Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1924-01-08 MinutesCOMMISSION MINUTES IF WING HELD ON January 8,1924' PNIPARED BY It OF _ . _11YCLERK 496 January 8th, 1924. Mal mm MM MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. On this 8th day of January, A. D. 1924, the Oommiesion of the City of Miami, Florida, met in regular session at the City Hall in Miami, Florida. The meeting wee palled to order at 9:00 o'clock A. M., by Chairman Romfh and on roll Dell the following mem- bers were present: B• 0. Romfh, J. E. Lummus, ABSENT: None. READING OF MINUTES J. I. Wilson, J. H. Gilman, C. D. Leffler. OF MEETING OF JA.NUARY 4TR The Clerk read the minutes of the meeting of January 4th, 1924, and there being no oorreotions or additions, thereto, on motion duly made and seconded the minutes were approved and accepted as written. REPORT OF FARMERS' CURB MARKET FOR FIRST YEAR'S OPERATION Mr. J. S. Rainey appeared before the Commission and submitted written report of the Farmer's Curb Market for the first year's operation whioh was signed by Mr. J. S. Rainey,J. C. Bail and C. C. Pemberton as Market Masters. After being read the re- port was ordered filed and oopied upon the minutes of the meeting. Said report is es follows: FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE FARMER'S CURB MARKET, MIAMI, FLORIDA. REGULAR MAR- KET DAYS, TUJ8DAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY. Market first occupied, December 30th, 1922. Total days used 154 Farmers using market 132 Total attendanoe 5898 Members expelled 1 Total ooileotione 0 26¢ per day. . $1474.50 Speoial oolleotion for building stalls 134.60 Cash on hand January let, 1924 60.10 Total Reoeipta 41669.16 Total Sales for the Year . .4117,960.00 Diebursemente for the year: Building and painting stalls 972 00 Janitor . Toilet fixtures and supplies Garden Hose . Name plates on stalls Brooms and supplies . Chairs for Ladies rest room 25.00 Advertising - . . . 5 00 Flowers for deoeaaed member . 6 00 Paint and painting 59 20 Stall alterations, labor and material Trash service ... . Electric clock rent 231.00 10.00 9.50 24.30 6 80 31.00 10.00 10 25 Market sign 27.50 Salary, Secretary & Treasurer 175 00 Refund to expelled member 9.26 Refund to H. G. Carter 4.00 Total Expenses 1614.76 Rent oolleated and due members 44.49 41659.16 (Signed) J. S. RAINEY J. C. BAIL C. C. PEMBBRTON Market Masters NAVAL RESERVE UNIT TO BE ESTABLISHED AT MUM Mr. Chas. A. Mille appeared before the Commission and submitted oommunioation ad- dressed to the Mayor in referenoe to the establishment of a Naval Reserve Unit in this City. The oommunioation was ordered filed and oopied upon the minutes and is as follows: Room 222 Calumet Bldg. Miami, Florida. From: Lieutenant Charles A. Mills, USNRP Enrolling Offioer Room 222 Calumet Building, Miami, Florida. To: Hon.E. C. Romfh. January 4, 1924., MY dear Mr. Romfh: 1. At a conference with the Commandant ,of the Seventh Naval District at Key West, it was oonoluded as most desirable to eetablieh a Naval Reserve Unit here at Miami. Td accomplish this it is of utmost importanoe that we have the support and co- operation of the City Commissioners, and it will be appreciated by the Commandant of the District and the writer to reoeive a letter from you assuring us of your approval and oo-operation. 2. In view of the feat that only a limited number of reserve units will be authorized and that Jaoksonville hes been the first city designated for duoh a unit, it is urged that the writer reoeive your letter of approval and oo-operation with the least possible delay. 411 '•I ri Mia 497 January 8, 1924. - MMM — i MIME w 3. We have interested several former reserve officers who are now working among the young men of this oity to signify their willingness and intention to enroll so as to aeoure for Miami a Naval Reserve Unit. 4. At a oonferenoe held at the Naval Bureau in Washing- ton by the writer and Naval offioers, encouraging assurances were reoeived that if a unit were established here at Miami, a small naval vessel would be assigned to this unit for use and benefit. Your early reply will be appreoiated. Very sincerely, CHAS. A.MILLS The matter submitted by Mr. Mille met the approval of the Commission and W. Leffler offered the following resolution approving the establishment of a Naval Reserve Unit in the City of Miami and pledging such support as the City Commission oan properly give: REDS OLUT ION NO. 1178 . A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ESTABLISNMINT OF A NAVAL RESERVE UNIT IN TES CITY OF MIAMI AND PLEDGING SUCH SUPPORT AS THE CITY COMMISSION CAN PROPERLY GIVE. WHEREAS, Chas. A. Mills has reported to the Commission that it has been oonoluded as desirable to establish a Naval Reserve Unit in the City of Miami and solicits the approval and support of the City Commie - Acton, and WHEREAS, the Commission believes that it is to the interest of the City to have such Naval Reserve Unit established in this City, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: That the establishment of a Naval Reserve Unit at Miami ie_hereby approved and the Commission will do all it oan properly do to give it its hearty co-operation. On motion of Mr. Leffler, seconded by Mr. Gilman, the said resolution wee passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Messrs. Rom fh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: Done. Motion oarried unanimously. PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE Communication from. Charles A. Mills and to petition of registered voters of the ordinance as provided for under aeotion being read was ordered filed and oopied follows: UNDER SECTION 5 OF CITY CHARTER others under date of January 8th in reference City of Miami requesting the passage of an 5 of the City Charter was reoeived and after upon the minutes. Said communication is as To the Honorable City Commissioners, City of Miami, Miami, Florida. Gentlemen: January 8, 1924. We herewith hand you petitions oontaining the names of 1322 qualified voters of the City of Miami. The petitions requests your Honorable Board to sell to Harvey W. Seeds Post No. 29 American Legion, for One Dollar (41.00) and the further oonsideration to er- eot and conatruot upon the property a Home for the Amer ioan Legion and as a memorial to the deceased Veterans of the World War, the fol- lowing deaoribed property; to-wtt: Lots two (2) and three (3), of Block Forty-one (41) North of the City of Miami, according to the Knowlton Map of the said City of Miami on file in the Office of the Clerk of the Cirouit Court of Dada County, Florida. We respeotfully ask the City Commissioners to give this mat- ter the earliest