08-24-64 AUGUST 24th, 1964.
A r~$ar meeting of the City Council of Delray Beach WPS held
in the .~Cil Chambers at 8:00 P.M., with Mayor Al. C. AveFF in the
Chair, C~ Attorney john Ross Adams, City Manager Robert Ji'Holland,
and Cou"~k~men Emory J. BarrOw, J, LeRoy Croft, Jack L. Sanders and
George'~°t, Jr., being present;
1. An OP~ing prayer was delivered byCity Clefk ~orth~ng.
X. Ma~ Avery announced that the CounCil meeting tonight Wo~!d not
be bro~9~t on account of the National Democratic Convention.
2. The~'~%~utes of the regular Council meeting of August !0th., 1964,
were un~$~ously approved on motion by Mr. Barrow and seconde~ by Mr.
Croft. :~?~i '
3. Mr. Arthur H. Ogle, President of the Seacrest Hotel, appeared be-
fore the Council, and City Manager. Holland asked City Clerk Worthing
to read the following letter he had received from M. rl Ogle, dated
August 19th~
.,'Thank you for your courtesy yesterday in listening to my
discourse on the controversial subject of surfboarding and
its undesirable effects on our hotel. Following your sug-
gestions Z am writing this letter for the attention of the
City Council in the hope that some relief may be given us
before the coming winter season. As you suggest, I shall
also plan to attend the meeting of.the Council on August
24th so that the~%-~ermay be discussed verbally with the
members of the Council.
First of all, let me say that I realize this is a knotty
problem.and I have no definite solution to present to the
Council, I would point out,however, that the reservation
of the beach in front of the Seacrest Hotel for surfboarding
was the cause of constant complaint from our guests last winter
and if continued, could have a severe effect on Our future busi-
ness. Please keep in mind that a majority of our guests use the
beach for bathing or sunbathing regularly, many of them daily,
that many of these guests have come to the Seacrest for a con-
siderable period of years and are accustomed to using the beach
direc%ly in front of the hotel property, and find it hard to
understand why it has now been taken away from them.
Certainly no one objects toproper sports and recreational
activity, provided it is carried on at a time and place which
does not interfere with other recreational activities which
have become regular and trad~itio~I~ over th~,~years. Delray's
principal business is base~ on tourism, and a great part of
our desirability as a tourist center results from our fine
facilities for ocean and sunbathing. If we lose those facil-
ities or any part of them, we are in the end going to lose
the patronage of some or perhaps many of these tourists whose
funds suDport our hotels, our apartments, and our merchants,
These young surfboarders will argue that they too have a right
to use the beach, but bear in mind that their activities are
perilous enough to deny the use of the same stretch of beach
for bathing. Keep in mind also that they are probably not for
the mo~t part local youths, that they pay no taxes here, that
they do not support our local merchants to any great extent,
8-24-64
"and that, by taking away a substantial part of our beach,
they are making it more difficult for the Seacrest to get
the income to help pay its very substpntial taxes.
What is the answer? As ! have said above, ! have no definite
solution. I do contend that to forbid the use by bathers of
the beach in front..of the hotel to guests of the SeacreSt, one
of the largest taxpayers in the beach section, is manifestly
unfair. If the surfboarding section were moved, it Wouid
Please us, but would be equally unfair to some other property
owner.
It would appear to me, therefore, that either Surfboarding
should be strictly limited to the beach in front of the beach
pavilion, or if that would be objectionable, it should be pro-
hibited entirely for the months of the winter s~ason.' The
latter course may seem dictatorial, but in theend it appears
that we are going to have to cater to our ocean bathers who
for the most part are the ones who support our city, or cater
to the young surfboarders, mostly from neighboring cities, who
contribute l~ttle or nothing to our economy.
Some proper relief in this situation is respectfully requested
from the C~ty Councilbefore the coming winter season."
During discussion, it was suggested that surfboarding be discon-
tinued during the tourist season, and At was also suggested that the
surfboarding area be placed in front of the pavilion,which.would not
be in front of a hotel or apartments~
M~yor'Avery reminded the Council they had given Some surfboard
manufacturers the assurance that there was no intention on the part
of the CoUncilof outlawing surfboarding.
