Res 55-95 RESOLUTION NO. 55-95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, VACATING AND ABANDONING A
PORTION OF NORTHEAST 1ST COURT RIGHT-OF-WAY, AS MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, BUT RESERVING AND
RETAINING TO THE CITY AN EASEMENT OVER THE ENTIRE
AREA THEREOF UTILITY AND ACCESS PURPOSES.
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, Florida, received an
application for abandonment of a portion of Northeast 1st Court, lying
east of N.E. 7th Avenue at the eastern end of N.E. 1st Court adjacent
to the Intracoastal Waterway; and
WHEREAS, the application for abandonment of a portion of the
Northeast 1st Court right-of-way was processed pursuant to Section
2.4.6(0), "Abandonment of Rights-of-Way", of the Land Development
Regulations of the City of Delray Beach; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(O)(3)(d), the
Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, formally reviewed
this item on July 17, 1995, and voted unanimously to recommend denial
of the request; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, finds that its interest in the described property is no
longer needed for the public good and deems it to be in the best
interest of the City of Delray Beach to vacate and abandon said
right-of-way, but retaining and reserving to the City an easement over
the entire area thereof for the purpose of public and emergency access
and constructing and/or maintaining either over or under the surface
poles, wires, pipes, sewers, drains or other facilities used for
various public utilities whether owned by the City or private
corporations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLQWS:
~ That pursuant to Chapter 177.101(5) and Chapter
166 of the Florida Statutes, it is hereby determined to vacate and
abandon all right and interest it holds to the following real
property, but retaining and reserving to the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, an easement over the entire area thereof for the purpose of
public and emergency access and constructing and/or maintaining either
over or under the surface poles, wires, pipes, sewers, drains or other
facilities used for various public utilities whether owned by the City
or private corporations, more particularly described as follows:
**Res. #55-95 was initially approved by the City Commission on
August 8, 1995 (4-0 vote). It was reconsidered by the City
Commission on October 10, 1995, at which time a motion to
rescind Res. %55-95 passed by a vote of 4 to 1 (Mayor Lynch
dissenting).
PARCEL 1: A proposed vacated right-of-way, being a
portion of N.E. 1st Court, Delray Beach, Florida, and
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of that part of the
South One-Half (S 1/2) of the North One-Half (N 1/2)
of Block 139, lying West of the Intracoastal
Waterway, MAP OF THE TOWN OF LINTON, a subdivision as
recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, in the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and being a
point on the Westerly Right-of-Way line of the
Intracoastal Waterway, as recorded in Plat Book 17,
Page 16A, in the Public Records of Palm Beach County,
Florida, and a point on the Northerly Right-of-Way
line of N.E. 1st Court; thence run South 7 degrees
43' 38" West, along said Westerly Right-of-way line
of the Intracoastal Waterway, a distance of 20.18
feet to a point, also being the extended center line
of N.E. 1st Court; thence run North 90 degrees 00'
00" West, along said extended center line, a distance
of 6.00 feet to a point on a curve, said curve having
a tangent bearing of North 7 degrees 43' 38" East;
thence run Northwesterly along the arc of said curve
to the left, a distance of 34.11 feet to a point of
tangent and a point on the North Right-of-way line of
said N.E. 1st Court, said curve having a central
angle of 97 degrees 43' 38", a radius of 20.00 feet
and a tangent of 22.90 feet; thence run South 90
degrees 00' 00" East, along said North Right-of-way
line, tangent to the previously described curve a
distance of 28.90 feet to the Point of Beginning of
Parcel 1.
TOGETHER WITH
~ A proposed vacated right-of-way, being a
portion of N.E. 1st Court, Delray Beach, Florida, and
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 28,
SEESTEDT-STEVENS SUBDIVISION, a subdivision as
recorded in Plat Book 18, Page 3, in the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and a point on
the Westerly Right-of-way line of the Intracoastal
Waterway, as recorded in Plat Book 17, Page 16A, in
the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida;
- 2 - Res. No. 55-95
thence run North 90 degrees 00' 00" West, along the ~
North line of said Lot 28 and the South Right-of-way
line of N.E. 1st Court, a distance of 23.47 feet to a
point of curve; thence run Northeasterly along the
arc of said curve to the left, a distance of 28.72
feet to a point on said curve, also being a point on
the extended center line of said N.E. 1st Court, said
curve having a central angle of 82 degrees 16' 22", a
radius of 20.00 feet, a tangent of 17.47 feet and a
tangent bearing North 7 degrees 43' 38" East; thence
run South 90 degrees 00' 00" East, along said
extended center line of N.E. 1st Court, a distance of
6.00 feet to a point on the said Westerly
Right-of-way line of the Intracoastal Waterway;
thence run South 7 degrees 43' 38" West, along said
Westerly Right-of-way line a distance of 20.18 feet
to the Point of Beginning of Parcel 2.
Containing 0.01 acre, more or less.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the 1st day of
August, 1995.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
- 3 - Res. No. 55-95
N.E. 2NB S7.
,, N.J. is-r,,,,, ct.
rD
..... t t~' LOW~Y
N.E. 1ST ST.
ATLANTIC VETERAN
PLAZA PARK
N N.E. 1ST COURT
,~,.- 0..~,,,, ABANDONMENT
~ OF' DEl,RAY I!~*.0t, F~
-- ~r~ ~~ --
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: ~CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: A~ENDA ITEM.# ~'~ '- MEETING OF OCTOBER 10. 1995
RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 55-95 ABANDONING A
PORTION OF N.E. /ST COURT
DATE: OCTOBER 6, 1995
This is before the Commission to reconsider a previously approved
resolution (No. 55-95) which abandons a portion of right-of-way
located adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway at the eastern end
of N.E. 1st Court.
The property owners located adjacent to the right-of-way (the
Hanleys and the Busschers) petitioned for the abandonment in
order to control access through the area. The Planning and
Zoning Board considered the request on July 17, 1995, and
forwarded a unanimous recommendation of denial based on it being
contrary to the City's Comprehensive Plan Coastal Element
Objective B-1 which calls for enhanced accessibility to the
public beach areas and waterways. The Board felt this action
could set a precedent for future requests and that it would be
difficult to ensure access would remain available to residents of
the street over time.
At the August 8th City Commission meeting, Mr. Hanley presented
his request and the Commission voted 4 to 0 to approve the
abandonment, subject to resolution of all legal issues with the
City Attorney, including, but not limited to, modification of the
F.I.N.D. agreement and receipt of any necessary easements.
Subsequent to this meeting, several residents of the street
submitted a letter asking that the decision be reconsidered. In
addition, at the September 5th regular meeting, two of the
residents appeared before the Commission to request
reconsideration, noting that they had not been informed of the
Commission's initial consideration and were not represented at
that meeting. It was the consensus of the Commission on
September 5th to schedule this item for reconsideration on
October 10, 1995.
Recommend reconsideration of Resolution No. 55-95 abandoning a
portion of N.E. 1st Court.