possible favorable consideration. Respectfully submitted, Committee of Petitioners Charles A. Mille - Chairman A. J. Cleary R. V. Waters Norris Moilya J. L. Billingsley Harry Goldstein C. H. Reeder Ralph Graham Henry Ralston Lorraine Smith Submitted with the foregoing oommunioation were fifty-five separate petitions whioh were ordered filed with the City Clerk as one instrument. The, ordinance as proposed and set forth in the petition is as follows: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND REQUIRING THE CITY COMMISSION TO SELL AND CONVEY TO HARVEY SEEDS POST NO. 29, AMiRICAN LEGION, DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA., ,9T MIA.MI. FLORIDA, THE PROPERTY DESCRIB- ED HEREIN, AT AND FOR THE SUM OF 41.00, AND FOR THE FURTHER 00 - SIDERATION THAT THE GRANTEE CONSTRUCT ADD ERECT THEREON A MEM- ORIAL HOME POR THE AMERICAN LEGION AND AS A MEMORIAL T0 THE DE- CEASED VETERANS OF THE WORLD WAR. s - January 8, 1924. IMEMIIIIUIIII I 11111111 111111 WEEM8, the inhabitants of the: pity of Miami deem it proper and desirable that the City Commission sell and convey to Hervey Seeds Poet` No. 29, American Legion, ,Department of Florida, at Miami, Florida, the property owned by the City of Miami, described as follows: Lots two (2) and three (3) of Blook forty-one (41) North, of the City of Miami, a000rding to the Knowlton Map of said City on file in the offioe of the clerk of the Cir- ouit Court of Dade County, Florida, for the purpose of building and oonatruoting thereon a memorial home•fer the American Legion, and as a memorial to the deceased veterans of the World War, at and for the oonaideration to be paid to said City not in exoesa of the sum of One Dollar (01.00), and for the further oonaidera- tion of the building and oonatruoting thereof of the..said memorial home for said American Legion, and as a memorial to the deceased veterans of the World war. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OP MIAMI: Seotion 1: That for and in consideration of the sum of one dol- lar in cash and of the further oonaideration of the ereotion and con- struction thereon by said Harvey Seeds Post No. 29, of a memorial home for the American Legion, and as a memorial to the deceased veterans of the World War, that the City Commission hereby authorizes the convey- ance to said Harvey Seeda poet No. 29, American Legion, Department of Florida, at Miami, Florida, for the purposes aforesaid, of the above described property. Seotion 2: That upon the payment of the said sum of one dollar that the City Manager be, and he is hereby, direoted to exeoute in the name of the City of Miami suoh deed of conveyance as may be necessary to convey the said property as aforesaid, for the purposes aforesaid, the said deed to be approved as to form and exeoution by the City At- torney. After some discussion the following resolution direoting the Clerk to oheok the pe- tition filed to asvertain the number of registered voters whose eignaturee are ap- pended thereto and requiring a report thereof at the next regular meeting was intro- duoed by Mr. Wilson: RESOLUTION NO. 1179. A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO CHECK PETITION FILED BY CHAS. A. MILLS, CHAIRMAN OF PETITIONERS, TO AS- VERTAIN THE NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHOSE SIGNATURES ARE APPENDED TO SAID PETITIONS, AND REQUIRING A REPORT THEREOF TO BE MADE TO THE CITY COMMISSION. WHEREAS, Chas. A. Mills and others have submitted petition request* ing the City Commission to pass an ordinance entitled: "An Ordinanoe Authorizing and Requiring the City Commis- sion to Sell and Convey to Harvey Seeds Post No. 29, Ameri- can Legion, Department of Florida, at Miami, Florida, the property described herein, At and For the sum of $1.00, and for the further canaieeratlon that the Grantee Construct and Ereot Thereon a memorial Home for the Amerioan Legion and as a Memorial to the Deoeased Veterans of the World War" said petition having been prepared under Seotion 6 of the City Charter of the City of Miami, and WHEREAS, said Seotion 5 of the City Charter requires the City Clerk to asoertain by examination the number of registered voters whose signa- tures are appended thereto and whether this number is at least ten percent of the total number of registered voters as shown by the oity registration books, and that the City Clerk shall attach to said petition his certifi- cate showing the result of said examination, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: 1: That the said petition, be, and is hereby, referred to the City Olerk to ascertain by examination the number of registered voters whose signatures are appended thereto and whether this number is at least 10 per cent of the total number of registered voters as shown by the City Registration Books and attaoh to said petition his certificate showing the result of suoh examination. 2: That the City Clerk make a report of suoh examination by the next regular meeting of the City Commission. Moved by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Leffler that the said resolution be passed and adopted. Roll oalled and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Rumfh, Lum- mus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion parried unanimously and the said resolution passed and adopted. r COMPLAINT AS TO SEWER OUTLET AT FOOT OF N. E. 22nd ST. While before the Commission Mr. Mille complained of the unsanitary oonditicn caused by sewer outlet at the foot of N. E. 22nd Street emptying into the Bay just south of the Bulkhead of a fill recently constructed North of N. E. 22nd Street and asked that steps be taken by the City to extend this sewer outlet beyond the bulkhead. LEASING OF STREET RAILWAY TO 1QLMI BEACH ELECTRIC COMPANY The matter of the leasing of the Street Railway oame up for oonaideration and after some discussion a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a lease to the Miami Beach Electric Company. upen oertain oonditions was introduoed by Mr. Leffler, and is as follows: January 8, 1924. RESOLUTION NO. 1180. 