Miss Dorothea Galvin objected to surfboarding, as she felt it
was dangerous where there were bathers, and also mentioned the danger
of surfboards sticking out of cars as they were t~aveling the streets.
During lengthy general discussion, Mr. Saunders suggested moving
the surfboa~ding area from its Present place in front of the Seacrest
Hotel to in front of the pavilion fora sixty day period, during
September and.october, with the City Manager being given full authori-
.ty to use.whatever means he has at his command to enforce same, and if
that is not complied with by the surfboarders, the surfboarding would
be disconti~ued for the season.
City Manager Holland informed the Council the ropes in front of
the pavilion would have to be removed if that was designated as the
surfing area, but he did not know at this time what expense would be
involved. It was pointed out that a 200 foot surfboarding area would
include a much larger area than just in front of the pavilion.
Mr. Saunders moved that th® City Manager be directed to present
recommendations to the Council on moving of the surfboarding area as
suggested, cost involved, etc., the motion being seconded by Mr.
Talbot.
Mayor Avery explained as follows: "It has been moved and sec-
onded tha~. the City Manager be directed to gO over to the beach,
measure, and come back with some practical recommendations'so that we
can put the sUrfboarding in an area that will hurt the least number of
people."
Upon call of roll, the motion carried unanimously.
X. Mr. Ogle mentioned the monthly sewer charges that would soon be in
effect, and asked if there had been any thought given to properties
that only used the sewer system three or four months of the year, as
far as eliminating the monthly charges during the months saidbuSi-
nesses were not operating.
It was explained that if the water service was discontinued during
a portion of the year, the sewer charges would also be discontinued for
that period of time.
-2- 8-24-64
485
Mayor Avery explained that in setting up the bond ordinance, it
was required.by the bonding attorneys to set up the monthly sewer
service c~rges in a certain manner in order to securethe payments
of principal and interest, as same became due on said bonds?
4. Mr. ~ft read the following BeaUtification Committee ~e~ing
minutes ~ Thursday, August 6th, 1964=
"Present= Bowen, Little~ Cartee, Croft, Lankton, Evaul~ Bingham,
Gop~e~ Plume. Also Mrs. Virginia Meyers of the Comm~y Re-
la ~s Committee and Mr. Burkhart of the Miami Heral~
MrS, ~eyers presented details of a clean-up pro~ect which the
co~mu~ity Relations Committee is undertaking in the w~st~rn
sec~= of Delray. Their plan is to concentrate on on~ ~=ea
(3~cks on S. ~. 14th Ave.) as a neighborhood improvement
plaD. This first area is made up of about 50% rental homes
and~50~ privately owned homes. The intent is to crea~e an
in0e~ve through the efforts of this group.
She spoke of problems common to the western sector - that
many of the migrant workers (day-haul laborers) are completely
illiterate and live under the most primitive conditions~ that
this group is totally unorganized and does not associate with
the year-round-people.
To date, ten'home owners of this nucleus group have met,.and
through a door-to-door educational program, are reading local
sanitation and safety laws to the people, and will ask for
cooperation and explain ~hp.t laws may be enforced. The sec-
ond step will be to set a clean-up day and arrange for special
trash pickups. The third step wall be to go to landlords and
seek cooperation for painting and planting grass.
She asked the help of this committee in handling some phase of
the work, possibly persuading garden clubs to donate shrubbery,
awarding certificates, starting an educational progra~ in schools
or providing public trash baskets. Mr. Lankton reminded her
that our beautification work is limited to City property, other
than the educational and incentive programs designed to reach
private property owners. We agreed to study this problem and
present ideas for assistance at our next meeting.
The l~tter of July 16th, sent with the budget requests, was
read and a discussion of next year~s work followed. Mr.
Lankton asked'that we investigate the possibility of widening
North Swinton Avenue since with the addition of schools,
churches and ~ore traffic, it requires beautification and im-
provement.
