11-18-63SpMtg NOVEMBER 18, 1963
A special meeting was held in the Council Chambers ~ 9z30 A.M.,
Monday, NQvember 18th, 1963, with Mayor Walter Dietz in the Chair,
City Manager Robert J. Holland, City Attorney John Ross Adams, and
Council~S~ A1 C. Avery, Emory J. Barrow, George Talbot, ~., and
Oliver ~i Woodard, Jr., being present.
Ma¥~r ~ietz called the meeting to order and announced that same
had been called for the purpose of consideration of fina~ plans for
development of that tract of land adjacent to and North ~f the Medical
Arts c~er Building. and lying between Andrews Avenue ~ the Intra-
coasta~*~erway, and for any other business that may co~e before the
meeting.
An Opening prayer was delivered by City Clerk Worthing.
City Manager Holland said this meeting resulted from the Council
request that he and the City Engineer meet with Mrs. Edith Moore re-
lative to the points he had brought up concerning drainage, police and
fire protection and garbage and trash pickup, further,.'that a meeting
concerning same had been held last Friday.
City Manager Holland asked that the following letter from ROB-E.
CORPORATION, concerning drainage, dated November 15th, be read:
"Re: Proposed Annexation of Property Owned by Rob-E. Corporation
and Robert L. Moore, Jr., and Edith C. Moore, his wife.
with reference to the above captioned proposed annexation,
please be advised that the undersigned will provide drainage
so that the water will follow the contour of the ~and and
drain from the east to the west as far as the cul de sac and
then will drain from the cul de sac to the finger canal lying
contiguous to the property on the north; such latter drainage
will be accomplished by the use of storm sewer pipes of what-
ever diameter is specified by the City, and such storm sewer
pipe will be placed within the boundaries of a six foot ease-
ment.
The above described drainage ~hall be designed by a qualified
engineer and shall be approved by the City prior to the con-
struction thereof. All construction shall be in accordance
with City standards, and City representatives shall have
access to the premises to inspect the construction at all
times during said construction period. No further building
permits will be issued on the aforesaid premises until said
system is completed to the satisfaction of the City.
Please be further advised that the undersigned do hereby agree
to save the City of Delray Beach harmless from any expenses in-
curred by the City, which are necessitated because of any im-
proper installation of the drainage or of the grading, insofar
as the same may pertain to the above captioned property."
City Manager Holland then asked that the folIowing letter, also
dated November 15th, 1963, be read:
"Re: proposed Annexation of Property Owned by Rob-E.
Corporation and Robert L. Moore, Jr., and Edith C.
Moore, his wife.
1t,18-63
"This letter will serve to supplement the sketch which
accompanies it in that~
1. PARKING - There shalI be nO parking required on the
twenty-foot right-of-way in that ample off-street parking
will be provided.
2. GARBAGE AND TRASH PICKUP - Ample space has been pro-
vided for garbage and trash pickup, as is more particularly
shown by said sketch.
3. FIRE AND'POLICE PROTECTION', ~he~e shall be ample
space provided for fire tru~ks or police cars to get in '
and out of the property with no probiem.~'
Concerning the sketch' ~eferred to in the letter, Mayor Dietz said
this sketch only concerns Lot 25 and asked about a sketch of the de-
velopment of Lots 24 and 11.
Attorney John Moore said there had'been no concrete plans set .for
the westerly construction, but whatever is done would have to be don~
in compliance with the City Ordinances, rules and regulations.
Mr. Woodard asked if Lots 11 and 24 were deveIoped, would the
owner be in agreement that the paved street right-of-way continue
we~t '~lon~ the same line the sketch indicates with another cul-de-sac
at 'the foot of that.
Attorney Moore replied that he did not think that was contemplated,
but there would be an easement lying to the West of the first cul-de-
sac.
Mr. Woodard asked how the two lots would be serviced without a
street running to'them.
Mrs. Edith C..Moore of Pelican Lane ex"~lained that the sketch
presented stopped at the cul-de-sac as the remaining land consists
of one building lot, further, the sketch showed where the garbage and
trash would be picked up at the cul-de-sac, and the development of the
land would be similar to Lanikai which development lies between
Gleason Street and'South Ocean Boulevard.