49P A, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THS CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LEASE FOR STREET RAILWAY EQUIPMENT OF THE OITY OF MUM TO THE MIAMI BEACH ELECTRIC 00MPANY UPON CER- TAIN CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THIS RESOLUTION. BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: That the City Manager be, and he 1e hereby, authorized and direct- ed to exeoute a leaee of the street railway, not to the Miami Beaoh Rail- way Company, but to the Miami Beaoh Eleotrio Company upon the approval of the contract by the City Attorney and upon the submission of a financial report of the Miami Beach Electric Company and the Miami Beach Railway Company. BE IT FURTHER,RESOLVED that the said contract as approved by the Le- gal Department and exeouted by the City Manager,.together with such fi- nanoial reports be thereupon submitted to the City Commission Zor appro- val and oonfirmation. Moved by Mr. Leffler and seconded by Mr. Wilson, that the said resolution be passed aid adopted. Roll called and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Luanne, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion unanimously oarried and the said resolu- tion passed and adopted. ALTERATIONS TO BALTIMORE & OAROLINA S. S. 00. WAREHOUSE APPROPRIATION FOR TheCity Manager submitted written oommunioation addressed to him from the Director of public Servioe in reference to alterations to the Baltimore & Carolina S. S. Co., Ware- house at the City Docks and requesting an appropriation for paying for the work. The communication was ordered filed and copied upon the minutes and is as follows: Mr. F. H. Wharton, City Manager, Miami, Fla. Dear Sir: January 7, 1924. We are having the doors in the Baltimore & 0aroltna 5.8.0o., warehouse out in half and fitted with new hangers. This will,re- quire an expanediture of approximately $475. There is available in "Repairs to Warehouse Fund" only 4168.80, so that it will be neoes- sary to provide additional funds to take Dare of this work. If consistent, it would probably be well to have some balanoe left in this fund to draw from in oase of other repair work that may become neoessary during the remainder of the fisoal year. Yours very truly, ERNEST COTTON Director of public Service Thereupon a resolution appropriating the amount requested by the Director of Public Ser- vice for the purpose of making alterations set forth in his communication was introduoed by Mr. wileon and is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 1181. A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF $475.00 FROM THE GENER- AL FUND SURPLUS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE BALTIMORE & CAROLINA S. S. CO. WAREHOUSE AT CITY DOCKS. WHEREAS, the City Manager reports that it is neoessary to have the doors in the Baltimore & Carolina S. S. Co. warehouse at the City Docks out in half and fitted with new hangers and that such alterations will require an expenditure of approximately 4475.00, and that there is avail- able in "Repairs to Warehouse" Fund only 4168.80, and *'_:4t it will be ne- cessary to provide additional funds to pay for the sait alterations, and WHEREAS, it is the sense of the Commission that the said alterations should be made and that the said sum of 4168.80 in the "Repairs to Ware- house" fund should not be used for the payment of such work reported by the City Manager, but that an appropriation should be made therefor. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: That the sum of 4476.00 be, and the same is hereby, appropriated from the General Fund Surplus for the purpose of paying for work at the City Docks as set forth in the preamble of this resolution. Motion by Mr. Wilson,seoonded by Mr. Gilman, that thereaolution be passed and adopted. Roll called and the vote was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Lef- fler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion unanimously oarried and the said resolution passed and adopted. BAY FRONT PARK DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION FROM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 0ommunioation from M. H. West, President of American Park Builders, Incorporated, of Chioago, I11., was reoeived and read and ordered filed and oopled upon the minutes: Chioago, Ill. Jan. 4, 1924. City Commissioners, Miami, Fla. Gentlemen: We have reoently been oomnninioation with some of your oitizens relative to privy 6 development projeots. This brings to mind correspondence we have had with your oity relative to a comprehensive oity plan for Miami and en- virons. It is one of the projects you will sooner or later take 50U January 8, 1924. up and the sooner you do this the more mistakes you will steer clear of in your test growing oity. City planning is 'being taken up by progressive o it ies all over the oountry and Miami it seems should not be a laggard in this respeot. The writer has bad the benefit of a oareful teohnioal training in this work and of twenty years praotioal experience. I have long sine passed through the aoademio and rather visionary per- iod which all beginners seem to go through in early praotioe and fan- ny I am able to prepare oity plane now or praotioal applioation and of real benefit to the cities involved. Our plans for Springfield, Ill., D9oatur, Rookford, Shreveport, Poughkeepsie, N. Y., Danville and my work here in Chicago, I think will establish this contention. However. I shall be very glad to have a chance to meet, with your Commission in explanation of this work, ite value and ap- plioation. possibly an arrangement may be made later in the season for such a conference. Very truly yours, (Signed) M H WEST President Amerioan Park Builders 201 Haat Ontario Street Chicago, Illinois. PETITION TO PREVENT OPENING OF ROCK PIT REFERRED TO LEGAL DEPARTMENT petition from Ernest young of 1739 N. W. 9th Avenue and others asking the Oity to prevent the opening of a rook pit between 17th Street and 20th Street N. W. and 6th Avenue and 9th Avenue N. W, wrga received and after being read was ordered oopied upon the minutes; Miami, Florida, Jan. 4, 1944. We the undersigned hereby petition the Oity Management to have operation of making a new rook pit between 17th St. N.W. and 20th St. N.W. and 8th Ave. and 9th Ave. N.W. stopped immediately. The making of a new pit is not only a nuisanoe but blasting is very dangerous to finished buildings looated near by. (Signed by Ernest Young and others). The petition was thereupon referred to the Legal Department for opinion as to what atepe, if any, could be taken by the city to prevent the opening of new rook pits within the oity limits. CLAIM OF WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FOR DISCOUNT ON ASSESSMENT The City Manager submitted to the Commission oorreapondenoe between Alex J. Coak- ley, Treasurer, Weatmineter Presbyterian Ohuroh and himself in referenoe to assess- ment against the Church property for improvements. After some discussion the oom- munioationa were ordered filed and plaoed upon the minutes and no action taken by the Commission thereon. Said communications are as follows; Mr. F. H. Wharton, Oity Manager, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir; Miami, Florida, December 26th, 1923. Referring to