Mr. Croft expressed concern over maintenance regarding Item No.
4 on our budget, request (3rd Avenue, along Railroad). After
further discussion, a decision was made to revise the original
budget request by cancel~ing ~m No. 4 and substituting the
following:
~4. Provide group plantings of low maintenance shrubs
and plants at ~he corners of 8th and 14th Streets on
N. E. 3rd Avenue, as well as a.sprinkler system...~500.
5. Star~ planting of Adonidia palm trees on North Swinton
Avenue, concentrating this year from 4th Street north...
$500.
Preliminary to beautification at the 14th Street railroad
crossing, this committee recommends straightening the hook
in the road on N. E. 3rd Avenue. (~ouncil action)
-3- 8-24-64
"Mr. Lankton suggested dividing the City map and letting
each member become~a "watch dog' forone area, studying
problems;writing letters and pin-pointing.properties in
poor condition. With the accord of members, he was asked
to assign areas at the next meeti~g."
Concerning straightening the hook in N. E. 3rd Avenue, Mr. Croft
moved that the City Manager and City Enginee~ make a survey of this
item and inform the Council of the cost involved; also make a recom-
mendation to the Council for future action.
Mayor Avery explained that it had been moved that the City Manager
be directed to prepare a feasibility and cost study, with recommend-
ation to the Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Saunders and
carried unanimousl~.
4.a. A roll call showed the following Civic Organizations and re-
presentatives to be in atten~ance~
Beach Taxpayers League, Zonta, and
Business & Professional Women's Club. Miss Dorothea Galvin
5. City Clerk Worthing read the following letter from the Village
of Royal Palm Beach, Florida, dated August 14th=
"Our Fire Department has conducted several training courses
during the past three years, and is currently engaged in
such at the present time.
I wish to take this opportunity to express our sincere ap-
preciation to your Delray Beach Fire Department, and to Mr.
Cook who has been outstandingly helpful to us in .these
training courses."
Mayor Avery asked City Manager Holland to see that the Fire Der
partment, and Mr. Cook in particular, were complimented through the
proper channels.
5. City Clerk'Worthing read the following ietter from Mr. John W.
Wilmer, President of the Gold Coaet Colt League, Inc., dated August
14th:
"! wish to express to you, on behalf of all the players,
managers, coaches and officials of our Colt League, our
sincere thanks for the prompt and generous support of the
City of Delray Beach. The $200.00 check which we received
from the City helped defray the expenses of sending our
District champions to the state tournament An Orlando.
It is very encouraging to know that the City'of Delray Beach
is behind our efforts to enable 15 and 16 year old boys to
play organized baseball and to know that you agree with our
endeavor to keep these young men active and occupied during
the summer months, and to teach them better baseball and all
the benefits that go along with athletic participation."
5.a. Mr. Talbot said there had been a considerable amount of publicity
concerning the progress of Interstate 95, that said publicity was
either in Dade County, Broward County or in the West Palm Beach area,
and requested that City Manager Holland be instructed to contact County
Commissioner George Warren to determine how that activity concerned
this area. Also, to determine the starting time of construction on
West Atlantic Avenue, and the status'of the program on N. W. 4th Street.
The other Councilmen unanimously agreed to the request made of the City
Manager by Mr. Talbot.
.. -4- 8-24-64
5.a. Mayor Avery said there had been a .budget meeting scheduled for
Tuesday n~ght, August 25th, but it would be impossible to obtain the
necessary data by that time.
Fo~uw!ng discussion, saidmeeting was rescheduled for 7~00 P.M.,
Thursday'nSght, August 27th, in the conference room at the City Hall.
MacprO'Avery asked City Manager Holland to notify the necessary
persons of ~he change of date of said budget meeting.
5.a. MayOr Avery informed the Council. that in 1962 the Cou~ui~ was
presentp~ with the problem of the mass of old municipal records, and
that a pro,ram of microfilming was discussed ~ that.., there had been
money budgeted for the purchase of equipment, and approximate!y
$1,600.00'~ad been spent for Recoz~ak equipment,consisting of a film-
ing device~ a viewing device and a film cabinet.
