated to provide notices of such contemplated rezoning to the property owners; however, the Board of Realtors decided if the City did not send individual notices to people whose property is to be.rezoned, they would and asked that the City reimburse them for postage that would be incurred in this undertaking. This request was made after Council determined to amend the zoning code to conform with State Statutes relative to notification of property owners. Mr. Sanson stated that he was under the impression that the City, in passing the new Ordinance No. 56-77 changing the notifi- cation requirements for public hearings, Would still notify the proPerty owners. If this is not the case, he stated he is going to have a hard time supporting this ordinance. The City ~ttorney stated that the original ordinance drafted did not require this and after the last meeting he heard some of the comments that were made. After checking the ordinance he noticed it did not require that the individual property owner be noti- fied; he asked the City Clerk to add a provision and, at that time, he was not aware that the Board of Realtors were already assembling a list of.property owners who would be subject to the rezoning of the Land Use Plan. He stated that in ~his instance it would be better to 'leave out the provision put in the ordinance and let the Board of Realtors go ahead and notify the property owners, if Council is agreeable. John Ghent, President of the Board of Realtors, 246 Lake Eden Way, Delray Beach, stated the letter that will be sent to the property owners who will be affected by the Land Use Plan will be sent out on Board of Realtors', Inc. stationery. There will be a date, the name of the owner and a brief description of the property - the contents of the letter was read by Mr. Ghent. Mayor Scheifley stated he thinks the idea of the.notifi- cation is very good and it is wonderful for the Board of Realtors to cooperate as long as there are no editorial comments one way or the other. Mr. Chapin stated he thinks the Board of Realtors deserves credit f'or its public involvement, but he thinks it is better that the City send out the letter; he would feel on much safer ground with much less criticism involved of the City and of the Board of Realtors, if this non-objective letter we~t out on City stationery under the signature of the City Clerk. Mr. Weekes agreed with what Mr. Chapin, but with a dif- ferent end result. He believes the better part of discretion would~ be simply for the Board of Realtors to make the mailing on its own and pay for the postage, which for 720 parcels of mail at 13¢ a piece would be around $100. He stated that under the circumstances, let it be a board action and not get the City involved in it at all. Mr. Sanson stated he has always been under the impres- sion that the City had the responsibility, through State Law or City ordinances, to notify the property owner and he thinks they should be notified; he feels any property owner deserves the right to know when changes are going to be made with his property. It is the City's responsibility because the City is initiating the rezonings. He commended the Board of Realtors for their thoughts to this and for bringing out a situation which needs to be rectified in the City ordinances. Mayor Scheifley and Mr. Weekes concurred with Mr. Chapin and Mr. Sanson. Mayor Scheifley asked if the Administration could handle it if Council were to pass a motion asking the Administration to notify every property Owner whose property would be rezoned. The City Manager stated that, yes, the Administration could handle it and asked Mr. 'Ghent if the mailing list they compiled would be avail- able to the City in order to get the notices out on time; Mr. Ghent answered, yes. - 8 - 8/22/77 379 Mr. Weekes moved that the City undertake the job of notifying each individual property owner whose property will be re- zoned as proposed to be rezoned by the implementation and changes in the zoning ordinances to implement the new Land Use Plan, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 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 Kissimmee, October 27-29, 1977. Mr. Chapin moved that in conformance with tradition that the Mayor of Delray be designated ~the reporting representative at this convention, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously with Mayor Scheifley abstaining. 7.a. The City Manager reported that a communication has been received from Mr. John K. Brennan requesting an extension of six months, to January 10, 1978, for preliminary plat approval of Lakes of Delray. It is recommended that this reques't be referred to the Planning & Zoning Board for study and recommendation. Mr. Weekes moved that this matter be referred to the Planning & Zoning Board for recommendation, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. Mr. Sanson asked that a discussion of the tree preserva- tion ordinance and the method of which the City enforces it be scheduled for a future workshop. Mayor Scheifley stated that in addition to Mr. Sanson's request, whoever prepared the tree preservation ordinance should con- sider an amendment as to whether or not they include a $5.00 charge to take down a dead tree. 7.b. Mayor Scheifley acknowledged the minutes of the Beauti- f-~tion Committee for the meeting held August 3, 1977. There was an item underlined for Council's attention, but not for Council action. 7.c. The City Manager reported'a communication has been received from the Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach Local No. 1842 re- questing permission to solicit funds on September 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, 1977, approval of which is recommended by the Solicitations Committee. Mr. Sanson asked for what reason are ~hey soliciting. The City Manager stated that it'is for Muscular Dystrophy. Mr. Chapin moved for granting the request for solici- tation of funds for Muscular Dystrophy by the Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach Local No. 1842, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. 