the enclosed tax natioe, will advise that this is the first notice that we have gotten of any assessments due against this property. This is probably due to the fact that they have been sent to the wrong address, and when I called to make payment of this bill I was informed that there was something like 468.27 interest due, which is more than one-half of the amount of the assessment. in view of this being Church property, and our failure to get proper notice, oan we not have this interest oharge waived. Look into this for ue, and advise us what you oan do. You will notice that the notice is made out to "Trustees Pres- byterian Church"; whereas the property stands in the name of the "Trus- tees Westminster Presbyterian Churoh", and we think the books of reoord show the property that way. Aesuring you in advanoe of our deep appreoiation of any con- sideration shown ns, I remain, Sinoerely, ALEX J. COAKLEY Treasurer -Westminster Presbyterian Churoh. Box 317 Miami, Florida, December 29, 1923. Mr. Alex J. Coakley, Box 317, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir; Answering your letter of Deo. 26th in referenoe to the aesese- ment liene for street paving and storm sewers against lot 1 and 2, block 11, Miramar, will say that these improvements as you will note were made way back in 1918 and 1919. There is no way the City can waive these interest charges other than to make an appropriation out of the General Taxes to take care of same. There has been several similar oases with church property, and Sohool Board property thrashed out before the City Commission with the Oity Attorney, and in all oases they have refused to waive the interest or to cannel the assessment for improvement liana. NMI MEM 1 The interest on these liens goes into a Sinking Fund to take oare of the Bond interest on the improvement bonds which were sold to do this work, and as stated above can not be waived. I am sorry that T oannot give you any relief in this matter.. Yours very truly, F. H. WHARTON City Manager Mr. F. H. Wharton, City Manager, Dear Sir Miami, Florida, January 7, 1984.' i aoknowledge reoeipt of your letter of December 29th, in reply to mine of the 26th, relative to assessments against Westminster Presbyterian Churoh, and note carefully what you say. We are not contending that the assessment is not all right, but we are contending that we should not pay the interest when the notioe had been wrongly sent, and therefore we had no notioe of it being due. On this beads, oan you not arrange at least for a discount on this aocount.' Thanking you in advance, we remain Yours very truly, ALEX J. COAKLEY Treasurer -Westminster Presbyterian Church. ACCEPTING DEDIC.A.TION OF STREETS SHOWN IN PLAT OF "MEADOW LIMN" The City Manager submitted plat of"Meadow Lawn" showing certain streets dedicated to the use of the Public. Said plat having been approved by the Director of pu- blio Service as required by the Charter. The streets as shown in the said plat meeting with the approval of the Commission an ordinance accepting the dedication of the streets as shown ih the plat was introduoed by Mr. Wilson. On motion of Mr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Lummus, the charter requirement for reading of ordi- nances on two separate occasions was dispensed with by the following vote: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Moved by Mr. Lef- fler, aeoonded by Mr. Gilman, that the said ordinanoe be given its first reading and read by title. Thereupon the ordinance was given its first reading and read by title only. Moved by Mr. Leffler and seconded by Mr. Gilman that the said ordinanoe be passed on its first reading by title only. On roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummue, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion oarried unanimously and the said ordinance passed on its first reading. on motion of Mr. Leffler, seconded by Mr. Gilman, the ordinanoe was put upon its eeoond reading and was read in full. Moved by Mr. Leffler and seconded by Mr. Gilman that the said ordinance be passed and adopted on its second reading in full as read. On roll oall the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOiS: None. Motion oar- ried unanimously and the said ordinanoe passed and adopted on its final reading as read. The ordinance is numbered 210 and is shown in Ordinance Book 1 at page /41as passed and adopted by the City Commission. ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF STREETS SHOWN IN PLAT OF "HIGH RIDGE" Also submitted by the City Manager was plat of subdivision known as "High Ridge". The plat having been approved by the Direotor of Publio Service as required by the Charter and the streets as shown in the said plat meeting with the approval of the Commission an ordinance entitled: AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING TEE DEDICATION OF THE STREETS IN TEE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS "HIGH RIDGE". was introduced by i r. wilson and on his motion seconded by Mr. Lummus, it was re- solved that the oharter requirement for readinga of ordinanoes on two separate oo- cesions be dispensed with. 0n roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion oarried and the requirement of reading the ordinanoe on two separate oocesions dispensed with. On motion of Mr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Gilman the said ordinance wee put upon its first reading and was read by title only. Moved by Mr. Wilson and aeoonded by Mr. Gilman, that the ordinance be passed on its first reading by title only. On roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Meagre. Romfh, Lummus, Wil- son, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion carried unanimously and the said ordi- nance passed on its first reading. on motion of Lr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Lummus, the ordinance was put upon its second reading and was read in full. Moved by ir. wilson and seconded by Mr. Lummus that the ordinance be passed and adopted on its second and final reading in full as read. Roll oalled and the vote there- on was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion carried unanimously and the said ordinanoe passed and adopted as 'read. The ordinanoe is numbered 211 and is shown in Ordinance Book 1 at page /bj'as passed and adopted by the City Commission. BILLS OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AUTHORIZED PAID FROM PUBLICITY FUND A resolution authorizing the payment from the publicity fund of oertain bills of the Miami Chamber of Commeroe as enumerated in the resolution wee introduoed by Mr.Wileon and is as follows: i 0.4 • Jantuairy 8, ,19E4., MI mm mm EE 1 1 RESOLUTION NO. 1182.. A RES MUTTON AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT FROM THE PU- BLICITY FUND OF CERTAIN BILLS ENUMERATED IN TEE RESOLUTION. WHEREAS, the Chamber of Commerce has presented bills for the months of Ootober and November from the Dorland Avertising Company in the sum of 48,012.06, covering advertising in various newspapers and magazines of the leadingpublishers; also two bille from the Thomas Cusack Company for illuminated bulletins displayed in Chica- go and New York for the months of November and Deoember, in the sums of 4400.00 and 4600.00 respectively; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami that the Direotor of Finance be and is hereby authorized to pay the above mentioned bills from the 1923-24 Publioity Fund. Moved by Mr. Gilman and seconded by Mr. Leffler that the said resolution be passed and adopted. 