Mrs. Moore was asked how far it was from the Westerly foot of the
cul-de-sac to the Intracoastal waterway, to which Mrs. Moore said she
believed there was about five hundred feet, about two hundred feet of
which was under water at the Westerly end. Mrs.'Moore further stated
they had planned to put boat docks at the Westerly end to service any
apartments, and they propose to sell apartments at approximately
~30,000.00 each.
Mr. Woodard asked the City Manager if the'City now has services
that would be comparable to what is proposed here, and whether this
five hundred feet would be in line with what is now'being performed,
to which the City Manager said there would be · twenty foot access
street, and if there was any trash beyond the first cul-de,sac the
street would have to continue to a second cul-de-sac further West.
Mayor Dietz said that woul~ be a large piece of property to be
land-locked.
Mrs. Moore said the whole tract is approximately 883 feet long,
less approximately 200 feet under water would leave 683 feet to be
serviced, and that the sketch shows a roadway of ~36 feet.
Mayor Dietz said every lot i~ the City of Delray Beach is entitled
to a connection to the sewer system and it ~ould be impossible to con-
nect this property if there was no access into it.
-2- 11-18-63
Mr~ Woodard me~tioned a 10 foot easement extending Westerly from
the 20 foot road and col-de, sa9, and asked if the owner would be
agreea%le to continue the 20 foot road right-of-waywhich would serve
.two ·purposes by giving the easement necessary for any services su~
as the sewer and also give a protection on paving.
. Section 4 of Ordinance ,No. G-508 was referred to, which Ordinance
annexes said property to the City of Delray Beach,.said Section 4 being
as follows=
"That the owners will dedicate the South twenty (20') feet of
said .Lot 25 for public roadway with a Cul-De-Sac at the West
terminal thereof and further provide for granting an ~asement
over the South ten (10~) feet of Lots 24 and 11 of said Model
Land Company Sub. in Section 9, Township 46 S., Range 43 E.,
for ingress and egress to the West boundary line of said
property, and shall further provide for an easement over the
Worth six (6') feet of the South twenty-six (26') feet of
said Lot 25~for utility purposeS.".
Mr. Talbot suggested a 25 foot· roadway and a smaller set back,
possibly ten feet and if a variance is needed,that c0uld also be
given~ to which Mayor Dietz said he would be in agreement.
Mrs. Moore asked 'if it was 9ossible to only annex Lot 25 at this
time and improve it and then discuss the development of the other two
io'~s, to which Mayor Dietz said he would personally object.
There was lengthy discussion as to where a 25 foot road right-of-
way would be located and Mrs. Moore said she did not want it to abut
the. South property line,_but to be at least two feet North in order
to gi~e her room for plantings to screen her property from the com-
mercial property to the South.
Ma~or Dietz suggested that Mrs. Moore work on her plans, since she
knows the desires of the Council, and bring plans back to the. Con,nell
that would suit her and the Council, and in the meantime the Council
rescind their action on the first and second reading of the Ordinance
so she would not be pressed for time.
Attorney John Moore commented= "Specifying that there will b~ a
25 foot right-of-way along with the setbacks, that the Council has
decided to give, the 5 feet, provided that th~s will be the North 25
feet of the South 27 feet, further, that no overhang shall be within
10 feet of the SoUth property line. I think that.takes care of the
thing."
Mr. Woodard c~.~men~= "And further, Attorney Moore, that the
col-de-sac would~ at~e Western terminus of the 2S foot right-of-
way line. Let us ~eview .... Attorney Moore has proposed that the
North 25 feet of the South 27 feet, giving two feet for plantings,
be a dedicated right-of-way, and my question was then that I assume
you would include in that,, that the cul-de-sac is now designed for
Lot 25,wpuld be at the West terminus of the road rather than at the
We~t edge of Lot 25, or you could put two if you so desired, but
there would be at least one cul-de-sac at the west foot of the road."
~. Avery pointed out that valuable canal frontage would be de-
stroyed if Mrs. Moore wa's required to give a road right~of-way to
th~ Waterway and provide a cul-de-sac at that location, 'that it would
be proper for the road to terminate at the East line of the Wester!y
lot.
