11-04-65SpMtg 298-1
NOVEMBER 4, 1965.
A special meeting, of .the 'City Council of the city of Delray Beach
was held in the Council Chambers at 4:00 P.M., Thuzsday, November 4th,
1965, with Mayor Al. C. Avery in the Chair, City Manager David
Gatchel, City Attorney John Ross Adams, and Councilmen J. LeRoy croft,
James H. Jurney, Jack L. Saunders and George Talbot, ~X., being pre-
sent.
Mayor Avery called the meeting to order and announced that same ~ad
been called for the purpose of.discussion'-concerning the Beach Erosio~
Program and for any other business that may come before the meeting.
An opening prayer was delivered by City Clerk R. D. Worthing, and
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Ameriqa
was given.
Mayor Avery presented each Councilman with copies of a pamphlet he
had printed and sent out with the 1965 tax bills, setting forth the
progress of the City during the past year, and showing where the City's
money comes from and where it is spent.
Concerning recognitiu~ of Veterans Day, Mayor Averysaid he had
been informed by Mr. C. Ripley, Principal of Seacrest High School,
that the schools would be cl~ed that day, and had also been ~nformed
that some of the business houeesin Delray Beach would be closed that
day
City.Ma~ager"~atchei Said that a Veteraas Day
prepared, that the committee ~ppointed to.plan the'ceremo"ieSf0r that
Mayor Avery a=ke~i'that'=omerme~er"of =he'CityHall perS0n~el'Ca11
a~ of 'the ChUrches i'ntowfi'requesting that'the'Veterans and'n~ti0nal
.[~aders be remembered in their prayers Sunday, and that announcements
%a made from the pulpit about the observance of Veterans Day.
' MaWr AVery asked'~0~nCilman ~eOrge Talbot, 'J~,.Ch&irman of ~he
Beach'~r0sion Commi't~&,"t0 c°nd~ct ~his portion °kthe meeting con-
~erning the Beach ~rosion Program.
Mr. Talbot said that a very important decision needs to be made at
this meeting, and ~ead':~he following letter from-Mr. E.' S. Kelley,
Vice President of Glace Engineering Corporation, dated November 2,1965:
"Sub~eCt: Time Table for Erosion Control Structures.
It is the pOlicy.of o~r firm to review from time to time various
jobs on which we are employed. In line with this policy and our
recent discussions,.the subject project has been reviewed.
We Su~mit the following for your information. At ~he meeting.of.
May 3, 1965, in Delray B~ach a time table was established for ~he
work contemplated'along the ocean front north of the public beach
and extending south-onto the public beach. Based on discussions
during the meeting concerning timing for the'most suitable Weather
conditions for doing the actual'ConstructiOn a date of N°vemb~rl,
1965, was set for beginning design plans and specifications for.~
this work. It was felt that this would set the tenta~iv~a~e
for starting to work on the construction as April 1, 1966.
DiSCUSSions with l~ca! contractors indicates that this is the
most desirable time to begin this type construction and affords
the]longest period of favorable weather.
Since the November 1 'target date has passed and based on the re-
cent hurricane damage and the present conditions, it was felt.that
we shOu%d direct.your attention to the fact that any extended
"de.lay in'beginning the design and. construction plans could re-
duce ~he'time available for construction, and thereby possibly
negate~ completion of the work this coming summer.
We wou~d like to suggest that if '~h~s construction work is to
be accomplished within the y~ar of I966, the City authorize us
to begin design construction plans ~o later than November 15,
196S, ~f this is possible.
After the ~lans and specifications.are co~pleted, it Woui-d be
desira~le to a.llow '~t least 3 Weeks for bidding the work. The
signing of the contract and bond documents usually r~quires
approximately one week, and the contractor is norma$1y given
two weeks notice of the start t6 work date.
It can be seen from the above that the November 15 date Will
allow a~ minimum of time for preparation of the construction
pl?ns and s~pecificati~)ns. I~ you h~ve any questions plesse
contact us."
Mr. Talbot said the delay on this Beach Erosion P~ogram has' been
caused by the attempt to obtain quitclaim deeds for ~he l~rop.erty
covered in SeCtion II, 'which has not progressed with the speed hoped
for, and ~that Realtor Robert Gracey has been of muo~ asei. stanoe in
attempting to show the property owners in .said Section II the cooper-
atioh 'th~ City will give in meeting any requirements they might de-
sire for 'their protection.
Mr~ Talbot referred to a letter from Mrs. John Hi Krey, dated
Sep-t~.mber 27th, .1965, .that was given to him by City Manager GatChel,
and said that 'he had talked, by telephone, to Mr.. Krey, and the fol-'
!ow~ are questio"s from Mr. Kr~,~s letter_a~.,d aBswer9 given him.