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
TO: DAVID T. HARDE-,N, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DlY~IE DOMINGUEZ, DIR~,T(~R
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING"AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 10, 1995
RECONSIDERATION OF THE ABANDONMENT OF RIGHT-OF-
WAY LOCATED AT THE EASTERN END OF N.E. 1ST COURT
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The item before the City Commission is the reconsideration of a
previously approved resolution (No. 55-95), abandoning a portion of right-
of-way located adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW), at the
eastern end of N.E. 1st Court.
BACKGROUND:
In May of this year, the owners of the single family homes located adjacent to
the subject right-of-way (the Hanleys and the Busschers) petitioned for its
abandonment. The primary reasons given for the request were to prevent
persons who do not live on the street from using the area. They were especially
concerned that public access requirements associated with the receipt of a FIND
grant for the seawall repair would attract additional users to the area. The
owners agreed to maintain access to the area for residents of the street through
recorded agreements.
The request was heard by the Planning and Zoning Board on July 17, 1995.
Staff recommended that the request be denied, based primarily upon a failure to
find that there was not a need for the use of the right-of-way for public purposes;
and that the request would likely encourage similar requests for street end
abandonments. The applicants spoke in favor of the abandonment and
submitted a petition supporting the request, which had been signed by the
owners and 27 residents of N.E. 1st Court. Three (3) residents spoke in
opposition, one of whom had signed the petition but changed her mind. After
some discussion, the Board recommended unanimously that the request be
denied.
City Commission Documentation
Reconsideration--Abandonment of N.E. 1st Court
Page 2
The item was scheduled for the City Commission meeting of August 1st, which
was postponed to the August 8th meeting due to Hurricane Erin. The residents
of the street had not been informed of the Commission meeting dates, and in
fact, several of them thought the P & Z Board's decision was final. While their
comments were forwarded to the City Commission in the back-up, the residents
were not in attendance at the meeting to express their opposition. Mr. Hanley
presented his request, and the City Commission approved the abandonment.
Upon learning of the Commission's decision, several residents of the street
signed a letter asking that the decision be reconsidered. It should be noted that
five of those signing the reconsideration letter had also signed the original
petition in favor of the abandonment, but have since changed their positions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
[] Upon reconsideration, deny the abandonment of the right-of-way
for N.E. 1st Court.
Attachments:
· Letter of request for reconsideration
· Location map
· Survey
Thursday, August 24, 1
Tom Lynch
Honorable Mayor of Delray Beach
Dear Tom:
This letter is directed to you and the City of Delray Beach regarding the decision which was
made by the City Commission regarding the abandonment of public property at the end of
NE 1st Court,
Many residenls of NE 1st Court were unaware that the property on the east end of NE 1st
Court was abandoned to the Hanleys and the Busschets by the City Commission, after the
Planning and Zoning board unanimously recommended that the abandonment be denied,
Our understanding from discussions with city officials was that a denial for recommendation
by the Planning and Zoning board end Planning and Zoning Department meant that the
issue was dead. The City Commission appears to have acted unilaterally and against the
best Interests of the city residents in precedent Setting action without proper consideration
for the issues based on the following reasons:
1) Residents of NE 1st Court were not notified ct' the abandonment of the NE 1st Court
property and were therefore unable t(~yoice opposition. Although there is no formal
requirement for notification Of NElst Coud resldenls that the city commiSSion would
consider this property for abandonment, the city government has not been been consistent
because residents were notified of the P&Z boan:l headng on July 17th at which time
several residents spoke out against the abandonmenl and the approval was voted down
seven to zero, The residents of NE 1st Court were not notified of the subsequent City
Commission hearing and theret~ore were unable to voice their opposition lo the
abandonment,
2) .The City Commission acted un!laler_ally in .qrantin~ the abandonment withou~
those affected by it. The Delray Beach City Commission disregarded the Delray Beach
Comprehehsive Plan which calls for not limiting access to residents of the Intra¢oastal
waterway. The Commission disregarded the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
board, Plannin§ and Zoning Department and many NE 1st Court residents for denial and
unilaterally granted abandonment to the Hanleys and Busschers without input from city
government or residents, ali of whom are affected by such a decision.
3) De!fay Beach is ~,ttin.(:l a precedent of abarldonin~ city Drepertv denying .access. to th..._
LntmCoastal waterway by all city residents. The precedent promises to open the door to
more petitions by local waterfront property owners to increase their frontage by petitioning
for abandonment an~l denying city residents the right to use what is taxpayers' properly.
To summarize, the city government should protect the rights of city residenls and has
clearty chosen to disregard the wishes et' the city government, the planning and zoning
board and residents o1' Delray Beach, There are no extenuating circumstances which would
warrant this property as any clifferently than any other public property in Delray Beach. The
City Commission should consider this as a dangerous precedent which will affect residents'
access to the intracoastal throughout Delray Beach.
While ~ believe it was the City Commision's intention to ac~ in bee[ interests of the city
residents and it appears that due p~ocess under existing statutes was fo[lowed, the
unilateral actions in this case do not reflect what is in the best interest of the residents or the_
t urge the city commission to review Ihe recornr~en~lation lot abandonment and get the
appropriate i,~pul from Delray Beach residents Including those who are most affected by this
decision, the residents of NE 1st Court, the city government and the recommending boards
before the precedent setting action of abandoning this property is finalized,
Sincerely,
cc: David Harden
Diane Domingo
~. ')-'-'~. ~~ , ,,- ,- (~,,'. , .
....................................... .................................................
.......................................................... .~o..5 .......
"~/, ,Jx,__~_ . ~, / ,,~ ..,:_~ . . . ,. :~,, ..:.; :.',..,. : ...,~:
4~ .................. :g:~_~...~.~.~.._~.r~rom ............. -
....... ~.~.~...~.,.,____C_.~__~agA_..~Lc..~.~ ~s_.~. C~' /
I
/
Names and addresses of Homeowners on N.E. 1st Court. Delrav
Beach. FL 33483
Mr and Mrs N. Bender, 819, N.E 1st Court
Mr and Mrs W. Emes, 809 N.E. 1st Court
Mr Roy Rising, President of Barclay House Co-operative
10 residences, 715, N.E. 1st Court (apts. lA - 1E & 2A - 2E)
Mr and Mrs S. Planam 840, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs J. Langford, 812, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. V. Espinosa and Mr J. Kennedy, 802, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs J. Davenport, 722, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. Sara Shaffer and Mr M. Tesch, 708, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs P. Ramsey, 717, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. Scher (new owner, formerly owned by Mr & Mrs L Rasmussen) 721 N.E 1st Court
Mr and Mrs K. Widner, 815, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs R. Goodleaf, 704, N.E. 1st Court (two attached homes)
Mr and Mrs Busscher, 823, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs D. Hanley, 828, N.E. 1st Court
Mr. Harden ...
FYI on the N.E. 1st Court abandonment,
I talked to the Mayor and Dr. Alperin
about it on Tuesday night. They feel
it should be reconsidered.
Since Mayor Lynch will not be at the
Sept. 5th meeting, Dr. Alperin asked
that I remind him about it and he will
bring it up under Commission comments to
see if there is support to reconsider
the matter (at a meeting to be held in
October as requested by Mr. Hanley).