Mrs. Moore informed the Council that she had no objection to giving
~5 feet for a road, but.asked that'she only be required to pave 20
feet of said road, and reminded the Council that Andrews Avemue was
only paved to a width of 20 feet, and in that way whe would be able to
use the other 5'feet for parking as is done in other parts of the city
-3- 11-18-63
Mr. Talbot suggested that parallel parking be permitted on the
~ North side of said 25 foolt road right-of-way, and only a 10 foot set-
1back requirement be made.
Mrs. Moore questioned just how far to the West she would have to
.give a roadway, and Mr. Avery commented as follows: "Let me ask her
· a question in an attempt to.clarify. If you develop both .of these
lots as an entity with one building on both of these lots, which can
be done,' then the cul-de-sac would only be placed at the Eastern most
end of that property, it wouldn't go to the second lot because the
building as an entity would cover two lots. If you decide to develop
the last lot as one lot then you are going to have to run the road
down and put a cul-de-sac at the Eastern most end of the last lot."
Mrs. Moore explained that the first building may be built a little
longer than was originally planned and the cul-de-sac would be placed
a little further West than shown on the sketch, and the CounCilmen
said that would be agreeable.
Attorney Nail MacMillan, representing Dr. R. E. Raborn, informed
the Council that Dr. Reborn would have no objection if the Moores .
would extend the 25 foot road on to-the Intracoastal Waterway or
close to it, plus a ]0 foot easement of which there would be no
variances as far as overhang is concerned.
Mr. AVery informed Attorney MacMillan that Mrs. Moore may want to
develop the Western lot on the Intracoastal Waterway and it would be
unfair to ask her to place a roadway into that lot,. and that the
road should only go to the Eastern part of the property she was going
to develop.'
Attorney MacMillan said they wanted to know Just how far the road
would go, and instead of a 10 foot easement he had intended to say a
10 foot set back, with no variances as far aa overhang is concerned.
Mayor Dietz commented: "As far as Mrs. Moore-is concerned, she
doesn't have to be put to the expense of a cul-de-sac a.way dow~
there. She just wants to develop the front part ofher property on
Andrews Avenue, so she puts a cul-de-sac where she has it now, on
the Westerly border of Lot 25. Later on when she develops she will
extend that road right .through the cul-de-sac and put another Cul-(]e-
sac when she has her plans."
Attorney MacMillan said Dr. Reborn would have no objectionto the
cul-de-sac stopping at the East edge of Lot 11.
Mr. Robert Gracey, speaking in behalf of the Christenson families,
informed the Council that he wanted to be sure there would be no
chance of an apartment building being constructed only two feet from
commercial property, as he felt there could be according to Ordinance
No. ~-508.
Mr. ~racey was informed that the provision of the proposed ordi-
nance permitting a building ova=hang had been-eliminated.
Mayor Dietz commented: "As I understand what they have suggested
there could be no building closer than 35 feet to the property that
Mr. Gracey s~eaks of under the plan that we have been talking about
thismorning."
~4r. Gracey asked: "That would be the whole way to the Intracoastal
Waterway?"
Mayor Dietz answered: "Thetis correct."
Mr. Gracey: "From the Christenson property to the South, at any
point. That clears that point. There is one other point. It was
-4- 11-18-63
suggested in here that in one case here we have a great scarcity of
land and a 20 foot road is all that is necessary at one point. ~ow
w~ are talking about a 25 foot r~d, and suddenly there is enough
land that the 25 feet can begin two feet North of the property to
the south of it. Now what this would do is cut off a u~y road from
.the c~m~rcial property to the South which for fire o~ 9nything else
means '~m&t Mia proposed road, fire engines, police, ~bege or any-
thi,g oouid .or go. this proposed road end access to
the com~rcial property to the South. To me it is an~a~Surdity to
run a street and set-it back two feet."
Mr. Avery informed Mr. Gracey that if he owned this t~pe of pro-
perty h~ certainly would not aedicate a street on res~8~tial propert]'
to ser~i~e commercial property, further, he certainly wpuld reserve a
strip ~n ord'Sr to landscape out the commercial building~.