May~ Avery.said this equipment had never been used and asked why
it had n~t been put to use when there was discussion of the need of
more st6r~ge space for municipal records. Further, with more budget
discuss~pn'sessions coming, asked that the City Manager mak9 provision
in the p~opOsed budget for any expense, if"it .was determine~ there
would be'a~ditional expense, to put this Rscordak equipment intouse.
The Councilmen unanimously agreed to such direction to City Manager
Holland.
6.a. Concerning insurance coverage of design and/or construction
liability relative tot he Sewage Works Project, Mr. Harvey Brown of
Beery and Brown, the City's Insurance Agent, informed the Council that
he was present at their request, in order that they may consider the
possible renewal of the insurance policy the City is presently paying
for to provide protection to Russell & Axon in the event of an error
or omission in their professional capacity as engineers on the.sewer
project.. Mr. Brown reminded the Council that Russell & Axon carry
insurance on all their other projects in the amount of $150,000.,but
the previous. Council had decided thcS150,000, coverage was not ade-
quate and contracted with Russell & Axon to have their.policy changed
to increase that amount to $500,000. Further, when the contract re-
quirements were not met by Russell & Axon, the Council had purchased
that insurance coverage through a local agent for one year at a cost
of $2,026.42. Mr. Brown informed the Council that the primary prob-
lem i.s when the policy expires,there is no extension of the discovery
period, and the insurance must be in effect at the time an error or
omission is discovered, and the present policy expires September 24th,
1964.
Mr. Talbot moved that the Council let the present insurance policy
in question expire. The motion was seconded by Mr. Barrow.
During lengthy discussion concerning the insurance coverage of
Russell & Axon, the question was asked of Mr. Brown if the insurance
premium would be considerably less for a ~350,000. policy than it was
for the $500~U0. policy.
Mr. Brown informed the Council he would have to investigate that
before giving an answer. City Attorney Adams pointed out that the
present policy has a $5,000. deductible clause,which would not cover
small errors or omissions. Further, if a gross error was detected and
the system didn't operate,.and Russell & Axon were out of business,
said policy would be beneficial to the City.
Mr. Saunders suggested the continuation of said policy until it
was determined how well the system operated.
Mr. Brown stressed that continuity of the policy should be ma~n-
rained if the Council intended to keep the policy in effect.
Following lengthy ~iscussion, and upon call of roll that the
Council let the insurance policy in question expire, Mr. Talbot and
Mayor Avery vote~ in favor of the motion, and Mr~ Barrow, Mr. Croft and
Mr. Saunders were opposed. The motion did not carry.
Mr. Saunders then moved that Mr. Brown be asked to furnish the
Council some facts and figures on the same type policy that is in ex-
istance, but for lesser amounts, at the next Council meeting. The
-5- 8-24-64
motion was seconded by~r. Croft and carried unanimously.
6.b. Concerning lands in violation of Ordinance No. G-560, pertaining
to accumulation of spoil and/or debris, City Clerk Worthing re~orted
that of the original group of lots in violation of said ordinance,
only Lot x, Block 14, Seagate, remained a nuisance.
Mayor Avery informed the Council it was his~nderstanding that
some work had been done on Lot X.
Following discussion, Mr. Barrow moved that the City Manager be
instructed to survey sll 1°ts in violation of Ordinance No. G-560, and
if any lots were found where work had not been started to eliminate
said violation, the 60 day notice,as provided.for in Ordinance No. G-
560,be ms,led to the owner. The motion was secon~ed~byMr. Talbot and'
carried unanimously.
6.c. City Clerk worthing reported that an application hadbeen re-
ceived for water service to Lot 30, Lake Shore Estates, located at ~-'
2013 N. W. 3rd Avenue, and that an abundant supply of water had been
determined to exist in. that area by the Water Superintendent. Fur~
ther,, it was recommended that this application be approved, and as
said Lot 30, Lake Shore Estates was adjacent to the City, an ordinance
would be submitted to Council later this evening proposing annexation
of the property.