Con O oa
RECEIVED ~
'
...... CITyCLERK Barbara & Derek Hanley
828, N. E. 1st Court, Delray Beach, FL 33483
(TEL: 407-278-4893)
To thc Mayor and City Commissioners of Dclray Beach, August 27, 1995
100, N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach FL 33444.
Dear Commissioner Smith
Ref: Ci_ty Commission decision to abandon Right-Of-Way at the end of N.E. !st Court
The inflammatory article, attached, appeared last Friday in the Delray News. This article was
clearly written to bring pressure on you and the other commissioners. There are two important
facts concerning this article, from which you can draw your own conclusions.
(1) One of the two people who voiced opposition to our abandonment application at the P &
Z Board meeting is an executive with the company that publishes the Delray News.
(2) The article was made more inflammatory by the inclusion of a photograph of the whole of
our back yard taken from the abandonment area. The careful wording of the caption under
the picture stating "The Land in Dispute". .... in bold type suggests that our property is
in dispute, which, of course is untrue, and a distortion of the facts.
We have spoken to a number of people on the street. Their main concern is that the conditions
pertaining to continued access to and West to East view of the intm-coastal through the abandoned
area for N.E. 1st Court homeowners should be executed so that is permanent through any
changes of ownership. This concern is the one expressed in the comments of street residents
reported in the newspaper article.
The City Attorney, Ms. Susan Ruby, stated at the August 8th. meeting, that abandonment could
be executed with an easement on the abandoned parcel to ensure access to and view of the intra-
coastal West to East through the area for all N.E. 1 st Court Homeowners, and that it would be
permanent through any changes of ownership.
May we respectfully suggest that the City Manager or City Attorney write to the
homeowners on N.E. 1st Court to explain how this will be executed. We
believe that such a letter would allay any fears that people may have and make
another hearing by the City Commission unnecessary.
Attached, for Mr Harden and Ms. Ruby, is a list of names and addresses of the N.E. 1st Court
Homeowners.
Should the Commission decide on another hearing could it please be scheduled in early October *
because we will be out of the country until the beginning of October and Mr and Mrs Busscher
will be out of state during September.
Yours sincerely,
. The Honorable Mayor, Thomas E.Lynch
Derek & Barbara Hanley Commissioner David E. Randolph Sr
Commissioner Jay Alpefin
Commissioner Kenneth C. Ellingsworth
City Attorney, Susan Ruby Esq.
· C! City Manager, Mr. David Harden - Please advise if a hearing is to be scheduled, thank you.
Names and addresses of Homeowners on N.E. 1st Court. Delrav
Beach. FL 33483
Mr and Mrs N. Bender, 819, N.E 1st Court
Mr and Mrs W. Emes, 809 N.E. 1st Court
Mr Roy Rising, President of Barclay House Co-operative
10 residences, 715, N.E. 1st Court (apts. lA - IE & 2A - 2E)
Mr and Mrs S. Planam 840, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs J. Langford, 812, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. V. Espinosa and Mr J. Kennedy, 802, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs J. Davenport, 722, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. Sara Shaffer and Mr M. Tesch, 708, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs P. Ramsey, 717, N.E. 1st Court
Ms. Scher (new owner, formerly owned by Mr & Mrs J. Rasmussen) 721 N.E 1st Court
Mr and Mrs K. Widner, 815, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs R. Goodleaf, 704, N.E. 1st Court (two attached homes)
Mr and Mrs Busscher, 823, N.E. 1st Court
Mr and Mrs D. Hanley, 828, N.E. 1st Court
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~ ~° - MEETING OF AUGUST 1, 1995
RESOLUTION NO. 55-95/ABANDONING a PORTION OF N.E. 1ST
COURT RIGHT-OF-WAY
DATE: JULY 28, 1995
In the front of your book you will find information received at
5:00 p.m. July 28 from the Hanleys, and the Planning and Zoning
response.
This is before the Commission to consider the abandonment of a
portion of the N.E. 1st Court right-of-way. The subject
right-of-way is located at the eastern end of N.E. 1st Court,
east of N.E. 7th Avenue.
This is an unimproved area adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway.
The area is not used for vehicular access; however, it does
provide pedestrian access to the existing seawall and Intra-
coastal. The property owners to the north and south of the
right-of-way petitioned the City to abandon a portion in order to
control access through the area.
During the review process, staff identified the need for an
easement dedication in view of an existing storm drain and lift
station facilities within the area proposed for abandonment. In
addition, the City has received a grant from FIND (Florida Inland
Navigation District) to repair and maintain the seawalls at N.E.
1st Court, Lowry Street and N.E. 5th Street. The grant is
conditioned on public access being provided to the seawalls
including the installation of a bench and signage acknowledging
FIND's contribution. If access is eliminated, the funds received
from FIND must be returned.
The Planning and Zoning Board considered this item at its meeting
of July 17, 1995, and voted unanimously to recommend denial of
the request since it is contrary to the City's Comprehensive Plan
Coastal Element Objective B-1 which calls for enhanced
accessibility to the public beach areas and waterways. They felt
this action would set a precedent for future requests, and that
it would be difficult to ensure that access would remain
available to residents of the street over time.
Recommend denial of Resolution No. 55-95 to abandon a portion of
the right-of-way for N.E. 1st Court, pursuant to the recommen-
dation and findings of the Planning and Zoning Board.
N.E. 2ND S7.
/ °
/
J , ~ LOWRY
N.E. 1ST ST.
ATLANTIC VETERANS
PLAZA PARK
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
TO: DL~V,~. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF AUGUST 1, 1995
ABANDONMENT OF N.E. 1ST COURT RIGHT-OF-WAY
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is consideration of a request for the
abandonment of a portion of the N.E. 1st Court right-of-way pursuant to LDR
Section 2.4.6(0). The subject right-of-way is located at the eastern end of N.E.
1st Court, east of N.E. 7th Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
The subject right-of-way is an unimproved area adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway.
The area is not used for vehicular access, however it does provide pedestrian access to
the existing seawall and Intracoastal.
In May, 1995, the single family owners to the north and south of the right-of-way
petitioned the City to abandon a portion of the unimproved right-of-way. The applicant's
reason for the abandonment is to control access through the area.
For a more detailed analysis, please refer to the attached Planning and Zoning Board
staff report.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board considered this item at its meeting of July 17, 1995.
Co-petitioners Derek Hanley and Dick Busscher spoke in favor of the request and
submitted a petition signed by a number of residents on the street who support the
abandonment. The petition stated that access would continue to be maintained for
residents of N.E. 1st Court. Three residents (one of whom had signed the petition but
had second thoughts) spoke in opposition to the request.
City CommiSsion Do~,umentation
N.E. 1st Court Abandonment
Page 2
The Board voted unanimously to recommend denial of the request. Several Board
members stated their feelings that public access to the Intracoastal Waterway should
be maintained, and that this action would set a precedent for future requests. They
also thought it would be difficult to ensure that access would remain available over time
to residents of the street.