Mr. Gracey q~stioned the change in the width of the'road and
said it being l~ated two feet from the South propertP'line was
rather unusual.
Mrs. Edith Moore answered: "The reason for that iS, I ~idn~t
want ~ ~ve any more land, but they have changed the se~acks on
I am back where I was to start with. You were origi:all~ planning
a 20 foot road and · 20 foot set back. Now you are planning ~ 25
foot road and a 10 foot setback . so I have really gained 5 feet.
~ hud never really approved'of putting any road on that South side
because I think commercial property can ruin'a residential area. and
I think anybody in my position would rather landscape it with t~ll
australian pines. Actually these apartments are going to look across
a very b~autiful yacht basin at houses that are in the $50,000.00
price bracket. I am trying to provide a buffer between the com-
mercial and ~his residential property."
Mayor Dietz informed Mrs. Moore that while satisfying her, the
other property owners also have to be satisfied.
Mrs. Moore continued: "I wish to develop the property, I wish
to bring this amount of ta~ money into the City of'Delray. It can
remain in the County if' it is so desired."
Mayor Dietz commented: "Would you rather stay in the County2 I
wish, with what we have now, that you would~ I don~t think it is an
advantage to Delray Beach. I sincerely think that you should be
given the opportunity to think this through. We shouldn't, in the
interest of a few tax dollars, get an-insurmountable Problem in the
City of Delray Beach, and'i for one would certainly Vote for the
recision of this."
Mrs. Moore said it seems that anything beyond Lot 25 is at ques-
tion. That L0t.25 is approximately.336 feet deep with 110 foot front.
age on a street, and asked if that lot could be accepted into the
city.
Mayor Dietz informed Mrs.'Moore that land-locked County land is
not desirable.
Attorney Moore commented: "Mr. Mayor, I think we are very close
except on two points. The one point is the two foot strip that the
Moor~. wish to leave at the South of their property an~ I see n°
reason why the City should make them dedicate something they don't
want to as long as they dedicate a 25 foot street which meets the
City requirements~ No. two, is how far West shall the dedication
go? It should not go as far as the East boundary-of Lot 11 because
that is only about 100 feet, and is all under water. The next i00
feet is also under water, and it should be left to good planning, I
think."
. ~- 11-18-63
'' ':Mayor Dietz inform_ed:Attorney M~ore that LOt 11 is 200 feet deep,
~h~refore it would all 'be ~i~der water, and that Lot 24 is 336 feet
deep; ....
Attorney Moore informed the Council that approximately 100 feet of
Lot 24 would also be un, er.Water.
Mrs. Moore commented: "If Lot' 11 is 200 feet deep, then you are
'asking for me to bring the cul-de-sac to the edge of the water line.
That is not practical as we want a buiiding~lo~ on the intracoastal
Waterway."
Mayor Dietz answered: "We are saying you must say there will he
a 25 foot road, that there will be .a 10 foot set back, tha~ there
will, under your present building plans, be a cul-de-sac on the West
boundary of Lot 25 and at a later date when the land is developed the
cul-de-sac will have to be put in a~ the .end o~ the road to the satis-
faction of the City."
Mrs. Moore: "To the existing building lot. That seems logical."
Mayor Dietz: "~'m not going alon~ on the 2 feet. I see no need
of having a 2 foot piece of land between.ihe road and property line."
Mr. Avery commented: "As far as the two feet is concerned, it
would seem to me, as. far as this individual property owner iS con-
cerned, it is up to their judgment, I .can see where if you force
this property owner to place this right at the property line, then it
opens up to the commercial property a commercial street Where com-
mercial vehicles can come down and c0mplete!~ ruin this residential
development. Also, it leaves this property'.~er the two feet, which
I think that any of us would require, to l~n~cape out the back of
commercial property. If the commercial property, wants a street back
there, then they can dedicate the property of.:their own to put it in
and she still has her two foot str. ip that she =an landscape out. I
thank the property owner is entitled to the protec$ion, and'it doesn't
concern his property."
Mayor Dietz commented: "I think we have a meeting of the 'minds,
so what is the proper procedure,Counselor?"
Mr. Avery asked if the abeyance could be lifted subject (o what
has been discussed.