Oues~i°n' '1' .Do ~e h~ve, or i~ it possible ~0bb~ain a near-term
and long-term officia~ statement of county p~.~n~ng wi.~h respect
Mr. Talbot: "~ou well know the answer to'that is n6. we don't
k~Ow what they are going to do. His main concern was, are th~ going
to widen it? My answer .to him was that in my lifetime ! ~i~1~,~ think
that it would be widened, that I didn'~t know of any immediate plans,
and the fact that A1A-'is more of a scenic road them it is "of conven-
ience to g~% ~rom one place to another, and the fact that,s condemn-
atio~ of th~ property in order to make it a larger road wou14 prohibit
it for a lOng, 1cng t~ime. He was satisfied 'w~th that ahswer."
Question No. ~. How .would this tie in with th~ J~r~POsed City plan?
Mr. Talbot: "The answer to the fi=st questiOn..answers--No, 2, to
which he agreed."
Question No. '3. What attitude would the county3 take on your pro-
posed plan as being a satisfactory solution to their road main~enance
program of the future?
Mr. Talbot: '"My explanation to. that; was ~hat the County and the
State wou~d be delighted' for us to 'sp~d $24~;O00 on this Section
because it would pr0te~t their road, and it ~would help their mainten-
ance program, In. that question h6' had in mihd th~$ -m, aybe the County
and State w~a ~t to" coneemn. ~a=t of ~ei~ '~r~y to ~k~,
=oat1 was pr6~ec~d, they weren*t in;cerested in-ma](~n~, any wider 'road,
wh~ h satisfied him."
OUes~ion-'~o. 4. Does t~e county ~n~.~ to wideo AIA in the'fore-
seeable future? ,,, ~.:~ .
Mr. Talbgt~-' "Tha~ was answsred in.th~' other questions."
Ouestion No. 5. Are there ~ny smrious'ai~6us&i°ns ~af°°t involving
federal, state or county planning with resp?at to the whole beach~
erosion problem?
Mr..Talbot: '"The answer is no. -In other Words, Delra~ Beach is
one of ~the few, and a matter 6f fact, ~he only one on the East coast
f put its ~gcketbook .where its mouth i~s a~d has
of Do :~ans, at 1east I kn°w'o,f no Pinna, the& a~e in-
, stat~~ or c°Unt~ ,~ian~n~ 'W~/icli' s~u~d be
298-3
Ouesti0n NoJ 6. You state-that there w£1I'~ot'~ an~increas~ in
my ad valorem taxes by'~agon~of this request'~for a quit cI~tm deed.
Mr. Talbot= "I explained that this is being put in on a Capital
Improvement Program that would be~aintained Wi~h a .percentage of
cigarette-tax money, which satisfied him."
0uestioh~No:. 7~' Would"s~ch'A plan contemplate a ~onvenientaccess
to the beach from my property across AIA? .....
Mr. Talbot~ "In that, I thought he meant would he have a walkway
across AI~ and I told him that he wo~uld ~ot~ that h~ would have 'to
fight t~e traffic iike .anyone else on AiA. He said tha~ iS'not What
I mean, ~6uld I'have any step~-down ~rom the wave wall to the'oCean?
My reply'to that was' that there woul~ be"steps every so 0f'te~_ perhaps
every 125 feet because we would have to have access'for not only'~hose
people there, but on the public beach at certain areaS. That satis-
fied him." -.- ~
OuestiSn No.,8. Why would not :an easement given' to the city ac-
complish the same~-ob~ec~ive? It would seem' t$ b~.easier.-to go d~wn
with property owners.
Mr. Talbot: "My answer to that was that I would not be a part.of
giving any'easement and spending'any:City money on an easement. I
told him that I was only one of five ~ndividual~, b~t I did 'not think
that was legal, and-I-wodld have to have some of the high~'st'~utho~ity
from'-'the state before that would be considered by me. ' .... :
He'still feels the only waywe are going t~ get an~p'la~e is-with
an easement"rather than'a quitclaim deed." ~
During Other comments Mr. TAlbot said the q~/itclaim deeds m~y .'
eventualXy be obtained, but' if they we-re ~ot ali o~ined ~t'W°uld
negate' the whole program, and Continued aS follows: "After my cch='
versation'with }[r.''Krey, and looking at the time table that'we are
faced With, uniess the comments of Bob.'Gracey change my m!~d;'the Only
thing that'~ Can recommend 'to' this Council is"that'we'pr°Cee~d a~ of
Nover~ber15't~h, authoriz'ing'-the engineering design beginning'~t the
north end of'the pUbl£'C' beach, or beginnin~ wit~ Sec%i0n 3, elimiha-
ting_Sea,ion II.- '' ' ' " - ' '
I asked the Engineers, that suppose we authorize wOrk on 'SeUtiOh
II and Section III'and~then are unable to get the quitclaim' deed~
that'the C~ty-req~t=eS~'~hatwould we have Wasted in engine~ring' '
costs? The'~nswer~w~. $19,000 and Id°n't think the city can gamble
$10,000-0n authorizing Section II plus the area~6r' the footage that
we are going to do in section III. It would be a $I0,-000 gamble.