CONDITIONS OF FIND GRANT
One of the questions that was raised during the P&Z Board meeting related to the
conditions of the grant that has been approved for repair of the seawall at N.E. 1st
Court. The grant from FIND (Florida Inland Navigation District) provides that the
project site be dedicated to the public for a period of at least 25 years. It also requires
that a sign be erected that acknowledges FIND's contribution. The sign does not have
to designate the area as a public park, which was suggested by the petitioners at the P
& Z meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, deny the request to abandon the right of way at N.E. 1st Court as requested,
pursuant to the recommendation and findings of the Planning and Zoning Board.
Attachments:
* Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report
* Petition supporting the abandonment
T:/PLANNI/DOCUME/REPORTS/CCNE 1ST.DOC
PLANNING ANF ZONING BOAR[ '-'-
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH --- STAFF REPORT---
MEETING DATE: July 17, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: III. B.
ITEM: Abandonment of Right-of-way for a Portion of N.E. 1st Court.
GENERAL DATA:
Owner ......................................... City Of Delray Beach
Applicant .................................... Derek and Barbara Hanley
A. Richard and Madlyn Busscher
Agent .......................................... Mark Krall, Esq.
Listick and Krall, PA
Location ...................................... NE 1st Court right-of-way, east of
NE 7th Avenue.
Property Size .............................. 0.01 acre
City Land Use Plan .................... None
Adjacent Zoning ..................... North: R-l-AA (Single Family Residential)
East:R-I-AA
West:R-I-AA
Existing Land Use ...................... Unimproved street right-of-way.
Development Proposal ............... Abandonment of unimproved eastern
end of a street right-of-way.
Water Service ......................... .... n/a
Sewer Service ............................ n/a. ATLAN TI C AVI~ iN U
HARBOUR
CONDO
(
The item before the Board is the recommendation to the City Commission for the
proposed abandonment of a portion of the N.E. 1 st Court right-of-way. The subject right-
of-way is located between N.E. 7th Avenue and the Intracoastal Waterway.
This right-of-way abandonment is being processed pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(0),
Abandonment of Rights-of-Way.
I..:.:.:.:.:.:,,,,,,? .:~:~:.~~~~~~~~...~~~~i~i~?~~~~.:~~~~~iiiiii~~.:.~~:.:.:~:.:.~.~~:.~.~~~:~~~~~~~ ...... :: :::::::: ................ :::: ........... :::: ......................................... : ....................... : .................... :.:.:.:.:..:.
The subject right-of-way area was created by the Seestedt Stevens Subdivision which was
recorded in 1936. The right-of-way consists ora two lane road with a cul-de-sac at the
eastern end. The area to abandoned is located to the east of the paved cul-de-sac and does
not provide vehicular access.
The subject right-of-way consists of two triangular parcels located at the eastern end of
N.E. 1st Court. Currently, this portion of the right-of-way is unimproved and is not used
for vehicular access. The area does, however, provide pedestrian access to the
Intracoastal.
To the north and south of the right-of-way are two single family residences, to the west is
the improved section ofN.E. 1 st Court, and to the east is the Intracoastal Waterway.
Zoning to the north, south, east, and west of the subject right-of-way is R-1 AA (Single
Family Residential).
Based upon the survey that was submitted concurrently with the abandonment petition,
the area to be abandoned is unimproved. However, there is a 12" storm drain and City
Lift Station Number Nine located within this area. No other public facilities are located
within the abandonment area.
The City's Environmental Services Department has no objections to the abandonment,
provided an easement is dedicated for the storm drain, lift station, and the owners
recognize their responsibility to maintain the seawall adjacent to the abandonment area.
The Fire Department objects to the proposed abandonment as it would reduce their access
to the Intracoastal in the event of a drowning, burning vessel, or other type of emergency.
Southern Bell, Florida, Power and Light, Florida Public Utilities, Leadership Cable, and
the City's Police Department have no objection and have given their release.
P & Z'Staff l~eport
N.E. 1 st Court Abandonment
Page 2
Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan Coastal Element Objective B-I, enhanced
accessibility shall be provided to the Delray public beach areas and waterways through an
"Accessibility Program." Policy B-1.2 states that additional marina facilities and
waterway access shall be provided. This policy appears to create a conflict with this
request. City staff has studied the issue of the street ends in the past and concluded that
the overall policy of the City should be that the existing street ends should remain public.
In addition, the City's Development Services Management Group specifically reviewed
the issue of abandoning the subject right-of-way and felt that the problems of trespassing
and drinking in public as reported by the applicants would best be handled by the Police
Department.
Regarding the applicant's statement that due to the proximity of Veteran's Park from
N.E. 1st Court the subject street end is not necessary for public use, it is noted that N.E.
1st Court is one of only nine existing street ends which the City controls and is at the end
of a uniquely landscaped block, and contributes to the overall ambiance of the street by
providing vistas to the Intracoastal. Allowing the right-of-way to revert to private
interests would jeopardize those views. The elimination of any of these access points is
contrary to the goals and objectives contained in the Coastal Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
An important consideration in the evaluation of this request is a grant that the City has
received from FIND (Florida Inland Navigational District) to repair and maintain the
seawalls along N.E. 1 st Court, Lowery Street, and N.E. 5th Street. Pursuant to conditions
of the grant, public access is to be provided to the seawalls, including the installation of a
bench. If access to the seawalls is eliminated, conditions of the grant stipulate that the
funds received from FIND must be returned.
The elimination of the N.E. 1 st Court street end would establish a precedent for property
owners along other street ends to follow suit. By abandoning this street end, private
citizens would become responsible for controlling access to the Intracoastal. Closing one
street end will likely lead to requests to close the remaining street ends, which is in direct
opposition to the provision of public access to the Intracoastal as stated in the
Comprehensive Plan.
When right-of-way is abandoned, the right-of-way area is required to be divided along the
centerline and returned equally to the adjacent property owners. In this situation, the
subject right-of-way area was dedicated from the Seestedt Stevens Subdivision. Both
property owners on the north and south sides to the right-of-way are petitioners to this
abandonment and the right-of-way, if abandoned, will be equally divided between them.
( ('
P & Z'Staff Keport
N.E. 1 st Court Abandonment
Page 3
Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(O)(3)(e), abandonments of rights-of-way, if approved,
shall be consummated by a replat of the receiving properties. The replat is required in
order to discourage the creation of numerous smaller properties which do not meet any
district regulations and therefore can not be developed. In this case both properties on
either side of the subject right-of-way consist of single family residences. As the
intention is to combine the receiving properties, a Unity of Title would suffice in the
place of a replat. Based upon the above, if the abandonment is approved, a waiver to the
platting requirement is appropriate.
I .................................................................. ....................................................................... I
Prior to any right-of-way abandonment being approved, the following findings must be
made:
A) That there is not, nor will there be a need for the use of the right-of-way for
any public purpose.
Pursuant to Comprehensive Plan Coastal Element Policy B-1.2 and the
requirements of the FIND grant for the seawall, public access to the Intracoastal
Waterway is to be enhanced throughout the City. This abandonment proposes to
eliminate a public access point for which a need has been identified.