Mr. Talbot moved that the water aPPlication for Lot 30, Lake
Shore EStates be approved, the motion being seconded by Mr. Barrow and
unanimously carried.
6.d. Concerning appointment of a Sewer Adjustment Advisory Board,
City Clerk Worthing reported to the'Council as follows~ ."This Council
adopted Ordinance No. G-553 on June 22nd, which, in-part, provided the
establishment of a Sewer Adjustment Advisory Board, such Board to con-
sist of three members, serving without pay, who shall be men or women
residents of Delray Beachand owners of improved real property within
the City, and the City!~ageror a person designated by him who shall
be an ex-officio fourth member of said .Board and act as its executive
secretary, but shall not have a vote thereon. Members of said Board
shall be appointed by the Council to serve a three year term except
that the first appointments shall be as follows: One member to serve
for a period of one year, one member to serve for a period of two years
and..one member to serve for aperiod of three years. Council consider-
ation of this issue'should be given in order that such Board may be
formed during the coming month."
Mayor Avery s.ai~'he"thought the basic areas of the City Should be
represented, and suggested Miss Dorothea Galvin of the Beach section
for the three year term, also as temporary~hairman until a chairman
is selected= Mr. Lens Brunner from the western section of town for
areathe tWOof townYear term~for theandoneMr' yearBenjaminterm. Hoxsie from the central business
Mr. Talbot moved that the appointments and terms ss suggested by
Mayor Avery be approved, sUbject to the a~cep~ance by saidindividuals.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Croft and ca,tied unanimously.
6.e. Concerning possible termination of a parking lot land lease,
City Clerk Worthing reported to Council as follows: "The City entered
into a lease agreement with ~obert A. Vos, under date of November 18,
1963, for use of Lots I through 9, inclusive, Block 124, intending to
use same for parking lot facilities. In 'accordance with certain terms
and conditions contained in said lease, should Council desire to termi-
nate this agreement, a written notice, expressing such intent, may be
given to the lessor, under date of September 18, 1964, and termination
of said lease shall, therefore, becomeeffective .November 18, 1964."
Mr. Barrow ~oved that the notice be given and the lease terminat-
ed, the motion being seconded by Mr. Talbot and unanimously carried.
-6- 8-24-64
6.f. Concerningproposed amendments to the rules and regulations
governing the Delray Beach Cemetery, City Clerk Worthing reported
as follows: "There ~was. attached to the agenda proposed amendments
to the rules and regulations pertaining to sale price of burial plots,
opening and closing charges, percentage of burial rights p~y~pnts to
be set aside fo= deposit in the Perpetual Care Trust Fund~ a~d general
supervision of andconduct of persons within the muniCipallY~Owned
cemeteries. The original rules and regulations governing the cemetery
were adgp~edby Council on motion at a regular Council meeting on May
25th, !95~and these proposed amendments reflect only th~ following
changes, Otherwise incorporating the original operational conditions
of the cemeteries:
'Pr~~e of Lots - All plots in the municipal Cemetery a~ ~ow
.... ~' i~iaiOut or under construction shall cost $125.00 per gl°t
f~!residents, plus an additional $50.00 for a non-resident
· wi~'~o relative who is a resident of the City, except that
P~OtS ~i~ the Pine Ridge section shall~cost .$75.00 per p!0t
fOrresidents, plus an additional $50.00 for a non-re~i~nt
wi~h~o relative who is a resident of the City.
There shall be a cha~ge of $25.00 considered a service
charge, for each interment, and $35.00 as a service charge
for each disinterment.
Ten percent of the purchase price for any burial rights within
the Municipal owned~Cemeteries~ shalI~ be set aside fo~ deposit
into a TRUST FUND to provide for perpetual care of th~ Ceme-
teries. Such perpetual care, whether applied to lots, graves,
or to any space within the confines of the Cemeteries shall
be limited to the income received from the investment of the
,Perpetua/ Care Pund~except that anyprincipal sums in excess
of $25,000.00 may be expended for expansion of or capital im-
p=0~e~ent for~the cemeteries on authorization by the City
CounCil.'