That was in.every a.tt~mpt ~o try to include Section II in our plans
so that we 'coula'-auth'6rize it along with the other on 'November I'Sth.
The'net'res~l~:that Ifeel I must suggest to this Council for their
conside~ation and decision is to'authorize on the 15th, work begin-
ning at the north end.'of'Section. III, with a survey of the distance
or'lineali~fOotage that Shoul~ be included south."
Mr. Robert Gracey informed the Council that he represents Mrs.
W. W. stone; Whose bUsihess is being taken C~re of bY her son Bill,
and that he has'recommended-to the Stones that'they cooperat~ with the
City in fu~niShing the requested quitclaim deed. 'Mr, Gracey furnished
a copy of a lengthy-'~etter..,he, had written'to Mr. StOne con',~erning the
beach erosion problem' and recommendations for their furnisbing'~he
City witha"'q~itclaim deed.' (See pages '~98-9-A,~98~9-~,298~9-0;~98-9-D,
Mr. Talbo~ reP°rt~:d~ that~he had received ~ call from Realtor Ford 298-9-]
Carter who is recomme~ding t~'Dr' F~ P. strickler that he cooperate
with the City in furn~hin~.a quitclaim deed. ' '
Mr. TalbOt also reported that letters to the property owners in-
volved in Section II, together with'quitclaim deeds, were mailed on
September 15th, so it ~ppears that the property, owners do not realize
that time is an im~orta~t, element. He then suggested that the proper-
ty owners inPolved in Section II Of the Beach ErOsion programme
written to again, reviewing the sitUation and informing them that time
is a very imPOrtan~ element, and the Council Will make a decision on
November' 15theliminating~Section II unless all of the signed deeds
hate been received'~
-3- 1.1-4-~ ~68
Mr. :Grauey said it had-b~,en a~e~d ~th City repres~.ntatives to
after set forth. The ~eea ~ula ~ ~1~ ~r~ un~ll Satisfactory
~eeds ~e received ~=om all o~ the :~r~.er~.~e=s ~n ~ ~volve~
strip. If aee~s from all such D=operty
Stone~s deed would be returned to her. ~ woula b~ a reaS°~able
time limit on this - say six months."
City Attorney ~ams s~id such a time limit ~y
o~er property e~ers 'as they may think ~e~ .~d s~ m~s ~ in
which to make ~ their min~ uon~=at~g
~ere ~s dis:cussion about including
as far nor~ ~as deeds could b~ ob~i~, l~i~ ~e re~g pro-
peTt~es out of ~e.p=ogram, but it ~s P~lm~ ~ut ~at in such a case
the northernmo~ ~roperty ~ul~ have an ~st-~st ~11 in front of
same .~i~ woul~ create a pToblem, ~.waS su~s~d that either all
or none 6f Section II be included in ~he Bea~h~Sr~sion Program.
~. Jurney asked if it would be feasible ~ have ~e ~ve screen
constructed at t~ north end of the present 9~i~c beaeb, pri~r to the
o~er reverent ~rk, in order to prote~ ~ ~p~c b~=h wh~le o~er
pl~n.s are ~.~ng made. ~. Talbot'~sai~ he w~ find out fr~ Glace
Enqi~eering ~OOrporation if ~bat ~would
~e ~yor and each Councilman were a~e~abl~ ~at ~e q~itcla~m
deeds from sai~ property ~ers ~ul~ s~9~a~ that th9 =ity ~uld
not permit par~ing o, either side of A~...~. ~=~n~ ~f t~ ~ro~rties.
The COU~L ~s also agreeable ~hat ~ ~ ~es~r~ct~ ~uld
read that ~re woUld be no .caba~as o= eo~eE~al uses, i~l~ing
picnic ~b~ ;and ~ills, of the properties ae~ed ~o the Clt~
Con=e=n~ng a restriction in the de~dS.
access ~ t~ ~ad ~ the ~a0h ~ ~is $9.~9n ~ area, ~r Avery
mensurate w~ ~ood eng~neering des~. ~l~w&~.-~e~y d~Scussion,
Mayor AverY' asked ~, Taint to ~imd
quent ~ey had expected to deSi~ steps in that see~ion, a~ following
rece~ o.~ t~t ~formatton the.~Beach ErOS~ CO~tee '~d ~ke re-
no si~!k ~ ~he ~s~ e~ ~f. A~ in ~ ~s decided
~o le~ that ~vt of ~he deed: ! ~ ~Y' ~s no contr~
over ~t ~,~ sa~e ~s paa=~d ~n ~e '-
C~y At~ney A~m~ ~oted ~e ~ol!~g ~ ~a~
desired b~ a p=~y o~er in Section ~: ~1~ ~.~ee to
assessed n~ or ~n ~e ~re ~ ~ ~ntenance .of
~is beachi" It ~s p~ sbt ~a~ ~ ~nd that
the pro~rty o~e~be ass~sse~-~ .~s~s for said
· deeds be con, t~nued through ~he eE~s.~ ~9~.!~ :~h'the help of
the City A~istration..