B) That the abandonment does not, nor will not, prevent access to a lot of
record.
Access to existing lots of record will not be affected by this abandonment as the
surrounding properties north and south of the subject right-of-way have legal
access from N.E. 1 st Court.
C) That the abandonment will not result in detriment for the
provision of access and/or of utility services to adjacent properties or the
general area.
While replacement easements may be provided for the existing storm drain and
lift station located within the subject right-of-way, access to the adjacent
Intracoastal Waterway will be prevented. Public access to the Intracoastal for
emergency and recreational purposes will be diminished as a result of the
proposed abandonment.
P & Z Staff 1Zeport
N.E. 1 st Court Abandonment
Page 4
I
This abandonment was reviewed by the Community Redevelopment Agency at its
meeting of July 13, 1995. The Agency transmitted a recommendation of denial.
The subject right-of-way is not improved, however it provides pedestrian and emergency
access to the Intracoastal Waterway. While no plans exist at this time to provide any
improvements within the right-of-way, the Comprehensive Plan states that the City is to
explore the creation of additional Intracoastal access. A stipulation of the FIND grant
states that if the area adjacent to the seawall is privatized, the grant funds must be
forfeited. The existing storm drainage line currently runs through the right-of-way and
discharges into the Intracoastal. There is also a lift station within the right-of-way which
is planned for an upgrade. Considering these facts, there appears to be a valid public
need for this area and it is therefore inappropriate to consider this abandonment.
1. Continue with direction.
2. Recommend approval of the abandonment, and approval of a waiver to the
requirement to plat.
3. Recommend approval of the abandonment, pursuant to
conditions, and approval of a waiver to the requirement to plat.
4. Recommend denial of the abandonment with masons stated.
By motion, pursuant to the inability to find positive findings with respect to LDR Section
2.4.6(0)(5) and inconsistency with Comprehensive Plan Coastal Element Objective B-l,
transmit a recommendation of denial to the City Commission for the abandonment of a
portion of the N.E. 1st Court right-of-way.
Attachments
Location Map, Reduced Survey, and Letter of Request
U:NE 1 CTPZ.DOC
.... ~EGEND:
~ - Indica[es Cen~er Lin~" "" C.C.-Indicates Poin~
R/W - Indicates Right-of-way of Curve
O.R.B.-Indicates Official Record Book P.T.-Indiqates Paint
P.B. - Indicates Plat Book of Tangent
PG. - Indicates P,age
-- Indicates Delta .....
R - Indicates Radius
A -Indicates Arc D"i~tance
T - Indicates Tangent
P.O.B.- Indicates Point of Beginning
NOTES: 1. This sketch represents a special purpose survey for the proposed
right-of-way abandonment.
2. Ali e~isting ~mprovements not shown.
~. This sketch reflects the proposed improvements for road%~ay and
curbing within the rig~t-of-~vay of N.E. ]st C~urt, accordiug to the
SS'
r - I~dicates Cen%er Line
R/W- Indicates Right-of-way
P.B.- InDicates Pla~ Book
PG. - Indicates Pa~e
O.R.B.-Indica~es Official Recor~ Book
I.P.F.-Indie~tes Iron Pin Foun~
ME~S. -Indicates Me~sure~
CONC. -Indicates Concrete
NOTES:
1. The sketch as shown hereon indicates a special purpose survey to
in~ic~e the location of existinw improvements and u~ilities.
2. The existinw Wr~vi~y sewer an~ force main do not f~ll within the
proposed ~re~ of ~b~ndonmenh.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
The Easterly abandonmen~ area of N.E. ls~ Cour~ a~jacen~ ~o ~he
Ingraco~s~al Waterway an~ lyinw Northerly of Log 28, SEESTEDT-STEVENS
SUBDIVISION, a subdivision as recorde~ in
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
CERTIFICATION:
I h?reby certify the s~cotch as sho~.:n hereon represents a. ~urvey made
" ' . . ~ ¥~^~.../~~//'-- -~;-~ - *-.Z~ECEIVED
,e e . a ua~~a .ley~ n~ ...... t
828, N. E. 1st Cou~[~ ~lray B~th'~ FL 33483 TEL: 407-278-4~ M~ .... ,~
The Honorable Tom Lync~f ~e City of Dekay Beach Florida. '~I 3~,I~/CE
D~ Mayor Lynch,
~is letter pro,scs a cons~cfive solution m serious problems on N.E. 1st Co~ ~y B~ch.
As you ~ow, subst~ti~ ~ money h~ ~n ~d is ~ing ex~nd~ [o build, exp~d ~d m~
Veter~s' P~k ~d m m~n ~owles P~ Bo~ ~ese p~ pm~de mple a~ss m ~e hm-
co~ wate~ay for ~a~g, fis~g ~d o~er ~mfion~ pm~ts by ~e gene~ pubfic. Seve~
sm~, but ~smpflve ~up$ of ~~se ~ese~.~n~egaie on S~m ~at end at_
~ inmmnaStgl; Among o~dfi~fi~, ~ey mnsume ~mhol ~d ~ju~a, ~am On ~e ~un~
use loud ~d fo~ l~age ~d p~ ~ek vehicles close at h~ often ~eg~y, ~ of which ~ey
would have ~ficul~ dohg in ~e pubfic p~. ~ek acfi~fies ~ ~mlemble m o~ comu~W, ~e
havhg a deleterious eff~t on pmpe~ v~ues ~d ~, evenm~ly, advemely impact ~e ~ b~e.
~e net eff~t is ~at some 70 msidenm of N.E. 1st Co~ who ~ ~m mem~m of ~e public, ~e
deni~ access m ~e h~-co~ water by ~e con~u~ ~d hfi~da~g presence of ~e~ h~dem.
P~en~ no longer ~ow ~ek chil~n m phy on ~e s~et ~ause of ~ek f~ for ~e c~l~n's
~eW. h ad~fion, we ~d o~ neigh~m ~ & ~ Busscher) whose propeffies ~ abut~g ~e
municip~ right of way, ~e unable m use o~ om back y~ds for m~y ho~s d~ng ~e ~y ~d
even~g ~cause of ~e close proxi~ ~d ~ha~or of ~e ~ders. ~e ~fice have ~n helpful,
but ~e gene~ly powerless m ~e action ~ause of ~e pubfic right of way ~d ~e ~ficflW h ~em
obse~ng illeg~ ~havior. Al~ough, one h~der was apprehend~ ~ause of an oumt~ng 1993
~est w~t. But, often, we ~e ~d to c~ ~e ~lice ~cause of ~e ~reat of later ret~iation.
PROPOSED SOLU~ON
It is ~po~t m note that Veter~'s P~k is only 280 f~t south of N.E. 1st Coup, on the next s~eet
(N.E. 1st S~ee0. Veterans' P~k provides approximately 620 feet of access m ~e ~-coas~ water,
most of the ~e it is not us~, ~d is h~y gowd~ when it is us~. Therefore, the solution we
propose w~l not im~e or prevent access to ~e in~a-co~ water for ~ose who ~sh il ~e N.E.