Prom the audience, Dr'. Reborn said, regardin~ the drainage, he did
not feel the two 'foot strip should impede drainage to the finger
canal.
Mrs. Moore commented: "Dr. Raborn's parking lots have been so
graded, he made it very high on the west side of his property and
very high on the East side of his. property on a portion of the parking
lots, and .very low in the rear of his property so some of his parking
lot to the East and some of his parking lot to the West and all o~
his parking lot to the North presently drain onto our property. This
is why he wishee to have a drain connecting his property through
property into the yacht basin. I will be perfectly willing to drain
Dr. Raborn's property after he has caused me all this trouble."
Mayor Dietz commented:. ".Then it would be, .you would probably have
this same problem on the second cul-del-sac. You will have to get
rid of the w~ter on the second".cul-de-sac, so. in this motion, you
have to drain water off of thi;first cui-de-sac, 'and then have to
drain it off of the second one,"
Mrs. Moore replied thatWhen the Christianson's.~improved .their pro-
perty perhaps they could be asked not to drai~ on the Moore property,
-6- 11-18-63
and continued: "I will drain everything properly on my own property
and when the Christianson property is developed, I think it would
behoove them to not drain onto our property 'like Dr. Reborn chose
to drain onto it."
Mayor Dietz asked what the legal procedure was at this time and
commented as follows: "This is for the record, there will be a
street dedicated, 25 feet running East and west the full length of
the p=Operty tO Lot 11 line."
City Attorney Adams said this would be the North 25 'feet of the
South 27 feet Of the property.
MayOr Dietz continued: "There will be, under the present plan of
constr~Otion, she is only going to develop Lot 25, but there will be
a proper cul-de-sac, an 80 foot'diameter cul-de-sac, which will touch
the WeS~ edge of Lot 25. There will be a 6 foot easement running
North and South from this cul-de-sac to take the drainage into the
finger ca,al. At a later date, if and when lot 24 is developed, there
will be a cul-de-sac provided in accordance with the directions of
the City a~ that particular time. There will also have to be a
drainage easement provided, I presume North and South~,'from that cul-
de-sac as f~Om the first cul£de-sac. The setback'" lines of the
buildings be ten feet from the property line from the street right-
of-way, and that the buildings do not overhang. Further, that the
street be paved to a width of 25 feet so as to allow parallel parking.
There shalI be n° angular parking, it shall be parallel parking and
parking limited to the North side of the street. I think that covers
the points we have discussed here this morning."
Mrs. MOore answered: "Now, I am a little bit confused. If we
put another cul-de-sac in later then I see no reason why we should
maintain two cul-de-sacs, provided we maintain two drainage areas."
Mayor Dietz answered: "If you want to build now on Lot 25 and
the cul-de-sac down on Lot 24 you don't have to put the firs% one,
but you have to have the drainage. Now how will the drainage be
handled?"
Mrs. Moore: "We will have to provide Dr. Raborn drainage as I
see it because of improper grading."
Mayor Dietz said if the street is built by the developer and meets
all of the specifications of the City of Delray Beach, there should
be nothing else in the laws of the City of Delray Beach changed
through this agreement, only the points specifically agreed upon,
Mr. Avery asked Mrs. Moore if things were clear in her mind now
about the entire set-up.
Mrs. Moore answered: "This parallel parking to the street is a
little confusing to me. Let's suPPose we dedicate the 25 foot street
and then have a ten foot set-back, that is 35 feet. We may even, of
our own accord, have a 12 foot set-back.
Mayor Dietz commented: "! think I anticipate your question. You
can have angular parking if yo~u take the front of your cars in on
your land a bit, but the idea is if it takes 7 feet to park a car
parallel, that gives only an 18 foot road."
~s. Moore: "That is what I was going to ask you. How much park-
ing will you require~ Pa=allel'parking will take up seven feet, and
I could still angular p~rk~XDvi.d~g I use 'some of my own set-back."
~eyor Dietz was in agreement a~ sa~d a car parked in an angular
poeit~on must not come out within the 18 feet of required roadway,
ahd'iasked Mrs. Moore if that was a meeting Of'minds as far 'as she
' ~MaY°r Dietz said he felt ~here was.a meeting of minds as far as
Mrs. Moore and Dr. Reborn are concerned, but not as far as Mr. Gracey
is concerned.