~. Pau~ .~=ig suqges~ ~ha~ a tax
pr~t~es in~l=ed ~ said Section
It ~. also~ po~nted~~ out' that said PF~' ~ ~. ~t income
~or Ave~ said'the pr~ati~n o~ ~eE~, '9~ ~act ~ith the
pro~rt~, o~ers ~n sa~d Se~tig~a II, ShoUld be ~ft V~ ~ ~W City
Manager wi~ ~'e assis~O~ ~e C~y At~e~., ~. ~r~, a~tor-
Beach E~s~ ~o~i~t~e.
City ~ ~hel ~aid~t~=e ha~.been s.~ 0om~ ~ the e6fect
that w~n ~e ~w enlarg~ sa~d transfe~ plant
Boyn~on Inlet, ~e San~ p~ over tO ~the sou~ s~de' o~ t~ inlet
11-~-65
would drift southward and would cause an accretion on the Delray beach
to the extent that such a revetm!nt .area,'~:~g prpposed, wou~ .~ot he
ne~essary~ ~nd tha~ there .~ould .be al~the protection nece_~sary..through
a norn~l~ flow of sand tha~ S~Ctions.~i~'~II'and Iii,of the~Beach Erp~.ion
Program would ever.need. ~'
City-Manager Gatchei~read the following .l~tter, ~ated October 27th,
tha~ he had written to Dr. Per..Bruun=
"The' City of Delray Beach is active1¥ engaged in implementing ~he
beach erosion control.WOrk as recommended by our enpineers,.Glace
Engineering Corporation, in the-planning report dated APril 1,
1965. We have provided $500,000, for this purpose out of bonds to
be sold next month, so the Project should ~egin in ~the not too
distantfuture. . :
Section II of the project is privately owned and the City ~as
been attempting to acquire deeds to this approxima'tely 1,300
feet, but without a great deal of success due.to informption
which is currently being circulated among the property owners
.to_the effect that a revetment will not be necessary when the
enlarged sand transfer plant is completed at Boynton Inlet._
Statements have been made which-indicate that sufficient"sand
will be available to Sections I, II and III of our beach erosion
projeot to build up all of the protection necessary.
We are'of the 'opinion that such statements a~e erroneous and'
that the sand transfer pl&~t will make little a~preciable dif-
ference in our beaoh, and feel' that you are Of ~he same opinion~'
If such is ~he case, we Would appreciate a statement from you to
such effect. ~lace Engineering Corporation has indicated that
Novenlber 1, 1965 is the la~e~t date which they could'begi~'design
plans and specifications in ~der.to begin construction on this.
proJ.ect byMrach 15, 1966, so I believe you can see the Urgency
in our request for-your opinion-as to this sand transfer 'plant
a~d its effects.
It iS a personal.Pleasure corresponding with you from the'City
of Delray'Beach and I trust that our associations will be as
fruitful as those experieneed while I was in Fernandina Beach.
Hoping to receive.an eir!y'rePly, .and 'with ki~d regar~il"
The City Manager then're~d the following letter from Dr. PeF Bruun,
dated NOvember l, 1965= ' '
"Your letter of October 27 was received by:me on NOvember 1.~
It happened that I, without knoWing your letter, inspected ~he
Delray. Beachee on OctOber 30, and I can confirm that a revetment
is needed more than ever before and that an enlarged by-passing
plant at Bol~lton Inlet will have no appreciable effect on..the
erosion.at Delray Beach.Which is mainly a result of,the rigs
of sea level." . . . :...~ .. ,:
City Attorniy Adams commented on 'his followin~letter's~'i.'~0Vember
4th, to the Counci!, regard£~g.-ero'sion=
"Last Spring, the CitY'Council posed a question to me.a question
concerning the statUso~ t~tle as to the lands in Section Ii of
our beach and lands .which nOw~ie under water'just ~ff our ,beach
in that section and, 'I assume, lands-which may be created in the
future by the i~stallation of erosion control devices. This letter
is ~ot "intende~'~t~ eXhaustively COver t~e sU~j~t,_ a ithoug~ ii'am
prepared to an~wer'sPe=i£iu questions that m~ght arise in t~is
connectio~.
The beach area E~st of AiAin Section II is Owned',,by the abutting
property owners tO the west. The properties are located'in Block
298-6
-"~ o~ Palm,Beach Sh, o~e~cre~, .a subd~vi~:~on p~tted .in 1919,
~e ~st l~ne of ~s s~V~e,~on.is:.s~s mean~.~ng
~e ~ters of ~e Atlantic Oc~n. A 60'
sho~ aS.ocean. BoUievard.wh~cb rBn~.~r~th' and ~u~ ~rou~
~e 10ts.