1st Corn s~eet end is unique ~ong ~e eight in which ~e city ~n~ols ~e right of way. One re,on
for t~s is ~e close prox~ty m Veter~s' P~k ~d the o~er is ~ause of ~e ci~c ms~nsib~i~ ~at
· e homeowners on ~is s~t have ~en u~n ~e~elves m ~aut~y ~d m~ ~e gea - ~is is
illus~at~ in the aaach~ photo,phs of ~1 eight s~eem en~g on ~e hm-co~t~. It is yew smfll,
1,4~ ~u~e feet ove~l, of which, oily approximtely 22 line~ feet of seaw~l feet ~ accessible.
We ~d ~ & ~s Busscher of 823 N.E. 1st Co~ ~e soliciting your sup~n ~d ~sismce h
p~suing a pmpos~ for the city m ab~don ~e right of way on t~s s~eet end. T~s r~uest h~
urgency because ~e city is.pl~ning m replace ~c seaw~l at ~e end of N.E. 1st Corn st~ng h mid ~
June, at a cost of $48,~, esfimat~ by the ci~ engineer's office. A 50% mamhing ~t offer~ by '-
m~e agency F~ r~ukes ~at the l~d adjacent m ~e s~w~l ~me a public p~k ff ~e ~t is us~.
We ~d the o~er homeowners on ~e s~eet ~e ho~fi~l Our propos~ is that the city ab~don ~e
public right of way to ~ & ~ Busscher and us, as the two sole, conti~ous pmpe~ owners. We
would ~en assume res~nsibiliw for ~e ~st of rep~ng ~d ~~ing ~e seaw~l and continue to
aint~n the l~dscaping. We ~ ~nt back ~1 necess~ easements for municip~ pu~oses and
mergency vehicles access. ~is would also put the p~cel on the mx roll.
There ~e 24 homes on N.E. 1st Court and an average of 2.9 residents per dwelling i.e. approximately
70 ~ople live at one time, or another, on the s~eet. Of the 1,400 squ~e feet, only approximately 900
squ~e feet is actu~ly usable and only 22 feet of seawall accessible because of the presence of ~ees and
shrubs, planted over the years by the homeowners. Therefore, access by residents on N.E. 1 st Court
alone causes saturation level.
! of 2
If the city agrees to abandon the public fight of way on this strip of land to Mr & Mrs Busscher and
us, we would advise the homeowners of the N.E. 1st Court community that we would not object to
their use of the area for walks and sightseeing, as they were accustomed to do before these problems
arose. If the city required it as part of an abandonment agreement, we would be prepared to enter into
a more formal arrangement on this.
N.E. 1st Court is a small, residential community. We are a community of people from different walks
of life, different age levels and different income levels working together as a model in self-help. We
contribute to Delmy Beach through our property taxes and our patronage of local businesses. We all
have an interest in Delray Beach becoming and remaining a desirable place to live. The problems we
have described threaten our fight to live comfortably and safely on NE. 1st Court. We are, as the
people most affected, willing to accept the bulk of the responsibility and the cost to £md solutions to
our problems, as described in your words and the words of other administration leaders quoted in the
February 1995 edition of Florida Trend magazine.
We, would like to meet with you and have requested an appointment, in the hope that you will support
our application for abandonment and use your influence to persuade others to support this proposal.'.:,-
It provides a win-win solution for the city and the homeowners on N.E. 1st Court - saving the city
$24,000 in immediate capital costs and avoidance of maintenance costs in perpetuity, plus adding to
the tax roll; and providing a safe, sanitary environment for this community, without adverse
consequences elsewhere. There is precedent for this. Under similar circumstances, the city
abandoned the end of N.E. 3rd Avenue to the adjacent homeowners whose property abutted the fight
of way at the end of the street - Mr & Mrs Baldasarre and Mr & Mrs Johnstone of 245 & 238 Palm
Trail respectively. I understand a similar abandonment was executed within Tropic Isles.
Thank you.
Yours Sincerely, -~-' ~ ~
Derek and Barbara Hanley (3~ C/Mr & Mrs Busscher
C/ City Commissioner, Ms. Barbara Smith. This corffirms the conversation we had a few days
ago when you visited, N.E. 1st Court. We would like to, speak with you again in the hope
that you will support our application to the city to abandon the right of way at the end of N.E.
1 st Court, and to provide any more information you may need. Thank you: D.H & B.H.
Ci.ty Commi~si0ner Dr. Jay Alperin. This confu-ms the conversation we had on the telephone a
couple of weeks ago. We would like to speak with you again in the hope that you will support
our application to the city to abandon the fight of way at the end of N.E. 1st Court, and to
provide any more information you may need. Thank you: D.H. & B.H.
City Commissioner, Mr Kenneth Ellingsworth.
Dear Mr. Ellingsworth, we have not yet had an opportunity to speak with you on this matter,
but would very much like to do so in order to request your support We think this letter is self-
explanatory and we wrote it to be as explicit as possible in defining the problem and offering a
constructive solution. We will call you to request an appointment to discuss the matter further
and answer any qustions you may have. Thank you: D.H. & B.H.
2of2
July 13, 1995
Ms. Randee Golder, Chairman
City of Dekay Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
100 N.W. First Ave.
Delray Beach, Fl. 33444
Jackson L. Langford
812 N.E. 1st Court
Delray Beach, FL 33483
Dear Ms. Golder:
This letter is directed to you and the city of Delray Beach regarding a recent filing of abandonment that
has taken place for the public property which stands at the end of N.E. 1st Court, zip code 33483.
We are concerned that if the city abandons this property to a private owner, it will result in the denied
access of the residents of NoE. 1st Court to the use of this public property. One of the main reasons we
purchased our home on N.E. 1st Court is the beauty and enjoyment of the intracoastal waterway, which we
currently have at the end of our street. We know that this access to the intercoastal waterway is rare in
south Florida, and as such enhances our property value and that of all the surrounding homeowners.
Denied or restricted access however, will not benefit any current or future N.E. 1st Court homeowner.
It is my understanding that Project No. PB DB 94-35 filed October 1, 1994, in conjunction with the
Florida Inland Navigation District has agreed to and funded project improvements for street ends of N.E.
2nd Street, N.E.5th Street, Lowery Street, S.E. 3rd Street and most importantly N.E. 1st Court. Upon
reviewing the document, item # 15 titled NON-DISCRIMINATION clearly states upon completion that,
"... the PROJECT shall be readily accessible, on a non-exclusive basis, to the general public without
regard to age, sex, race, physical handicap, or other condition...". This clearly defines my stance on this
subject.
I would greatly appreciate your assistance in denying the abandonment of this property. Please contact me
if I can be of any help, or if you have questions or require additional information. I can be reached at my
office 276-9804 or at home, 276-9831,
cc: Tom Lynch
Barbara Smith ~J[JLl 1 4 1995
D. Beatty
Bill Harris PLANNING & ZONING
Homeowners of N. E. 1st Court, Delray Beach, Florida
May 3, 1995.