0n roll oall the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Masers. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion carried and the said resolu- tion passed and adopted. COMPLAINT AGAINST ASSESSED VALUATION MRS. ANNA J. GOUGH As instructed at the meeting of Deoember 18th, 1923, the Direotor of Finanoe report- ed that he had gone into the matter of the assessed valuation plaoed by the City As- sessor on the property of Mrs. Anna J. Gough, being Late 1 and 2, Block 17, Law- rence Estate, and submitted the report of the Tax Assessor whioh was ordered filed and copied upon the minutes of the meeting and is as follows; Miami, Florida, January 7, 1924. Mr. 0. L. Huddleeton, Direotor of Finance, City of Miami, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir; 1923 TAXES MRS. ANNA J. GOUGH 0. 50' Lots 1 and 2, Block 17, Lawrenoe Estate. I hand you herewith letter of Mrs. Gough, together with letter from Mr. Ross, regarding assessment on this property, and will advise property was assessed in 1922 and 1923 as follows: GROUND VALUE IMPROVEMENT VALUE TOTAL 1922 4 800.00 4 1,950.00 42,750.00 1923 800.00 4,500.00 5,300.00 I made an inspeotion of this property.and find an apartment house of four large apartments also garage apartment in the rear. I would consider the property worth in the neighborhood of 420,000.00 and I fail to see where an assessed valuation of 45,3000.00 would be too high. The only mistake I oan see is that it was not assessed for more last yetir, however, I am not certain that both of the buildings were oompleted in 1922. I would consider 46,300.00 a very reaeonable assessment for this property. Yours respeotfully, F. K. CRING City Tax Assessor After some discussion of the matter it was the sense of the Commission that a re- duction in the assessed valuation of the property of Mrs. Anna J. Gough was not justified and on motion of Mr. Willson, seconded by Mr. Leffler, it was resolved that the requestof the said Mrs. Gough be and is hereby denied. On roll Dell the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummue, Wilson, Leffler, Gil- man. NOES: None. Motion carried unanimously. The foregoing resolution is in full as follows; RESOLUTION NO. 1183. A RESOLUTION DENYING THE REQUEST OF MRS. ANNA J. GOUGH FOR REDUCTION IN ASSESSED VALUATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY SET FORTH IN HITS RESOLUTION. WHEREAS, Mre. Anna J. Gough has filed with the Commission protest against the assessed valuation placed by the City Assessor against cer- tain property owned by her and described as follows: Center 50' Lots 1 and 2, Block 17, Lawrenoe Estate, and WHEREAS, the City Assessor erports that he finds upon investiga- tion that the assessment placed thereon is in line with similar proper- ty within the City and does not recommend a reduction in the assessment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the Oity of Miami: That the request of Mrs. Anna J. Gough for reduction in A aeese- ment placed by the City Assessor on property set forth above be,and is hereby, denied. SALE OF 4177.000. SERIES "V" SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS TO OTIS & COMPANY This being the date eet for the reoeption of sealed bide for 4177,000.00 Series "V" Special Improvement Bonds of the City of Miami, the Direotor of Finance submit- ted the following sealed bids reoeived by him, to -wit: January 8, 1924. 7.774 • 1 ear Otis & Company, Cleveland Atlantio National Bank of Jacksonville Weil Roth & Irving Co., Cinoinnati, Miami Bank & Trust Company, Miami Seasongood & Mayer, Cinoinnati, (O. G. White & Company, Ino. New York (Florida Munioipale, Ino., Jacksonville, Spitzer, Roriok & Company, Toledo, 4173,123.70 172,167.90 170,628.00 172,021.03 171,247.80 172,734.30 171,820.00 All of said bids were accompanied by the certified check of each bidder in the sum of 43600.00 and all of eaid bids provided for payment of accrued interest to date of delivery by the bidder whose bid was aooepted. And it appearing that the bid of °tie & Company of Cleveland, Ohio, of 4173,123.70 and accrued interest to date of de- livery, was the highest and beet bid received, a resolution aocepting the offer of said Otis & Company was introduced by Mr. Lummue and is in full as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 1184. A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF OTIS & COMPANY OF CLEVMLAND, 0HI0, FOR ONi HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN THOU- SAND DOLLARS SERIES "V" SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR THE RETURN OF CERTIFIED CHECKS TO THE UNSUCCESSFUL BIDDERS; AND PROVIDING WHERE THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST OF SAID BONDS SHALL BE PAYABLE. WHERr;A:S, this being the date set for the reception of bide for One Hundred Seventy-seven thousand dollars (4177,000.00) Series "V" Special' Improvement Bonds of the City of Miami, Florida, and WHEREAS, the Director of Finance has submitted the following seal- ed bids, aocompanied by certified checks of two percent of the par value of the amount bid, received by him, to -wit: Otis & Company, Cleveland 4173,123.70 Atlantio National Bann of Jaoksonville 172,167.90 Weil Roth & Irving Co., Cincinnati, 170,628.00 Miami Bank & Trust Company, Miami, 172,821.03 Seasongood & Mayer, Cincinnati, 171,247.50 J. G. White & Co .,Inc . New York, 172,734.30 Florida Municipals, Inc.,Jaokaonv ills Spitzer, Roriok & Company, Toledo 171,820.00; and WHEREAS, it appears that the offer of Otis & Company of Cleveland, Ohio, of $173,123.70 and aoorued interest to date of delivery is the highest and beet bid received, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: 1: That the offer of Otis & Company of 4173,123.70 for 4177,000.00 Series "V" special Improvement Bonde of the City of Miami, Florida, be, and the same is hereby, accepted. 