By virtue of Co~on. Law, the la~ 10gate~. betow th~ ~an h~gh'
~ter ma~ is vested in ~e State of Florida ~n truer for
.p~lic for-pur~se~:of..navig~ion, .fishing, ba~ing, ~nd similar
uses~ ~e definit~on of:-)mean h~ ~ter.F is ~e average height
of the high ~ters at a..g~en place over a peri~ of nineteen
years. Th~s line ~s ,eetabl~shed by a recent Survey fou
City using : ~gures from the U. S. ~ast and ~detic ~rvey)s
Table for 1965.
It is ~ite o~ioum fr~ looking at. ~e .original p~at of the
af~es~d s~ivision that considerable erosion has occurred
durinq ~e Intervening 46 ye~s, snd also there hss been lost
a~ditional land as a result of Hurricane Betsy a~. ~e recent
prevailing winds from the Northeast.
It can thus ~ seen ~at ~he s~tus of fee title of the
~ich formerly was upl'and but which now consists of submerged
land is determined by ~e ~nner ~n ~hich th~ )and became sub-
merged. Part of the loss of these up.nas has u~o~tedly-been
due to sudden and violent action of ~e ~ves. alon~ ~e heath
f~ont. ~om ~e recent storms) hoover., ~e ~_~r ~por~on
loss ~s due to gradual an~, imperceptible ~ct~n of ~he waves,
The ~le in Florida is ~at when ~e sea ~mper, ee~ .encroaches
u~n the upland, the loss falls upon the o~ ~:~e lan~ thus
lost by e~os~on, returns to the ~e=sh~p. o~ ,~h~., the
upland ~s lost by reason of avulsion, ~ change.
~e Co~ uses the following lan~age in
rule, to.apply with res~c~
a-cc~t~On~ - ~at ~ ~.
de.sit of particles ~at its
measured even
time to ti~ - the new thu~ t~ ~e
rule is ~at, ~ the sea, lake, or S~r~ .
gradually a~ ~e~e~2~bl~ encroaches u~ ~e land,
the :~~.~e ~
tn progresS. ~a~qe. '
~tion
XX through ~e
feasible that
which ~came totally .~s
a result of .~
~e
c.~m to th~se ~e
I have
the
At~rney
should not be been
with ~e ~'~$~on of any
ev~ua 1
~8-?
"It is possible to have the Trustees of the Internal Improvement
Fund .cCme'~'~n~0~:-~he picture and c!ai~°~ch x~nds'on behal'f ~'f the
State.;' "~Ho6~'%e%-?~! ~a~ 'f~re~ee a'. ~c~1 ~iofi of det~fm~n~n~
the i~n~' 'WH~r6='~e g~aduaI eros~ofi--'stoppea'-and ~e avuls~0n b~ga~.
It w0~l'd,- therefor~¥~ seem .ev~n~more i~por~nt for'~e ~ity to
sist ~n ~ts attempts ~ chain the land Bast of the road r[ght~
of-way eider by ~it chum ~eed 0r by conde~at~on. Th~s ~uld
foreV~r..e~m~nate' ~ ~S~utes ~.~, ~he upland' o~e~s."
~.-Talbot r~ad the foI'10w~ng Iet~r-~at ha~'been ~tten to
w. T. ~r~2onj'j-Adm~n~strative A~istant~of ~e Div~S[O~ of Beaches
Shores of the Flor~ S~te ~ard Of ~nservation, by ~-. T. S. Rice,
Plann~g Co0rd~nator of Glace Engineering C0~orat'~on,, -dated ~e~er
2nd, 196~ '--
"~is letter is a .follow up to our verbal conversation at our
recent Florida Shore and Beach Pre~ervat~on Associat~oW Board'
of Directors meeting ~n Jacksonville Beach, Florida in ~ich
you advised ~ ~at you ~uld ~ con~ct~ng ~e Ci2y of Delray-
Beach a~ o~elves wi~in a ~nth to discuss what aid ~y be -
available on a state level.