Council adoption, of these amended rules and regulations is re-
commended."
Mr. CrOft moved that~the p~oposed amendment~ be adopted, and the
City Clerk be instr~cted~t~ notify the local 'funeral directors mf said
action, and that'a copy of said regulations be furnished them. The.
motion was seconded byMr. Barrow and carried unanimously.
7. There we~eno petitions and~co~unications.
~-. 8.a. Ci~ Clerk Worthi~ informed the Counoil that Resolution No.
' 1483, a ~ateRoad Department prepared resolution, provides for Council
i authoriz~the execution of a quit claim deed by the proper officials,
conveying~certain Cityowned parcel, of land, lying within the estab-
lished 106 foot right-of-way for West Atlantic Avenue,· in favor of the
state Road Department of Florida, and that adoption of the resolution
is recommended. Further, said parcel of land is a small strip of
right-of-way west of the Seaboard Railroad that the City obtained to
provide better ingress and egress to the induatrial section to the
north.
'~" R~OLUTIONNO. 1483. ·
On motion of Councilma~ C=oft, seconded by Councilman Talbot, the
following Resolution was adopted.
WHEREAS, ~he State Road Department of Florida proposes to improve
that part of State Road S-806, Section 93550,2601, between Sunshine
State Parkway Easterly to Swinton Avenue.
-7- 8-24-64
490
WHEREAS, in order -for ~he '~State. Road Department to further and
complete eaid pro,eot, it is necessary that certain lands now owned
by the City of Delray Beach he acquired by the state of Florida for
the use and benefit of the State Road Department of Florida, and
WHEREAS, the State Road Department having requested the City of
Delray Beach to execute and deliver to the State Road Department a
deed in favor Of the State of Florida conveying all 'right, title and
interest that the City of Delra¥'Beach has in and to said lands re-
quired for rights of way for said State Road and said request having
been duly considered,
NOW~ .THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of t~e City
of Delray Beach, Florida, that the Mayor and Clerk of said Cit~be
and they are hereby authorized and directed to make, execute' and de-
liver to the state Road Department a deed, in favor of the State of
Florida, conveyi~g'a~l right, title and interest of the City of Delray
'Beach in and to said lands owned by the City of DelSey Beach and re-
quired for rights of way for said State Road S-806, S%ction 93550-
2601.
BE IT FURTHER R~SOLVED that two (2) certified copies of this
Resolution be forwarded forthwith to the State Road Department at
Fort -Lauderdale; Florida,
This is to certify that the above and foregoing.'~ion, No.
1483, is a true and accurate copy of a Resolution unanimously passed
by the City .Commission of the City of Delray Beach at a regular meet-
ing held.
witness my hand and official Seal of the City of Delray Beach
this the ' day of ' 1964, A.D.
Resolution No. 1483 was unanimously passed and adopted on motion
by Mr. Croft and seconded by Mr. Talbot.
8.b. City Clerk Worthing presented ORDINANCE NO. G-566.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH CERTAIN LANDS LOCATED IN SECTION'
8, TOWNSHIP 46-SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, WHICH LANDS
ARE CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF
SAID CITY~ REDEFINING TH~ BOUNDARIES OF SAID
'CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LANDS~ PROVIDING FOR THE
~
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID L~NDS~ AND PRO-
~' V~DING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF.
Ordinance No. G-566 was unanimously placed on first reading on
motion by Mr. Barrow and seconded by Mr. Croft
8.c. The City Clerk presented ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH CERTAIN LAND, NAMELY LOT 30, LAKE
SHORE ESTATES, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EX-
ISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY~ REDEFIN-
ING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID
LAND~ PROVIDIN~ FOR THE. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF
SAID LAND~ AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF.
Ordinance No. G-567 was unanimously placed on first reading on
motion by Mr. Talbot and seconded by Mr. Croft.