2: That the City Clerk be, and he is hereby, direoted to return to the unsuccessful bidders the oertified checks which accompanied their bids. 3: That theprinoipal and interest of said bonds is hereby made pay- able at the United States Mortgage & Trust Company, New York City. Moved by Lir. Lummus and seoonded by ;,ir. wilson, that the rcaid resolution be passed and adopted. On roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummua, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion carried unanimously and the said reso- lution passed by an affirmative vote of the entire City Commission. CONFIRMATION OF PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT N0. 180. This being the date set and advertised for reoeiving remonstrances for the confirma- tion of preliminary Assessment Roll on Highway Improvement No. 180,,it was announced that the Commission would hear the objections of any person or persons whose property was described in the said assessment roll. There being no objeotione filed and the Assessment Roll meeting with the approval of the Commission, a resolution confirming the said Assessment Roll as prepared by the City Manager was introduced by Mr. Gilman and is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 1185. DISTRIOT H-180 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMi T N0. 180. WHEREAS, the 0 ity Commission of the City of Miami, Florida, met on the 8th day of January, 1924, pursuant to the notice of said meeting under Section 56 of the City Charter, to hear all written objections to the confirmation of the preliminary assessment roll on $ighway Improve- ment No. 180, Dietriot H-180, by any person whose property is desoribsd in said preliminary roll, and WHEREAS, the Commiesion or the City of Miami, having received and oonsidered all written remonstrances filed to the confirmation of the preliminary roll by any persons whose property is described in said roll, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: That the prima facie assessment, as indicated on acid preliminary aesessment roll, be and is in all things oonfirmed and sustained against any and all lots or parcels of ground desoribsd thereon. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sums and amounts age inet each of the lots or parcels of ground in said preliminary assessment roll are less than the amount that esoh of said lots or parcels of ground is be- nefited by said improvement and that such amounts are in proportion to the geoial benefits, and that the proportion of said cost to be paid by the said City of Miami on account of highway interaeotion is the sum set opposite to the same therein. The total cost of the said improvement, in the sum of 46688.21, is hereby approved and confirmed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ten (10) days after date of this con- firmation of said assessment roll the same be delivered to the Director u+, xaR i e. 5U4 ' January 8, 1924. UN MM EZ MM MM i of B'inanee and'the Director of. Finance .is hereby ordered, thirty (30) days after date of this resolution to make oolleotiana of the assess - meats therein as required by law. Moved by Mr. Gilman and seconded by Mr. Wilson that the resolution be passed and adopted. Roll oalled and the vote thereon was•ae follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion unanimously oarried and the said rendition passed and adopted. IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED REPORT OF CITY MANAGER The City Manager reported to the Commission that the work under Highway Improve- ments Nos. 150, 161, 152, 153, 161, 162, 171, 172, 178, 179, 181, 183, 184, 185, 186 and 187 had been completed and thereupon a resolution aooepting the work done under the said improvement districts, directing the preparation of assessment rolls by the City Manager and direoting the olerk to give notioe for objeotione to the confirmation of the assessment rolls was introduced by Mr. Leffler and is as fol- lows: RESOLUTION NO. 1186. A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK DONE UNDER OERTAIN IMPR0VEM8`NT DISTRICTS SET FORTH IN THIS RESOLUTION; DIRECTING THE PRE- ' PARATION OF PRiLILMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLLS ON SAME; 'AND DI- RECTING NOTICE FOR OBJECTIONS TO CONFIRMATION OF SAID ROLLS TO BB GIVEN BY THE CITY CLERK. WHEREAS, the City Manager rep lowing streets under the following Highway Improvement No. 150, Highway Improvement No. 151, Highway Improvement No. 152, Highway Improvement No. 153, Highway Improvement No. 161, Highway Improvement No. Highway Improvement No. Highway Improvement No. Highway Improvement No. 162, 171, 172, 178, Highway improvement No. 179, Highway Improvement No. 181, Highway improvement No. 183, Highway Improvement No. 184, Highway Improvement No. 185, Highway Improvement No. 186, Highway Improvement No. 187, orts that the Improvement of the fol- dlatriote have been oompleted, to -wit: N. W. 8th Road, S.E. 5th St., from S. Miami Avenue to Briokell Avenue, N.E. 29th St., from N. Miami Avenue to 2nd Avenue. S. W. loth Street, N. E. First Court, from 14th St. to 17th Street, N. E. Miami Place, from 14th Street to 17th Street, N. E. Miami Court, from 14th Street to 17th Street, N. W. 2nd Street, S. W. llth Street, S. W. 5th Ave. from S. W. 8th to S. W. llth Street, N. W. 10th St., from N. W. 2nd Ave. to N. W. 3rd Avenue, N. E. 21st st., from 2nd Avenue to Bay, N. E. 29th Street, from 2nd Avenue to Bay, N. E. 25th Street, N. E. 34th Street, N. E. 35th Street, N. E. 28th Street, N. E. 2let Street; and WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the said improvements have been properly and completely done, and is in conformity to the plans, profiles, details, drawings, and specifioatione of the City Manager as adopted by the Commission of the City of Miami for such improvements, and due notice to the owners and all other persons interested in the property abutting said improvements having been duly given, and the Commission of the City of Miami having heard the owner or owners and all other pereone interested who appeared, and having reoeived and considered all remonstrances and com- plaints from the owners of property or other persona interested therein against the oast of such improvements, and being satisfied that said work has been done and completed in accordance with the profiles, details, draw- ings and speoifioatione, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami: 1: That the said work for said improvements be, and the same is here- by, aooepted and oonfirmed by the Commission of the City of Miami. 