7.d. The City Manager reported that it is' recommended that B-~more Realty be reimbursed in the amount of $5,637.50 as the City's share of the cost of installing oversized water and sewer lines to serve Country Manors and others. This was done at the request of the City. Delray Square and Rainberry Woods are connected to these lines. Mayor Scheifley asked if Rainberry Woods would be paying the City back and the City Manager stated that they have already paid the City $4,368 and there is still more to come. Mr. Weekes moved that Biltmore Realty be reimbursed $5,637.50 for putting in the oversized water and sewer lines, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 7.e. The City Manager reported that an application has been received from Aldo and John T. Gray of Delray Beach for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, d/b/a Gray's Taxi, for operation of three taxicabs within the City. In compliance with Section 26-7, Chapter 26 of'the Code of Ordinances, Council should fix a date for ' a public hearing to be held on this application for a Certificate of - 9 - 8/22/77 Public Convenience and Necessity, notice of which shall be forwarded to all operators of taxicabs. At such public hearing, and as a result thereof, Council shall determine if further cab service within the City is needed. It is recommended that Council authorize a public hearing on the application be held at the next regular Council meeting on September 12th. Mr. Sanson moved that the public hearing be scheduled for September 12th, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanir mously. Before roll call Mr.' Chapin raised the question of the necessity of Council to go through the process of, in essence, regu- lating taxicabs in Delray Beach. He stated'he is not sure what public interest it serves and it seems that this is a carry over from years ago. He stated that perhaps this could be scheduled for a workshop meeting because he is not sure it has any relevance today. Mayor Scheifley stated he agrees with Mr. Chapin; however, Council would have to retain some restrictions as far as inspection of the cabs. He stated he usually votes in favor of the cab licenses on the theory it may improve the service if there is more competition. He asked the City Manager if this could be scheduled for a workshop; the City Manager answered, yes. 8.a. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 40-77, amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan by changing from commercial land use classification to high density multi-family (15 units.per acre) Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block C, John B. Reid's Village, is before Council for passage consideration. A public hearing is s~heduled to. be held at this time. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 40-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP FOR THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY CHANGING FROM COMMERCIAL LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY (15 UNITS PER ACRE) LAND USE CLASSIFICATION LOTS 1, 2, AND 3, OF BLOCK C, JOHN B. REID'S VILLAGE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 21, PAGE 95, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. (.Copy of Resolution No. 40-77 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws df the State of .Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. There was a question from the floor about the location of this property. Mr. Chapin stated that this property is on Venetian Drive, north of Mira Mar across from the Mira Mar Apartments. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Sanson asked the City Attorney in this situation and any others that come up where the Land Use Plan is amended, what is the leaal reauirements for effectuatin~ that chan~e. The Citv Attorney stated that it is the same procedure as tonight - a public hearin~ and the oassina of the resolution. Under the new comprehensive planning act an ordinance will be required and, if there is a comprehensive amendmen~ which is more than five percent, then it has to go back through the review process. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 40-77, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: - 10 - 8/22/77 381 Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 8.b. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 44-77, requesting that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a budget for the Palm Beach Sheriff's Department which does not spread the cost of the Sheriff's road patrOl to properties lying within Palm Beach County Municipalities maintaining their own Police Departments, is before Council for passage consideration. At the meeting on August 8th, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare the resolution. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 44-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ADOPT A BUDGET FOR THE PALM BEACH SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT WHICH DOES NOT SPREAD THE COST OF THE SHERIFF'S ROAD PATROL TO PROPERTIES LYING WITHIN PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES MAINTAINING THEIR OWN POLICE DEPARTMENTS. (Copy of Resolution No. 44-77 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Weekes moved for the passage of Resolution No. 44-77, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. B~fore roll call Mr. Sanson stated that he has had several citizens contact him about this and the question has been posed to him' as to what can a citizen do to protest this. He suggested the following (1) contact County Commissioner Medlen and protest his vote in favor of this; (2) there is talk of a petition drive and if it comes to