~ have- recentl~ been in con,ct w[t~ Councilman ~orge Talbot]
Jr., Of ~lray 'Beach who is ~a~an of ~eir' erosion~ co~ittee
and ~ ~dv~se~'. that ~ey. ~ave set their' ~rget' date., for au~or~z-
in: vi~ o~ ~hese~ci~c~st~n~.s, we' ~18~ appr~ate~ h&a~'~,~ from
you as. to ~gu=. Pl~' ~'hope"~that 'w~.'~i~. h~e ~n
CXt~ ~an~ger GakcheX repor2ed' fha2 ~. ~rlton has been in
Beach, ~a~ he likes ~e Be~eh Eroslon Program, and [eels ~at
Beach ~Y be eli~le' for some' Sta~e assistance from money 'mad~ ~vail-
able b~'~e 1965 ~gislat~%-aha Contknued ae f~llows~ '.He ha,~ ~ent
a lette=, and ~ere a~ certain ~es~ons ~hat all fit lnto the
re=ion ~.e~ntl~ ad0p~ed by ~e State ~binet, and as s~n a~ ~ can
get ~e ans~s to these we can then fo~ulate our 'fo~1 application
fo= S~e assistance ~n this ~ac~ Brosion ~ect'." -
~t ~s pO~nted out'~% ~e C~ty'~uld ~en be ~n a ~0s~t~on to
start, %h~ngh proof channels w~th Jacksonville, fo= Feae~al'
a~Ce,
~.. ~a~e Chr~stiSO~,:'AS~istant City Engineer, invited ~e: Council
and ~e=~C~y ~nager''' ~o ~ ~ld Coast P~lic Works Supervisors As-
sociation meeting and d~nner 'to be held in De}ray Beach,- ~sdax eve-
par~e~2' heads oF" ~e various cities from ~Ca, ~ton tO Palm BeaCh.
~e following memorand~ from Cit~ Attorney Adams to the City
~nager,:j~ated.~Ove~e~ 4~', ~965, rega~aing ;em0val of wrecked, or
abandoned cars, ~s P~sented to C0unc~l=
'~A. R~o~a~--of ~e~ed ~r 9bandoned Feh~cles on private property
by SeCtion ~5.1~ ~ 15.12, ~gde of Ordinances (Co--only kno~ as
~t C~e~Lng ordnance). ' '
~. ~Ve'~ report delivered to C~
. 2, s~m~t to'Cit~ CoUnCil [or d~e~nat~on 2hat a pr[~' '
3:., F0i. lowing"'sai~'~Siofl; a 30 day. ~°tice ~i' gigen' iO '
4.' ' ~0h' failure' ~ aba~e, '~st is' dete~ned' and assesS~~ -
' ' '- '
-7- n-4- 5 888
"5. Certified copy of Resolution recorded and mailed to
property owner. ·
(COuncil~ Policy .~cently ad~pted also r~/uires contacting
Wishes--So :e~p~iOy Someone 'd~irectl¥"~ '" ~: "' · '
"The advantage .of thii~ 'procedure is that a valid li'en can b-e -'
perfected and the City will eventua'lly be paid. *'The d+sadvantage
is that many hours are ;required ¢~' making survey, tying same in
with' leg&"l descriptions, dCaftinu ResOlttt~ons, and recordifig re-
leases-~hen paid'; A-~so';" it cSu[d'~hanale only cars" 16cared on
priva%e property, -
B. Removal of .wrecked or abandoneW'aUtomobil'es '~Y 'Section 15-25,
- Code '~of
1. Provides pen~alty for owner or lessee of premises where
junked cars are stored on.private propert~y, .or.owner of ?ar,
if' stor~ o~ p~blfc ~r'ight of-waY,
2.' Gr~%~:s ;?2~'-~p~rl nO~ice 9eriod to eieher remove, 'sigh an
ag.~e?~e~t,th~t [~.~ty ~a'F re'm~ve/'
The:-advantage':of this method is that it c~n be a sp~edie['
solution t~ th6.problem. The disadvantage is that many owners
of d~r~ (especially those on righSs-of-way)/cann°t':be l°ca'tec%'
At' th~' present ti~e, with s~ch s 'large' number of disabled
~ic.[es' located around Va[ious parts ~o£-town, ~-a more prectic~-%
solution might be as follows.- -
I. order'a Survey of th6 Various abandoned cars.
2. A%tempt '.to se~V~ 72 hour"~otices on any owner-~ that can
be lo~ated.
3. Contract with a private individual-or-fii~m-for the' r6~
moral at a specified rate per car.
4. Take pictures of the car as each is being removed.
The obvious advantage here is that this procedure can quickly
remove all.. of the present abandoned cars. The disadvantages
are that.the City will bear most all of the expenses, and a'
few owners may even attempt to seek .indemnification. This
latter procedure vas recently used in Boyn. ton Beach leading
to the removal of s~me 300 cars." ..-
City, ~mnage$ Gatchel reported that contact had been established
with a gentleman who is able to transport junked automobiles out of
the City and ~ePcsit them on County owned land west of West Palm
BeaCh which ha.s been provided for said purpose, at a cost of $7.00
per vehicle. Further, that the same pe~son has worked for t4ne Ci. ty
of Boynton Beach in such an effort recently,_, and has been ~b~e to
dispose of 200 to 300 vehicleso
The City Manager said there is a time element involved ~n this
transaction as, due to other commitments, this work W~ul~ have to
start by November l~th or be de~ayed until after of 1966,
and he believed that the manner of removal of ~ndoned
automobiles as expl&~ned under Item B in w~Uld be
advantageous as the cars could be moved a 4isadvan-
tage would be that the City may have to of the expense, and
continued: "This procedure was recent Beach lead-
ing to the removal of some 300 had this
same service provided to them at a cost of .lc. Ours
is $7,00 because ~f the extra distance of : ~a~l~ with Tom
Eain, the cit~ Manager'~;~atld 'he said theY~removed the..s.e~ automobiles
at the rate o~, $6.00 .,~$~r V~hicle, and the~ g~t betwee~ ~0 and ~0.0
of them hauled out of town at a total ~OSt ~o'~hei= Gi'ty of only
about $150.00. This was 'because of their ability to trace down the
owners of these vehicles aha recoop the $6~00 per vehicle, plus some
little administrative cost. This is a chance that you would have
-8- 11-4-65
298-9
"to take. At $_7.~O0 .per_ veh£Cle, i~ we .got rid .of
about $1,400.00 This is a~tual c~ash .cut of pocket. The~e are many
more than 200, but we would try to recoop what money we can." It was
so moved by Mr. Saunters. The moti. on ,w~.s seconded by Mr. Talbot and
carried unanh~_ ous ly. -~.