Petition in support of the application for abandonment by Mr & Mrs Busscher and Mr
& Mr~ H~nley of 1323 & 828 N. E, lst Court respectively
We, the homeowners on N.E. 1st Court, Delray Beach, do hereby attest that we are being
intimidated by the constant presence of intruders, strangers to the community, who
take up residence on the small strip of land at the intra-coastal end of N.E. 1st Court,
Delray Beach, some of the many intruders regularly use it as a daytime home.
These individuals spend hours sleeping, eating, drinking, fishing and using the area
as a toilet. Some groups drink alcohol, smoke marijuana and yell and scream foul
language at one another. The residents of this street no longer feel secure in their
own neighborhood while these people are present. The adjacent homeowners have
asked some of these people to use Veterans' Park, which is very close by, and have
been met with threatening responses. Often, they are afraid to say anything, or call
the police, because of the fear of reprisals.
We are also very concerned for the safety of the children living on the street and for
our visiting grandchildren. The constant stream of intruders attracted to the end of
the street is an ever-present threat to the safety of our children and the security of
our homes.
This small area has been beautified and maintained by the homeowners on N.E. 1st
Court for many years. All the trees were planted by homeowners of the street and the
homeowners immediately adjacent to this parcel of land have, for twenty years,
watered the plantings, cut the grass and trimmed the trees and bushes.
We would like to continue to be able to enjoy the beauty of the end of our street.
Therefore, we fully support the application by Mr and Mrs R. Busscher of 823 N.E. 1st
Court and Mr and Mrs D. Hanley of 828 N.E. 1st Court, for the City to abandon to them its
right of way on the land that abuts the Busscher and Hanley properties and the intra-
coastal right of way. The Busschers and Hanleys will grant back all necessary
easements to the City and assume the responsibility for maintenance and repair of the
seaw_all and_ maintenance of the Landscaping; A~ W,~Lx . _~v2~..,~.?r~7~t~.~(z4-/~.~. t~_c_~~ 2% ,,
....... ....~.....~..:?.~.. ..... ,~c-.~,.,~,t/.~..l...vZ..5.~ .................. Address..].'~...~..~..:..../..~..:~ ..... [:?.. .... (...C~...Sr ......
Name
/I
Name ......... .,~..QL~..Q~(L.!"~:.Q~.~..,c, ............ Address .... 53 ~ ~- .~ .~. \ c. % (~O ~C'~
Name,~.....~~.. ,.~..~, ..~. ~ ......... Add ress...~..~....,~... ~.~.........'/:~...~...: ......
! of 3
........... .................. ..............................................................
/
.............. ........
am6JL ~..~7 ................................................. Address ................................................................
......... .................
.......... ....
~...._.~......_~..~.~ ................. ~r~ ................................................................
....................................... ...............
$~ i' ........
ame.~JI.x ...... Address..~ ..........................................................
Nam~.........~~~ ......... ~ddress ................................................................
Name..~
~~ .................. ~.~0~ ............................... ~ Address
Name....~ ..............................................................................................................
~am~d~....~..~.~ ........................... ~..~.
2of3
Nam~ ~.....~z~ ............................. Ad d rcss...~:)..~/./~)..../~)..,. ~'...,./. ...............................
Name ...................... ~.:.:.~ ...... ~-..~.;;..~ ...... ~ ............ Address ..............................................................
Name~~:..~~~..~ ..................... Address ......... ~..~:...~-. .... ~.~.~.' .......
Nam ........................ ~ ...........Address ................................................................
~m~...~~.~~ ..... ~s ..... ~Z~..~C...Z~.~...e..~
~.m~..:~~ ............................... ~r~ .... ze.~.~...~.e..~ ............
Name ~~(A~.~ Address
3of3
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN
CITY MANAGER
FROM: PAUL DORLING
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DATE: JULY 28, '1995
RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT FOR N.E. 1ST COURT
The Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation of denial was based on a
combination of the information provided in the staff report, the members personal
knowledge and the testimony given at the Public Hearing. It is noted in the minutes of
the Planning and Zoning Board meeting that the arguments put forth by the applicant in
the letter to City Commissioners (July 26, 1995) were voiced at the hearing. The
Planning and Zoning Board considered these arguments in their decision and
recommended unanimously against the abandonment.
With respect to the alleged omissions and inaccurate statements within the staff report
the following is noted:
1. Comprehensive Plan Policy B-1.2 states that "Additional marine facilities and
waterway access shall be provided pursuant to Policy C-6.5'. Policy C-6.5 deals
with the citing of marine facilities in addition to a Manatee protection program
which neither deals with marine facilities nor waterway access. The fact that
Policy C-6.5 does not mention ways to provide additional waterway access is not
to be construed that additional ways to provide waterway access should not be
pursued.
2. The loss of FIND money is not stated as a reason for denial nor does the report
imply that the abandonment will cost the City of Delray Beach money. Page 2 of
the staff report states that FIND money currently allocated for this street end
seawall is an important consideration in the evaluation of the request and that
should the abandonment be granted the City is obligated to return that portion of
the grant money allocated for N.E. 1st Court. Further, the recommendation for
denial on Page 4 is based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect
to the Comprehensive Plan and required findings of LDR Section 2.4.6(0)(5);
more particularly Section 2.4.6(O)(5)(a) as there is a need for the use of the
right-of-way for public purposes (additional waterway access and as a
requirement for FIND grants) and Section 2.4.6(O)(5)(c) that the abandonment
will result in elimination of access to adjacent properties (Intracoastal
Waterway).
To: David'T. Harcien
Re: P&Z Board Recommendation on the Right-of-way Abandonment for N.E. 1st Court
Page 2
3. While an objection from the Fire Department is noted in the staff report it is not
listed as a reason for denial of this request. The reasons for denial are an
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan and failure to make required
findings under Section 2.4.6(0)(5). The project file does contain a letter from the
Fire Department stating they have no objections or comments on the
abandonment. However, when contacted by phone the Fire Department
objected to the abandonment as it diminished access to the Intracoastal
Waterway in the case of emergencies. This objection was based upon a belief
that physical improvements were proposed (i.e. fencing). As no physical
improvements are included the Fire Department is not objecting to the
abandonment.
4. The location of the Lift Station and the provision of replacement easements were
items identified in the Analysis section of the staff report. Neither of these
issues were cited as reasons for denial. It is noted that the Lift Station is within
the improved right-of-way while the support electrical control panels, antenna,
vents, etc. are located within the abandonment area. As indicated in the staff
report replacement easements will be required if the abandonment is approved.
5. The CRA recommended denial of the abandonment on July 13, 1995. This
board is independent of the City and renders their recommendations without
regard to the staff recommendation.
6. The applicants reasons for the abandonment were fully represented at the
Public Hearing at which time the applicants, and the surrounding neighbors
presented their case to the Planning and Zoning Board. The Planning and
Zoning Board considered this information in the decision to unanimously oppose
the abandonment.