being, participate in it; and (3) at the public hearings that the County is going to have on the budget which will be published, attend and protest. .. The City Attorney made a correction in the resolution that in'the last WHEREAS clause it states the county budget date is August 1, 1977, it should be October 1, 1977. Mr. Sanson stated'it would be to some degree that Council authorize the City's legal department to participate with the City of West Palm in the class action suit drawn against the County if the budget is adopted taxing the cities. The City Attorney stated that it is not necessary that authorization be given at tonight's meeting. There has been discussion between the various city attorneys who may be involved in the case as to the exact format that the case is going to take which has not been decided at this point. He stated he cannot indicate the specific type of suit, etc., that he would recommend; there is sufficient time and he can come back to Council later on this. 8.c. The City Manager reported that it~is recommended that Resolution No. 45-77, accepting extensions of sanitary sewers installed in Area 21, comprising Southridge and Southern Pines Subdivisions and Area 34 in Tropic Palms Subdivision be approved ~s operational. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 45-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING EXTENSIONS OF SANITARY SEWERS INSTALLED .- IN AREA 21 COMPRISING THE FOLLOWING SUB- DIVISIONS AND LATERALS: SOUTHRIDGE, PLAT 1 OF 2, DELRAY BEACH, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 24, PAGE 24, OF THE PUBLIC RE- - 11 - 8/22/77 382 CORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; SOUTHRIDGE, PLAT NO. 3, DELRAY BEACH, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 24, PAGE 24, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; SOUTHERN pINES, DELRAY BEACH, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 4, PAGE 60, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; LATERAL 21-B-2 (LOCATION - FROM SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET RUNNING IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION ON SWINTON AVENUE AND TERMINATING AT STERLING AVENUE AND SWINTON AVENUE); LATERAL 21-B-3 (LOCATION - REIGLE AVENUE); LATERAL 21-B-4 (LOCATION - STERLING AVENUE); ALSO ACCEPTING EXTENSIONS OF SANITARY SEWERS INSTALLED IN AREA 34 IN THE SUBDIVISION OF TROPIC PALMS, PLAT NO. 1, DELRAY BEACH, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 25, PAGE 102, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; INCLUDING LATERAL 34-C-2 (LOCATION - MALLARD DRIVE, BETWEEN DOTTEREL ROAD AND JAEGER DRIVE), AND LATERAL 34-C-3 (LOCATION - BETWEEN DOTTEREL ROAD AND CURLEW ROAD) AS OPERATIONAL AND SETTING THE INITIAL SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND OTHER RELATED CHARGES TO BE IMPOSED FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY SAID SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. (Copy of ResolutiOn No. 45-77 is on file in the official ResOlution Book.) Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Resolution No. 45-77, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. $.d. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 46-77, to %he Public Service Commission asking them to reconsider the recent rate schedule which they adopted for Florida Power & Light, is before Council for passage consideration. At the August 8th meeting, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare the resolution. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 46-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, TO THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PRO- TESTING THE INVERTED RATE STRUCTURE ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMISSION IN REGARD TO THE RATES OF FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY. (Copy of Resolution No. 46-77 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Weekes moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 46-77, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. ~ Before the second to the motion the City Attorney explained that the Resolution is set up to request the Public Service Commission to study further the inverted rate structure that they established and some of its implications; in the meantime, the usual method that they have used in the past which is the declining block method of rate structuring, be used which would spread the increase equally among'different users. This would mean that the impact would be more across the board in a fairly equal basis. - 12 - 8/22/77 383 8.e. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 37-77, relative %o rezoning and placing land presenlty zoned GC (General Commercial) District in LC (Limited Commercial) District, located in Section 16-46-43 on the north and south side of East Atlantic Avenue between the Intracoastal Waterway and the ocean is'before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July llth meeting at which time a public hearing was held. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 37-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENLTY ZONED GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT IN LC (LIMITED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT, SAID LAND BEING IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE OF EAST ATLANTIC AVENUE, BETWEEN THE INTRA- COASTAL WATERWAY AND THE OCEAN, AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1976". (Copy of Ordinance No. 37-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Weekes moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 37-77 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes~ Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. Before roll call upon question by Mr. Sanson, Mr. Weekes stated that this rezoning just changes the GC to LC. 8.f. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 55-77, relative to annexing a 9,360 square foot parcel of land located in Section 9-46-43, 1003 N. E. 9th Avenue, subject to RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the July 25th 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. 55-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LOT 15, FIRST ADDITION TO KENMONT, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 22, PAGE 24, AND THE SOUTH SEVEN AND ONE HALF (7½) FEET OF THE ABANDONED ALLEY RUNNING EAST AND WEST BETWEEN SAID LOT 15 AND LOT 22, BLOCK 2, KENMONT, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 20, PAGE 65, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; (REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY); REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SUCH LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 55-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) - 13 - 8/22/77 384 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. 55-77 on 'Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 8,g. The City Manager rep0rted that Ordinance No. 56-77 is ~eiative to amending notification requirements of the zoning code to conform with the State Statutes. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the August 8th meeting and is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. 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 Or. dinance No. 56-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY-COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY REPEALING SECTION 29-23(B) (2) AND SUBSTITUTING IN ITS PLACE A NEW SUBSECTION (2) PRO- VIDING FOR THE NOTIFICATION, PUBLICA- TION AND PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO REZONING REQUESTS RE- VIEWABLE BY THE DEL/LAY BEACH PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Copy of Ordinance No. 56-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 56-77 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by'Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes'; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. Before roll call Mr. Sanson asked if this will be with the proposed addition by the.City Attorney under paragraph (c) which was not in the first reading; it was noted that-this is correct. 8.h. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 45-77, r-~tive to rezoning Lots 20 and 21, Delray Beach Shores, Section 21-46-43 on the west side of A1A, between White Drive and Rhodes Villa Avenue from RM (Residential Multiple Family District - Medium Density) (Couhty zoning) to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling District) (City zoning) is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. Prior to passage consideration on First Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The holding of this public hearing is made necessary by Section 166.041, Florida Statutes. Council is to consider passage of thiS ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading on September 26th. Council, at its regular meeting on June 27th, requested the City Clerk to give proper notice to the property.owners in the vicinity of Delray Beach Shores in accordance with the Home Rule Act, that will eventually lead to rezoning. - 14 - 8/22/77 385 The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 45-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY) DISTRICT (MEDIUM DENSITY) (COUNTY ZONING) IN R-1AA (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT (CITY ZONING), LOTS 20 AND 21, DELRAY BEACH . SHORES SUBDIVISION. SAID LANDS LYING ON THE WEST SIDE OF A-l-A, BETWEEN WHITE DRIVE AND RHODES VILLA AVENUE IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23,' PAGE 167, 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, Florida. Donald L. Lockhart, Palm Beach County Planning, Zoning, 'and Building Department, stated he has been directed to come before Council to enter into the record a couple of pieces of correspondence. First, to Palm Beach County Attorney, Mr. Rutter, dated December 14, 1976 from Mr. Mariott, endorsing the County acquisition of the. pro- perty for public use, specifically for parking and second, a letter dated July 20, 1977 to Mr. Wardell, Assistant County Attorney, from Mr. Shandy indicating that the proposed rezoning would not prohibit parking on the proposed lots. In this regard, the County has no objections to the rezoning provided it will not interfer with the beach parking. Mr. Sanson asked if the bid was officially approved and Mr. Lockhart answered, yes. Mr. Sanson requested that Mr. Lockhart ask Mr. Dance to send a memo to the City Manager giving the details. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Weekes moved for the passage' of Ordinance No. 4~-77 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed'with a 4 to 0 vote. At this point Mr. Chapin excused himself from the meeting to avoid any possible conflict of interest because his partner repre- sents the owners of the two lots to be discussed in the next item, 8.i. 8.i. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 46-77, rela- .t~iv~ to rezoning Lots 60 and 61, Delray Beach Shores, Section 21-46-43 on the west side of A1A, between Lewis Cove and Brooks Lane from RM (Residential Multiple Family District-Medium Density) (County zoning) to RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling District) (City zoning) is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. Prior to passage consideration on First Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The holding of this public hearing is made necessary by Section 166.041, Florida Statutes. Council is to consider passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading on September 26th. Council, at its regular meeting on June 27th, requested the City Clerk to give proper notice to property owners in the vicinity of Delray Beach Shores in accordance with the Home Rule Act that will eventually lead to rezoning. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 46-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY) DISTRICT - lS - 8/22/77 386 (MEDIUM DENSITY) (COUNTY ZONING) IN RM-6 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT (CITY ZONING), LOTS 60 AND 61, DELRAY BEACH SHORES SUBDIVISION. SAID LANDS LYING ON THE WEST SIDE OF A-l-A, BETWEEN LEWIS COVE AND BROOKS LANE IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 167, 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, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 46-77 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. Before roll call Mr. Sanson requested that in the future on Whereas clauses that the dates are actually put in that the Planning~ '& Zoning Board recommended something and the City Council consider it at workshop.- At this point Mr. Chapin returned to the meeting, 8..~.. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 57-77, amending Chapter 9 "Building Code" of the Code of Ordinances relative to-requirements for service and storage areas of installation of flammable and combustible liquids, is before Council for passage consi- deration on First Reading. This ordinance amendment is necessary to increase the total aggregate storage limit from 18,000 gallons to 30,000 gallons, which increase was requested by the Fire Department. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 57-77:. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 9 "BUILDING CODE" OF'THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY REPEALING SECTION 505, AND SUBSTITUTING I~N ITS PLACE A NEW SECTION 505 REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE AND STORAGE AREAS OF INSTALLATION OF FLAMMABLE.AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the cap%ion of the ordinance. Mayor Scheifley asked if he is correct in assuming this was brought to light by the desire to build a big storage tank at the new sewerage plant. The City Manager stated that this is true and there are some related factors also having to do with the three types of gasoline now sold by many of the gasoline stations where they need larger storage capacities underground than they have had before and than what was permitted by the existing ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 57-77 on First Reading,~seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 9.a. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on August 16th, recommended by unanimous vote that the street name of Alamondin Terrace be changed to Calamondin Terrace. Council, at its meeting on July 25th, referred the street name change request to the Planning & Zoning Board for study and recommendation. - 16 - 8/22/77 387 Mr. Sanson moved that the street name of Alamondin Terrace be changed to Calamondin Terrace, becoming official at the time the Subdivision ordinance is changed, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.b; The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on August 16th, recommended by unanimous vote that the preliminary plat request of Shadywoods Subdivision, located in Section 25-46-42 on the north side of Linton Boulevard between Military Trail and Dover Road be approved, subject to the following: 1) Complaince with the Director of Public Utilities comments as stated in his June 14th memorandum; 2) Compliance with the City Engineer's comments as'stated in his August 16th memorandum; 3) Compliance with the requirements of Lake Worth Drainage District as stated in their August 10th letter; 4) Compliance with the requirements of the South Florida Water Management District as stated in their August 16th letter; 5) That the sidewalk requirement be waived on both sides of the street. Steve Gravett, 4860 N. E. 12th Avenue, Ft. Lauderdale, stated that the majority of the lots are 90 feet. Mr. Sanson asked Mr. Carey if the preliminary plat that they were shown encompasses both phases or just one. Mr. Carey replie~ that it is for the whole thing; this locks it in where they cannot sell half the property. Mr. Gravett stated there will be two family units built per lot and their main objective is to keep as much of the landscape area and greenery as possible. Mr. Chapin moved that Council sustain the unanimous recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board relative to the prelimi- nary plat approval of Shadywoods Subdivision subject to the compliance of the five requirements as outlined in the agenda .for tonight's meeting under 9.b., seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.c. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on July 19th, recommended by a vote of 5 to 1 (Pompey dissenting) that the Spinner rezoning request of a 3.8 acre parcel of land from R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District to RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District located in Section 21-46-43 on both sides of Del-Haven Drive between the Intracoastal Waterway and A1A be denied, based on the following reasons: 1) The change would be contrary to the recently adopted Land Use Plan, and would have an adverse effect on that plan by allowing multiple family to encroach into the single family area; 2) The change would be contrary to the existing single family land use pattern; 3) The change would create an increase in traffic congestion and affect public safety by increasing the traffic volume over what it would be under the present zoning; 4) There are no substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accord with the existing zoning. Council, at its meeting on July 25th, referred the matter to workshop. At the August 1st workshop meeting, Council informally decided to sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board. - 17 - 8/22/77 Mr. Chapin moved to sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board with regard to the Spinner rezoning request for 3.8 acre parcel of land on both sides of Del-Haven Drive, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.d. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on August 16th, recommended by unanimous vote that the conditional use request for The Haven, a board and care home, which is presently used for a private residence, in Section 9-46-43, 430 N. E. 5th Avenue in the GC (General Commercial) District be approved, subject to the following: 1) Compliance with the requirements of the Community Appearance Board as stated in'their minutes of August 10th; 2) A time limitation of 12 months be set for development of the project. No objections were made at the Planning & Zoning Board meeting regarding the board and care home. The board and care home in this instance would be for temporary housing of non-deliquent children. Aubrey Ewing, Executive Director of the Haven Foster Home Project, 470 N. W. 20th Street, Boca Raton, stated that they are 'focusing their efforts towards children who are either neglected or abused who have no place to go. The figures in Palm Beach County right now are that there are 1000 homeless children a year. The purpose for using the terminology "non-delinquent" was to inform the residents of the area that they are not housing children that would otherwise have gone to jail. Mr. Sanson stated he has no objections to allowing this use and help out in what is a valid need but he would like to know if it does not work out, does Council have the right to revoke ~he use if the children present problems to the City of Delray and to the neighbors, and if there were any kind of delinquency problems that evolved from it and it was shown to be incompatible and not in the best interest of the h~alth, safety and welfare of the citizens of Delray? . The City Attorney stated that the specific problems that come up will have to be addressed when they come up, but assuming that someone who has applied for and been granted a°conditional use is meeting the conditions for that use, no, Council~cannot revoke it. Mr. Sanson stated that it is his understanding that in granting the conditional use Council can 'put whatever contingencies on it they deem proper and this is something Council. should consider - putting an amendment or condition on %he approval motion so that if there are problems, the use can be revoked. The City Attorney stated that this is too vague and if Council wants those kinds of conditions, he suqqested that they send it back to the Planning & Zoning Board to see what they can propose. Mr. Sanson also questioned what is to prevent an expan, sion of the facility. The City Attorney stated that if they wanted to expand this facility, it would have to come back before Council for approval. Mr. Carey stated that it has been made very clear that the board and care facility is limited to ten human beings. Mayor Scheifley stated he does not think you can put further conditions on this, you have to rely on other sources, the management, have faith in them and the police department to enforce the rules and it is not wise to put conditions on it. Mr. Weekes stated the property in question is just south of where he maintains his office and across the street from Joe Rose Body Shop, just below Bodel Printing and none of the residents in the area had any objections to it, and therefore, he does not see any reason to put further restrictions on this. Mr. Weekes added that if it becomes a public nuisance, Council can treat it as a public nuisance. The City Attorney stated that Council has independent regulations in that regard. He stated he is not sure it may accomplish all the things - 18 - 8/22/77 389 Mr. Sanson envisions as problems, but in the event it gets to the magnitude that Mr. Weekes suggested, it can be controlled. Mr. Chapin moved that Council sustain the recommenda- tion of the Planning & Zoning Board to grant a conditional use request for the Haven Board and Care Home, located at 430 N. E. 5th Avenue, presently in GC (General Commercial) zoning district subject to the conditions as outlined in tonight's agenda, item 9.d., seconded by Mr. Sanson under the assumption that the City Attorney is correctly telling the facts that, if this develops into any kind of problem to the City of Delray, it can be revoked. The City Attorney stated he cannot give that kind of broad endorsement that if there is any problem in anybody's mind that it will somehow be corrected through conditional. use - it cannot be conditional use was not designed for that and cannot regulate that. If there is talk about other violations of other laws, those are regulated by those laws; the occupants of this property will be subject to those like anyone else. Mr. Sanson withdrew his second; the motion was then seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. 10. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize payment.of the City's bills. Mr. Weekes moved that Council authorize payment of the City's bills, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. General Fund .............. $282,942.41 Water and Sewer Fund .......... 35,488.91 Cigarette Tax Fund ........... 11,870.00 Utility Tax Fund ............ 54,075.85 Mr. Chapin moved for the adjournment of the meeting, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. The meeting- adjourned at 9:23 P. M. City Clerk MAY O R 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 22, 1977 which minutes were for- mally approved and adopted by the City Council on _~7~o /,~/ /~7 - City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the minutes that you have recieved are not com- pleted as indicated above, then this means that these are not the official minutes of the City Council. They will become the official minutes only after they have been reviewed and approved which may involve some amendments, additions, or deletions to the minutes as set forth above. - 19 - 8/22/77