2: That the City Manager be, and he ie ;o_�:,� direoted to make and file with the City Clerk a preliminary assessment roll of each of said im- provements as provided in Section 56 of the City Charter. 3: That upon the filing of said preliminary assessment roll, the City Clerk cause notice to be given ih a newspaper published in the City twine weekly for two weeks, stating that at a meeting of the Commission of the City of Miami to be held on a certain day and at a oertain hour, not less than twelve days from the date of the first publication, any person whose property is described in said preliminary assessment roll, may ap- pear and file written objeotions to the confirmation of the maid prelimi- nary assessment rolls. Moved by Mr. Leffler and seconded by Mr. Gilman that the said resolution be passed and adopted. Roll called and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NO::S: None. Motion oarried unanimously and the said resolution passed and adopted. COMPLAINTS AS TO INFERIOR AND DEFECTIVE WORT{ UNDER STREET IMPROVEIMENT CONTRACTS Mr. Carl T. Hoffman and D. J. Heffernan and Roy D. Marsh having heretofore appeared before the City Commission at an informal meeting of said Commission as Attorneys re- presenting clients who had complained as to the oharaoter of the work and alleged failure to carry out specifications of the contracts in the paving of certain streets in the City of Miami, and the matter having been discussed between them and the City iSU5 I I IIIIII II I 11111 I ■111.I. 11111111111111111111.11111111 111111111111E111 II III 1111.I11 I I IIIII I111111III 11111111111 I 1 11 1111111 II I I 1 1111II I II i i i 1 January 8, 1924. ©ommission at such informal meeting, the City Manager submitted the following Communication to whioh was attaohed the report submitted by Mr. Chas. H. Holetlew, County Engineer, Palm Beach County and Ernest Cotton, Direotor of Publio Servioe of the City of Miami, all being in referenoe to the said com- plaints. Thereupon upon motion of Mr. Lummus, seoonded by Mr. Leffler, it was resolved that the said communioations be filed and copied upon the minutes. The roll call showed the following vote: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lumens, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES; None. Motion oarried and the said communications and oomplaints are as follows: Communication of City Manager: City Commission, Miami, Pla. Gentlemen; Miami, Florida, January 8th, 1924. Referring to the attaohed complaint, which is unsigned, in reference to defeotive and inferior work on oonorete curbs and gutters now being laid by the contractors, beg to say that none of this work• has been aooepted yet in full by the City, and that the oontraotors will be required to repair all broken curbs and gutters, and to oorreot any defeots in the work before final pay- ments will be made. Respectfully, F. H. WHARTON City Manager Complaint as filed: THAT INFERIOR AND DEFECTIVE CONCRETE WORK 18 BEING DONE ON OITY CONTRACTS: SPECIFICATIONS: (EXCERPTS FROM SECTIONS 29 and 30). The oontraotor is to take epeoial precaution to proteot ourb and gutter or gutters from damage. The curb and gutter is to be made in place in one continuous operation in uniform lengths of six feet with one -eight to one - quarter inoh joints formed by the removal of temporary steel tem- plates, extending the full depth and width of the work. Speoial oars is to be used in making curves true circles tan- gent to the straight ourb and all °straight" curb is to oonform so truly to line and grade that there ie no noticeable variation from it. The attention of the Contractor is furthermore called to the very slight fall or grade which can be obtained and the extra pre- cautions which will be necessary to secure absolute acouraoy in following the grades. The most careful attention must be given to this. MEMORANDA.: Curb and gutter is constructed in blooks or seotions of oon- orete material six feet in length. NON-COMPLIANCE CHARGED: That epeoi1ioatior:s oontemplate that the blocks or seotions of ourb and gutter shall be uniform and completed unbroken; that the joints between the blocks shall be suoh as to present a smooth and oontinuous surfaoe on the top of the curb, the faoe of the ourb, and the top of the gutter; that the ourb and gutters before acceptance by the City and payment made therefor shall be in a good unbroken and workmanlike oondition. That there is at present in the curb and gutter oonatruoted on N. E. 16th Street twenty-five (25) or more broken and shatter- ed blocks or seotions of curb and gutter (all between E. E. Second Avenue and Bay Shore Drive); that the pavement on said N. E. 16th Street has been laid and the first oiling given. That there are a number of broken and shattered blacks of ourb and gutter on the various streets in Edgewater where ourb and gutter was constructed under contracts with the City. That an inspector of the City oondemned this broken ourb and gutter and ordered it replaoed while the contractor was still on the looation with hie men and equipment, but that the oontraotor was permitted to leave this defeotive work and remove his men and equipment from the job; that after he has eo removed hie men and equipment the base or foundation course of the pavement was oom- ple ted and the penetration course laid and oiled and the second coat of oil applied to the street. That there are three blocks of broken ourb and gutter with- in a epaoe of one hundred feet on the south side of northwest ninth street at the corner of northwest fifth avenue. That on southwest third street the joints in the gutter are not even and uniform in some plaoes there being as much as one inch difference between the levels of the top of the gutter on either side of a joint. (we are informed that the property owner in front of whose property this particular oondition exists has made oom- plaint to City public aervioe department). That the defeotive work to whioh attention is direoted above does not oonatitute all of the work of this oharaoter. That there are many other blooks on other street where this oondition exists. 0111141131,1111111101R011101111111111111111 11111glp,l!Pt!ITIIIT9141111111111I9111101191R1111N mPllEmpll!1N!'1111'!1 !IgPIIIpA!!A111191AAI!III'"I! 