7. It is noted inquires for similar abandonments have been discussed verbally with
other residents. It is anticipated that if a precedent is set in this case it would be
difficult to deny similar future requests. The applicant has in the letter of July 26,
1995 used the granting of an abandonment request at S.E. 4th Street to support
the granting of this request. With the abandonment of the S.E. 4th Street right-
of-way the desire to maintain existing access pursuant to the City's
Comprehensive Plan Policy B-1.2 was discussed. The abandonment was
recommended for approval as it was thought to be of insufficient size (25') to be
developed as an improved street end and further that it is not evident to the
public that the area is public right-of-way.
To: David'T. Harden
Re: P&Z Board Recommendation on the Right-of-way Abandonment for NE. 1st Court
Page 3
In summary, while there may be some question as to whether Comprehensive Plan
Policy B-1.2 applies to this type of waterway access, adequate grounds for a
recommendation of denial exist. The abandonment request fails to meet the mandatory
findings required under LDR Section 2.4.6(0)(5) as there is a need to use the right-of-
way for a public purpose (additional access to the waterway and as a condition of the
FIND grants) and the abandonment would be detrimental to the provision of access to
adjacent property (Intracoastal Waterway).
S:IPLANNIIDOC UMIINE1C T.DOC
N.E. 2ND
N.E. 1S'T CT.
0
LOWRY
N.E. 1ST ST.
ATLANTIC VETERAN S
PLAZA PARK
N.E. 1ST COURT
~ /44P S1~7~4 --
,~o.~- /o . ~ *~ ~, ¢,
(~,/~ ~.~) I~ ~ '"~ ....
'
,, . ,, '
,
L~GEND:
Indicates C~nt~r~
R/W- ~ Indicates Right-of-way ' of Curve
O.R.B.-Indicates Official Record Book P.T.-Indicates Point
P.B. - Indicates Plat Book of Tangent
PG.- Indicates Pa~e
- Indicates Delta
R- Indicates Radius
A- Indicates Arc Distance
T - Indicates Tangent
P.O.B.~- Indicates Point o.f B~innin~
NOTES: ' ,',' ..... ! .... 1. This sketch represents a special purpose survey fo~ the proposed
right-of-way abandonment.
2. All existing improvements not shown.
3. This sketch reflects the proposed improvements for roadway and
curbing within the right-of-way of N.E. let Court, according to the
construction drawing provided by the City of Delray Beach Engineering
Department.
4. For Legal descriptions Parcel 1 and Parcel 2, see attached.
5. Bearings are based on,assumed datum.
6. Parcel 1 and Parcel 2
shall also become
easements to the City of GENTRYENGINEERING&
Delray Beach for the
installation and mainten- LANDSURVEYING,INC.
ance of utilities and fo~ .... P.O. BOX 243
necessary purposes for DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
City Forces.
Sheet 1 of 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Parcel 1, a proposed vacated right-of-way, being a portion of N.E. 1st
Court, Delray Beach, Florida and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast"~orner o~ that part of ~ne South one-half
1/2) o¥ the North one-half (N. 1/2) o~ Block 159, lying West of tine
Intracoastal Waterway, MAP OF THE TO~N OF LINTON, a subdivision as recorded
in Plat Book 1, Page 3, in the Public Records o~ Palm Beach County, Florida
and being ~a point on the Westerly Right-o~-way line o~ the Intracoastal
a~er~ay,. a~ re~ord~ in Plat .Boo~ l~t Page 1~, in the Public Re~ords o~
aim ~eacn uoun~y, florida an~ a poi on the ~ortheriy Right-of-way line
o~ N.E. 1st Court; thenc~ run S 7~45'38" W, along said Westerl~
Right-of-way line o~ th~ Intracoastal Waterway, a ~istanc~ o~ 20.18 ~et
a point, also b~ing th~ ~xt~nd~d c~nter lin~ o~ N.E. 1st Court; thence run
N ~0~00'00" W, along said extended cehter line, a distance 'o~ 6.00 ~eet~ to
a poin~ on a curve, said curv~ having a tangent bearing'o~ N 7~43'38"
thence run Northwesterly along the arc o~ sa'id curve to ~he le~t,
distance o~ 34 '11 to a P~int o~ tangent aod a p~in~,,on
Right-of-way line o~ said N.E. 1st Court, said curve having a central angle
o~ ~7~45'58", a radius o~ 20.00 ~eet and a tangent o~ 22.~0 ~eet; thence
run S ~0~00'00" E, along sa~d North Right-of-way line, tangent to the
p~ eviously described curve a~ distance o~ 28.~0 ~eet to the Point o~
Beginning o~ Parcel 1.
CERTIFICATION:
I hereby certify ~he sketch attached herewith represents a survey made
under my direction and to be ·true an.d accurate to the best o~ my knowledge
and belie~, subject to 8assmsnts and right-of-ways o~'r~cord and I ~ur~her
certify tha~ said survey meets the minimum Technical Standards o~ Rule
61G17-6 o~ the Florida Administr~ive Code.
1A D SURYE¥1 G, INC.
· ~.0. ~OX 243
Sheet 2 of 3 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Parcel-2, a proposed vacated right-of-way! being a portioo.o¥ N.E.
Court, Delray Beach, Flori'ba ~nd more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast morner o~ Lot 28, SEE~TE~'~-STEV'~"~UBDIVISION,
a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 18, Page 5, in the Public Records of
Palm Beach County, Florida and a point on the Westerly Right-of-way line
tme Intracoastal Waterway, as recorded in Plat Book 17, Page 16A~ in the
Public Records o~ Palm Beach County, Florida; thence run N 90°00'00" W~
along the North line o~ said Lot 28 and the South Right-of-way line of N.E.
1st Court, a distance of 25.47 ~eet to a point o~ curve; thence ru~
Northeamterly along the arc o~ sai. d curve to the left, a dibtance of 28.72
· eet to a point on said cuc~e, also being a point on the extended
line of said N.E. 1st Oourt, said curve having a c~tral angle of
82~16'22", a radius o~ 20.00 ~met, a tangent o~ 17.47 ~eet and a tangen~
bearing N 7°43'38" E; thence run S 90'°00'00" E, along said extended cen[er
line o~ N.E. 1st Court, a distance o~ 6.00 ~eet to a point on {he said
Westerly Right-of-way o~ the Intracoastal Right-of-way; t~ence run S
7°43'38" W, along said Westeri~ Ri..ght-o~-way line a distance o~ 20.18 feet
to the Point o¥ Beginning o~ Parcel 2.
CERTIFICATION:
I hereby certify the' sketch attached herewith represents, a.survey made
under my direction and to"be ~rue and accurate to the be~t of my knowledge
and belie~, subdect to sasemsnts and right-of-ways o~ record and I further
certify that said survey meets the minimum Technical Standards of Rule
61G17-6 o~ ~'he Florida Administrative Code.
~ste~ed Florida Land Sur~yor ~nd Mapper No. 2580
Date o~ Special Purpose Boundary Survey: May 11, 1995
GENTRY ENGINEERING &
LAND SURVEYING, INC.
P.O. BOX '243
Sheet 3 o~ 3 ,DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444