City ~ana. ger.'Ga.t~, he1 informed the Council that no.th~ng has .bee,
provided in .the ~udg~et to cove=_ such.an expense,~, and requested de-
termination from Council as to where said money might come from..
Further, that he would suggest it be "~ the Contingency Fun~ at such
time aa aB amount may become known~
Mayor Avery said the ~ork had been authori~.ed~ and at the time the
money is needed ~t will be pro. vided.
faced with is that there wil~ be some cars yo~ can't .telL~who the
owner is. I wan~ to _go on record that you might have somebody come
in and try to make a c.laim. This Contractor is going to ask the City
to hold him harmless, I am sure: which most bus,ness men ~wou14~_ dO, so,
as long-a.s you. approve ~t on that basis and understand there could~
possibly be somebody Compla~ni~g,~ but for th~ general welfare of the
public, I think we wil~ have to do ~hia."
City Manager Gatchel sa~d that the man who will remove said cars
would undoubtedly request a le£ter to the e.ffect .that the City would
save him harmless, as explained by the C£ty Attorney, and. aake. d if
Council would authorize him to-write such a letter. It was so moved
by Mr. Talbot,. ~seconded by Mr.-Saunders-and C~rried u~an~mously.
The meeting 'adjourned at 6:00 F.M~ . · -~ -
.... R.. · D, WORTHING ....
City Clerk .
APPROVED;
-9- 11-4-65
October 16, 1965
AIR MAIL
Mr. William B. Stone
1020 Central Trust Tower
Cincinnati 2, Ohio
Dear Bill:
I am trying to reach you over the telephone, but you
are out of town so I will not be able to reach you until
Monday. In the meantime, I am writing this letter which I
hope we will have time to type a~ mall before our office
closes today. If not, it will be mailed to you Monday.
Several weeks ago you and I discussed over the telephone
the request of the City of D~lray ~ac.h for a Deed to the beach
rights on the east 8ids of the Ocean Boulevard in front, of your
Motherts home. Since our conversation I have had discussions
with the City Council representative in charge of the beach
erosion project, George Talbot, and the City Clerk, Bob Worthlng.
My thoughts aa expressed to them and~repeated to you are as
follows:
1. All of us recognize the seriousness of beach erosion
in this area and that something must be done.
2. Vertical 8eawall8 erected by private property owners
to preserve their lands, or the State Road Department
to protect the Nlghway, are most undesirable aa ex-
perience ha8 shown there is seldom any beach in front
of such w~ll8 and such wall8 are, for practical pur-
poses, almost ink~oselble to descend for bathing pur-
poses.
3. The cost of the proposed sloping revetment is approx-
imately $200.00 per front foot. It 18, therefore,
most unlikely that property owner8 in the area would
Join in an installation of this type at their own
expense.
4. According to the City .~ttorney, the City cannot
legally spend any money on this project unlemo the
land is City owned. Public funds for improvement
of private property, etc. There seems to be some
disagreement among attoz~eys on th18 point but the
William B. Stone -2- lO/lb/65
Council has said that in any event it would not
undertake the proposed improvement unless the City
did receive title.
5. The City cannot expect property owners to do any-
thing which would decrease the value of their high
priced homes without Just compensation in money or
other amenities for losses in value.
O. It is ~kV opinion your Mother and the other property
owners in the area would be benefited by the pro-
posed development provided the view from your homes
would be similar to that now enjoyed. You certainly
would not be benefited with development and parking
such as now exists on the public beach, but use by
swimmers alone, with no parking of automobiles,
would give reasonably near the same outlook as now
exists.
7. If the City were to condemn the beaches, it could
then put them to unrestricted public use which might
be undesirable for the upland property owners. It
appears, however, that at this time the City would
abandon the project rather than incur the expense
and time delays of condemnation.
8. There is a legal question as to whether or not
there are any property rights east of the Ocean Boule-
vard as it appears the wave wash has extended back
into the road right-of-way. I am not qualified to
express an opinion on this and the answer should be
from an attorney or perhaps from adjudication.