. · . Mr, Gracey said One of'the, reaSonS th~'¥c~e up was because of
the lack of a de4icated "drainage eaSement*a~?:the end of a proposed
cul-de-sac, and Mayor Dietz informed Mr. Gracey that a drainage ease-
mentwas being provided in the mo~ion now being considered.
Mayor Dietz commented as follows: "As to the matter of legality
her~, the:order is stayed, this Order should be changed by one motion
changing the conditions:'ofOrdinance No, G-508' as outlined here and
once that OrdinanCe 'is ch~n~ed then a motion to remove the. stay on
the Ordinance. We don't want to remove the stay .before we modify
the Ordinance."
Mr. Gracey asked if the drainage easement at the second proposed
cul-de-eac would extend from the North edge of the property' to the
South edge of the property, and Mayor Dietz said it would drain that
area on an easement 6 feet wide, running North and SOuth.
Mr. Gracey asked if the easement would extend from one boundary
to the other and Mayor Dietz replied as followS: "At this motion
here she is not required to put in two cul,de-sacs, she is only re-
quired to put in one, but she has to take care of the'drainage that
comes~from Dr. Raborn's property through ~n easement."
Mrs. Moore commented: ."If'I dOn't'put a cul-de,sac there I will
; still~%ake~ care of '~r. Raborn~s ~rainage.'' MrS. Moore als0 said. if
the Chri~stianson.'s improved their pro~rty she would expect them to
drain.it to the Intracoastal Waterway'inStead of to-her propertY.
'.~'?~", M~0r.~Dietz commented: "The records are clear,., ~nd. the motion
wi!l' pertain to the reco[d,~that is.clear.." May0~".~t~'tz~sked'each
Councilman if he was clear'as to what was intend'ed-in,the motion'and
Mr. A~.ery commented as follows: "Mr. Mayor,did yoUj.~%ate that sh:e
would.be' given the right to have the two feet on~.t~e South side of
~Ma~or Dietz answered: "I/~'%nderstood it to be-,that she could put
this road where she wanted as iong as the r0~d'!was 25. feet wide and
that the set-back was ten feet."
City'Attorney Adams asked if the letter 0f November' lSth 6on-
cerning drainage had been incorporated in the motion, as it was in
detail as to what was expected.
Mayo~ Dietz said to incorporate the letters iD the motion there
must 'not be anything taken a~ay from the motion tha%!'h~-~been out-
lined on the tape.
Cit~ A~'torney Adams: '"..The' oniy th'!np'that w0~ld be':-chaflg~would
be the parking in the second lette~ 6f-November'lSth. ~'The'~'ag~eed
that there would be no parking on the right-of-way, so that would
be the O~ly variance/ otherwise it will be the game."
Mayo~'Dietz: "Then we' ~ill.alao include ~he letter of November
15th, but calling attention to the fact that Item':No.~ 1'no longer
applies bpcause the road !~ to be 25 feet instead of 20 feet and the
set-backbein~'.10.feet will allow parallel parking.
Ci~yAttOrDp~damsi '"Also~ we w~t to get some instrumentde-
Mayor Dietz: "How-~ we go about that? we don't want to unstay
this. This thing is stayed and we have to get it to remain stayed
until the Counselor advises that legally everything has been done."
Mr. Avery: "May I suggest a motion to eee if it accomplishes the
things ~h~t we want. I move the abeyance be lifted as 9~ this time
subjea~ ~ the conditions as enumerated by the Mayor a~d incorporating
the tw~ ~tters dated November 15th from ROB-E CORPO.RA.T~Q~, but
Mr. W~0dard said he would second the motion for di~g~ssion pur-
poses.
Mayor D~etz: "Again, let me caution you'that by lSf~g this and
actin~ oh'-the 'amendments la~er,"you may e~tabliSh a 19~ailsitUation
that~'yoUwoUid not have if yo~ am&nde~ the oFdinan~e ~then removed
the st~, in other words---~-."