-8- 8-24-64
9.a. City.Clerk worthing, reported that an amended petition for change
in zoning~ of. Lots 6, ? and 8, Block 4, Southridge Subdivision, was
recently, referred by the Council to the Planning/Zoning Board for'a
hearing ko be held thereon, and read the following Planni~g/Zoning
Board r~gort, dated August 21st~
"A ~blic Hearing was held on August 18th, 1964 at'4=00
o~19ck P.M; in 'the Council Chambers to hear objections
or a~proval on a request to rezone.~.-3, Multiple Fam$!¥
DW~ing District, to C-2, General Commercial Distri¢~t
LOtS 6, ? and 8, Block 4, Southridge Subdivision.
--- T~..property owners were notified. Five of the ten
j~d by letter or in person. One of the petitione~.
aDp~sred and explained the rezoning request.
P~e8~Dt at this meeting were Mr. Lankton, Mr.
K~b~r and Mr. Hanna. A motion was madeby Mr, Kablg~t
s~c~ded by Mr~ Sinks and unanimously approved to
~o COuncil that the request be granted."
Mr. Talbot moved that the recommendation, of the planning.Board
be sustained, the motion being seconded by Mr. Barrow.
Mr. Martin Kummer, a property owner and resident of that area
objected to the rezoning of said Lots 6, ? and 8, Block 4, Southridge
Subdivision, to a C-2 Zone.
It was pointed out that the owners of sa~d property wanted it re-
zoned in order to provide a parking lot for their.bus£ness, and had
promised to place landscaping in front of the fence erected on the
north boundary, which is adjacent to Dixie Boulevard.
Upon call of roll that the recommendation o~ the Planning Board
be sustained, the motion carried unanimously.
It was pointed out that an ordinance would be prepared for pre-
sentation to the Council at their next meeting covering the rezoning
of Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 4, Southridge Subdivision.
10.x. City Attorney Adams reported to Council as follows= "Last week
the Council-directed me to work with the.parties and amend the Ordi-
nance of the Moore property, adjusting the easements and location of
the cul-de-sacs in accordance with the wishes of Dr. Raborn and Mr.
Gracey. Attorney John Moore, representlng Dr-. and Mrs. Moore, said
they felt just a~ending it that fa~ would do th~m no ~ood, so they
withdrew their request."
10.x. City Manager Holiand referred to the f0~owing letter from Mr.
· '-' D.R. Neff, dated August llth, 1964, and recommended that such action
'~ be taken.
"Subject= C-15 Canal Bridges, Semi-Final Estimate.
1. There is attached as enclosure No. 1 a summation of the
final construction costs of the two bridges constructed by
Cleary~Brothers'Const. Co. over C-15 Canal.
2. These fiLal costs have been agreed to by the contractor,
as attested by Mr. Langford's signature.
3. The bridges have now been completed and accepted in accord-
ance with the .plans and specifications.
4. The final cost is $102,410.30 according to my records
we have paid on two partial estimates a total of $45,754.00.
This leaves a balance due'~,~the contractor of $56,656.30.
8-24-64
'4t92
"5. In view of the small, amount of channel material yet
to be moved, and in the absence of final release papers, it
is recommended that $$1,656.30be paid the contractor at'
this time. Mr. Imngford and X~have agreed ~o our retaining
$5,000. until final legal settlement is effected on the con-
tracts"
Mr. Talbot moved that said recommendati~n be approved. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Barrow and unanimously carried.
lO.a. City Clerk Worthing presented Bills for Approval as
GeneraI Fund $ 62,146.94
Water Fund - Operating Fund 3,412.00
cemetery Perpetual Care-Fund 2,000.00
Special Trust Account -
First National Bank of Delray Beach 10,052.00
The bills were unanimously ordered paid on motion by Mr. Barrow
and seconded by Mr. Croft.
The meeting adjourned at 9545 P.M., by order of Ma¥or:~Avery.
R, D. WORTHING
City Clerk
A PPROVSD .-
..... ' .....MA¥o'a ....
-10- 8-24-64