With the above thoughts in mind, the City representatives
and I have agreed to the following concerning Mrs. Stone's
property, subject of course to the approval of both you and
Mrs. Stone. (Numbers will be continued for easy reference).
9. Mrs. Stone would deed to the City her property with
deed restrictions carrying right of reverter as here-
inafter set forth.
10. The deed would be held in escrow until satisfactory
Mr. William B. Stone -3- 10/16/65
deeds were received from all of the property own-
ers in the involved strip. If deeds from all such
property owners were not obtained, Mrs. Stone's
deed would be returned to her. There would be a
reasonable time limit on this - say six months. ~4~,TM
11. The deed would specify that the land would be re-
deeded to Mrs. Stone if the beach improvements
were not installed as planned within a certain
. period of time.
12. The following restrictions would be included in
the deed with right of reverter if violated:
a. The City would never permit parking on either
aid.e of the Ocean Boulevard in front of your
Mother's property. There would be no side-
walk on the west side of the Ocean Boulevard.
At the present time the City could build a
sidewalk in the right of way, which would
destroy a portion of the lawn and bring
pedestrian traffic a little closer to your
front door. The City would have the right,
however, to have a sidewalk on the east side
of the Ocean Boulevard. (The City should
agree to protest any violation of the side-
walk agreement by the State Road Department
over which it has no control and which could
improve the road in any way it desired. )
b. There would be reasonable step access from
the road to the beach within each 100 feet
of linear frontage along the involved strip.
c. The City would not erect or allow to be erected
any cabanas or such shelters. Neither would
the City permit any rental cabanas or commer-
· clal activities of any kind on the beach.
~You will recall there are now cabana concess-
ions on the public beach). The City would not
permit picnic tables, grills or other such im-
provements on the beach. The intent of this
would be to restrict the beach to bathing pur-
poses. As there would be no. parking within
Mr. William B. Stone -4- 10/16/65
the area~usej for even bathing purposes, would
be less desfrable to the general public than
the existing public beach which has parking.
d. The City would agree to maintain the revetment
and further agree the property would not be
assesses now or in the future for the improve-
ment and maintenance of this beach.
The disadvantage to you would, of course, be the loss.
of property rights as may exist as well as having public bath-
ing on the beach. Of course the public always could walk along
any beaches below the high water mark, but I only recall casual
strollers or fishermen so doing.
The advantages of granting such a deed would be:
1. The hope for creation of a usable beach which the future
owner of your Mother's home could enjoy. We have lost
sales of the property because it is quite a little
walk southward along the road, which has no side-
walks, to the nearest usable beach.
2. Having use restrictions which wo~ld be impossible to
obtain should the City either condemn the beach rights,
or be successful in having a Court decide there is no
beach property left. Again, the latter is a legal
question which I am not qualified to answer.
I have assured the City tb~t we, meaning you, Mrs. Stone
and ourselves, desire to cooperate and ask only a minimum of
reasonable protection in return for the deed. I have promised
that, should the City Council fore, ally approve of these condi-
tions, which I am led to believe it will, I would discuss same
with other friends and clients of ours who own property in
this area.
I discussed this entire matter yesterday with Jim Nowlln,
the attorney who speaks for the Fontalne Fox property. Jim
believes the City could legally spend public funds to improve
the beach if an easement for that purpose were given instead
Mr. William B. Stone -5- 10/19/o5
of a deed. He compares the beach easement to a utility ease-
ment across private property. I discussed this point with
the City representatives. They do not concede the legal ques-
tion but state that, even so, the Council Just would not spend
such a large sum of money to improve the private beachfront
under such an arrangement even if it were legal. There are
arguments both ways and I have taken the position that some-
thing must be done in the near future and that the only way
it can be accomplished is by cooperation by and between all
parties.
Time seems to have become of the essence as the City has
not received deeds as it had expected, The object is to have
the work done before next August and the hurricane season.
After deeds are obtained there would be further engineering
required, drawing of final plans and specifications, letting
of bide and the work itself. The deadline ia, therefore, near
for the work to be done in 1966. A month's delay might throw
it back another year. For this reason the City is anxious to
know whether or not agreement can be reached as to the deeding
of the various properties alone the ocean and would appreciate
your giving early consideration to the proposal as outlined
herein.
With kindest regards,
Sincerely yours,
~BO/o f
P.S. I have obtained and scanned the report made by Olace En-
gineering Corp. of St. Petersburg, Florida to the City of Delray
Beach. This is a long document of app~oximately 75 pages. From
this I was able to photostat a typical detail of the proposed
revetment and enclose same herewith. This is an overlay over
a sketch and does not photograph well.
P.P.S. After dictating this letter, aa~ldst numerous interruptions,
"f!Iuse the apology Cicero appended to one of h~s too long letters -
I had had more time I would have Written you a shorter letter",