Mr. Avery said he did not actually make a motion b~t had said he
wanted t~hrase a motion and see if the City Attorne~'w~Uld say it
was wh~t :~he City. wanted'. .
MayoF ~$etz suggested that the action be taken in tw~ steps, as he
~ityAttorney Adams asked what the two steps were 'and Mayor Dietz
answered: "My steps were that we amend'as outlinedby Ai~ Ordinance
No. G-5.09, and we vote on it. Then once we haWe'amended .it we take
another vote removing thestay tha't ~ against Ordinance No. G-508,
but we do have to'make provisi~n somewhere that Mrs. Moore present
to us these rights-of-way and everythSng. The~have.to legally be
presented to the City andcongg~uentl~ it~would be g~od business,
and I would insist if it was my private business, that these,rights-
i,,,-of-way be given to me befo~e I lifted a~y stay, but if John Ross
"Adams feels differently about that I will acquies~e.,.
City Attorney Adams: "~.believe that' might be the Prudent way to
do ~i, I think at t~esame t~me, at ~he.next m~eting, we oUght to
presenta rewritten amended ordinance just so everybody understands.
we-probably should reduce this ordinance to writing incorporatin~
ail.the th~ngs that have been Said for the future Council."
At~gr~ey Moore said he felt this ~o~ld cause further delay, and
MayO~!D%gtz s~id~he .did no.t f991 delg~ was as ~portant as getting
this~ r~ght for the citY ~f 'De~ray"Be~h. ' '
City Attorney Adams commented~ "I am not suggesting that we
follow this co~rse at all times, but I believe the Ordinance ~uld
be orally amended as' you suggest. That w~ could amend the Ordinance
accordingly."
Attorne~.~ore informed the Counc~ that he coUld obtain the right-
of-way deed for the City today.
Mayor Dietz~said he would want ~he right to vote on the amended
Ordinance after he sees it in print.
Mr. Avery asked if that would permit Mrs. Moore to'start to work
i~ediately on the plans she has, to whichMayor Dietz replied that
Mrs..Moore's plans may be Ch~nged as she is now considering, a cul-
de-sac furthe~ Westi
' There was discuss~on of a special meeting at' a time when the City
Attorney would'~v~the amende~ Ordinance prePAred ~d the City Clerk
informed CounCilthat a spec~91.meeting was necessary this Week to
canvass the returns of the'Primary Election to:be h~id on November
19th.
-9~ 11-18-1963
~o~lowing discussion, Mayor' Dietz asked if h~ could have a motion
to consider this item in its final form at a special meeting at 1~30
P.M., Thursday, November 21, 1963, it being so moved by Mr. Woodard,
seconded by Mr. Talbot and unanimously carried.
City Clerk Worthing suggested this amendment be taken care of in
the form of an emergency ordinance, to which City'Attorney Adams said
he did not believe that was necessary, but the second reading could
be amended.
MaY6r Dietz commented as follows= "I have a matter here that I
am terribly disturbed about. This Council took action relative to
Cleary Brothers, and I read here in the paper and I want Bob Holland
to tell his City Engineer that I am not bluffing. It says here that
the C~ty ~gineer agreed there is a bluff£ng game going on and noted
neither side wants to back down. There is no bluff on my part, when
I voted in this Council, and will you please restrain your City Engi-
neer from making comments about Council action. It is in the Sun
Sentinel the 15th of November and I want that verbatim in the records.
Mayor Dietz commented further: "Now in the Palm Beach Post of
November 14,. 1963, 'I asked the City to purchase these trusses when
I found that they were available with the thought in mind to improve
our City garage. The item was eliminated from the budget for the
y~ar 1963-64.' These are quotes in the Palm Beach Post. 'The parti-
cular point I was concerned about 'was the statement which I read in
the paper that the trusses were unuseable and would bring only a few
dollars for junk. I don't 'agree with this statement the City said,
owing to the fact that the trusses can be sold today for the same a-
mount of money, $5,200.00 to a local contractor. ! shall'inform the
~ouncil that the trusses can be disposed of should they see fit to
~ so, he stated. He added I'm hoping that they decide to keep them.
we need the garage.'.' ! can only suggest in the best interest of
everyone concerned that these trusses be sold, and if you have the
possibility,_Mr.' Holl&nd. t6 sell them, I suggest strongly you do.,
because there is ~Oing to be e lot of action on this in the next
.Council. It's illegal and if you have a customer, you se11{~ and
you will save aiot of'trouble. A lot of trouble. I would '~ike that
in the records verbatim."
Mr. Woodard commented: "I would like to follow up on the point
that the Mayor made that 'if we have a customer, perhaps we should
consider the sale of these trusses. I think what has taken place as
regards the original purchasing of the trusses, at the moment, is not
what we are considering here. As you know I was not in favor of pur-
chasing them in the first place, so I am in favor of selling them
right now. What is the feeling of the rest of the Council~"
Mr. Avery suggested that the Council consider any legitimate offer
for the trusses.
Following discussion, Mr. Woodard moved that the City Administra-
tion advertise ssid steel trusses for sale, and the Council entertain
any offers they might receivel Mr. Woodard said he understands the
Council has the opportUnity of accepting or rejecting any offers that
might be received. The motion was seconded by Mr. Avery and carried
unanimously.
Mr. Avery informed the-Council of a request from the Elks Club to
sponsor a Jungle Land Kiddie Ride, Tuesday night, November 19th, on
some property owned by Col~.'D~gal G. Campbell, said property lying
South of West Atlantic Avenue. and between 2nd and 3rd Avenues, and
moved that permission for this be granted and the permit fee be
waived. The motion was seconded by Mr. Talbot and carried unani-
mously.
-10- 11-18-63
Mr. Woodard commented as follows= "I met from eight o'clock this
morning until nine-thirty wi.th some members of the'Boaxd of Directors
of the Chamber of Commerce and some downtown business men to discuss
thle parking hassle, and it was a very useful meeting and very bene-
ficial and I think we all left there with the best of feelings. To
sum the discussion up, it is understood that ...... . Mr. Worthing
has.handed me this letter from the Chamber of Commerce, dated Nov-
ember 18th." Mx. Woodard read the letter SS follows=
"At a called meeting of the Board of Directors of the Delray
Beach Chamber of Commerce, Friday, November 15, 1963, the
following resolution was passed:
'That the Mayor. and City Council be informed that the Board
of Directors of the Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce is in
complete favor of the City acquiring downtown parking area,
but that the Board disfavors the sale or trade of City pro-
perty to obtain this parking space.'"
Mr. Woodard then continued= "A~ the time I heard of this meeting
I thought it would be better if I did not attend as I did not want
to get into an argument about the subject. After the meeting this
morning, I feel that I.probably should have attended the meeting, and
if I had been at the'meeting I think perhaps a different decision
might have been reached. At any rate, ! indicated at the meeting
this morning that we would receive the appraisal of the properties
that are now being appraised. That personally my own feeling was
that if the appraisal came through equitably within a reasonable
amount that I personally would recommend the exchange be made. If
the appraisal did not come through indicatingan equitable value I
would then be opposed to the exchange. In any case I think that I
would like to see Jack Kablsr added to this parking committee and
that his thinking be included with the thinking of the others on
the additional efforts that the City may make in providing additional
parking areas in other sections of town. There certainly is a feelin~
that there are other blocks that also should have parking provided
for them and that the method of approaching these additional areas
is by purchase of the property. I think that, just to bring you up
to date on the discussion, at such time as we receive these ap-
praisals we should consider our action at that time."
Mr. Talbot reported that he had abstained from voting at the
Chamber of Commerce meeting last week, further, that everyone was
highly complimentsry of Mr. Woodard in the job he had done on this
item.
Mr. Avery moved that Mr. Woodard be given the authority to
point any additional persons to the Committee that he may deem neces-
sary to provide the proper job. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Talbot and carried unanimously.
_ Mr. Woodard then asked that Jack Kabler and Dick Jebb, subject
to their acceptance, be sent a letter inviting them to participate
in the activities of the Parking Committee.
The meeting adjourned at 11=00 A.M., by order of Mayor Dietz.
R. D. WORTHING
City Clerk
APPROVED:
MA YOR
-11- 11-18-63