'P! Ig1111111111p'111914P1u11111!411 1I 1 L w .F II ggll'1Iq111I II 14111 III I1111'1A111R1'I'I III glll 11' I�IIII1141!4!I 11I'4111! INN! 500 January 8, 1924. MIME EERIE Following ie the charge made, the oommunioation of the City stinger, the report Of Palm Beaoh County Engineer Holttlaw and Director of publio Service Ernest. Cotton: INTERIOR MATERIALS ARE BEING USED ON CITY PAVING CONTRACTS: Speoifioations for Bituminous Macadam Pavement read: "PAVEMENT "20. General Deaoription. The bituminous maoadam pavement shall consist of two courses of broken atone, separately constructed, laid to conform to the required grades and cross-section; and constructed as hereinafter specified, with bituminous material inoorporated with the second or top course. "21. First Course. After the sub -grade has been prepared as specified, a foundation course of pit run rook shall be evenly spread, so that it shall have, after rolling, the required thickness of five (8) inches, no stone larger than four (4) inches in its largeet dimension being used. This course shall be rolled with a 10 to 12 ton roller. The initial rolling shall begin at the sides of the road and continue towards the oen- ter and shall be continued until the stone is thoroughly bonded, suffi- cient water being used to secure a good surface. In the preliminary estimate of quantities in the proposal whioh con- tractors used in submitting bids for suoh pavements the contractors are asked for bids for furnishing a oertain number of cubic yards of extra stone referred to as "Miami Pit Rook, or equal." IT IS CHARGED: That Bituminous Macadam Pavements are being constructed under oity oontraots and at the expense of the City of Miami and the owners of pro- perty abutting upon the streets beihg so paved, whioh said contracts were let upon oompetitive bids for the construction of such pavements, under specifications containing the above quoted sections 20 and 21; That the material being used on such oontraots for the first or foun- dation course of suoh pavements is inferior in quality and not in confor- mity to the apeoifioationa embodied in such contracts, because: It is not broken stone within the meaning of the specifications; It is not "Miami Pit Rook or equal" as provided for in the estimates of quantities upon which bidders were required to submit bide; It is not pit run rock within the meaning of the spec ifioatione, but is a mixture of rook, sand,sllt, marl, in which the proportions of sand, marl, silt and other substances which are not rook, are such as to con- stitute thirty percent or more of the whole volume; That the proportions of aand,marl, silt and other substances, not rock, are so great that the material will not bond properly to form a foundation course within the meaning of the specifications; and that the foundation courses laid with such material is not properly and thoroughly bonded in Conformity to the specifications; That in many cases such material is not equal in value for the foun- dation course for such pavement, to the material which has been excavated and removed from the street in preparing the sub grade for such pavement; That the same kind of material as that which is being used for the foundation course on such pavements has been rejected and condemned and not permitted to be used as first or foundation course in the construo- tion of pavements in the City of Miami by C. W. Murray, former City En- gineer and Director of Public Service, by C. N. Grimehaw, ohief lnspeotor, and by Fronk Snyder, inspector in the engineer division of the Department of Public Service. That the same kind of material has been rejeoted and condemned and not permitted to be used in the construction of pavements in the City of Miami and various parts of Dade County by the following civil engineers: Frederiok, Hazelhurst, Y,lyoe, Hoffpaiur, Moore and Crawshaw. That the same kind of material is known and considered by practi- cally every engineer, contractor and construction foreman in Dade County to be inferior to Miami Pit Rook, incapable of bonding together as does Miami Pit Rook, and not suitable material far the construction of the foundation course for macadam pavement. That the material of this inferior oharaoter has been used in the construotion of foundation oourse for bituminous macadam pavements on the following streets in the City of Miami: Bay Shore Drive, North River Drive, Northeast Nineteenth Street, Northwest Eleventh Street, Northwest Seventh Avenue, Northwest Ninth Street. City Manager's eommunioation: City Commission, Miami, Fla. Gentlemen: Naomi, Florida, Jan. 8,` 1924. I am handing you herewith report submitted by Mr. Chas. H. Holtslaw, County Engineer of Palm Beach County, in referenoe to the foundation course on several of the streets of Miami on whioh com- plaints have been made. I am also attaching hereto report of W. Ernest Cotton, Director of public Servioe, his findings on the same subject. Respectfully, F. H. WHABTON City Manager Report of Chas. H. Holtslaw: West Palm Beaoh, P3,a., January Oth, 1924. • • c JarnUart 8, 1924. Mr. F. H• Wharton, City Manager, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir: As requested, and confirming my verbal report to the City Oommtsaionere on the 3rd inst.I give you the following report on investigations of street work in Miami. On January 3rd teat holes were dug and conditions found as follows; No. 1 on North River Drive, about 200 feet north of N.W. lat Street. Depth of foundation course after being oompaoted, inohee; bond fair. Under a strict interpretation of the epeoifieations, I would say that the foundation oourse does not comply with apeoifloa - tione in so far as the bond in concerned; under a liberal interpre- tation, the bond in this case might be aooepted. No. 2. At the southeast corner of North River Drive and N. W. 3rd Street. Depth of foundation oourse after being oompaoted, 4 7/8 inohee; bond poor. A liberal interpretation of the epeoifioations would permit aooeptanoe in so far a depth is concerned, but the bond does not comply with the specifications. Another test hole was dug approximately 27 feet south of the teat above and 2 feet west of the east gutter on North River Drive. Depth of foundation after being oompaoted, 4i inches. Does not com- ply with specifications either as to depth of foundatioh course or as to bond. Looation of these two holes aeleoted by Mr. Grimahaw. No. 3. At the intersection of N. W. 9th Street and 6th Avenue, location seleoted by Mr. Grimshaw. Depth of foundation oourse af- ter being compacted,•34 inches; bond poor (two test holes) Does not oomply with speoifioationa. No. 4. Another test hole was dug on N. W. 9th Street, approxi- mately 175 feet east of No. 3. Depth of foundation oourse after be- ing compacted, 5i- inches; bonded fairly well. I believe this test would show a condition aoceptable under the apeoifioations. No. 5. On N. W. llth Street at the oorner of N.W. 8th Street Road; teat hole dug near south gutter in location selected by Mr. Grimahaw. At this location, I believe trouble must have developed in the sub -grade, as there were two distinot strata of rock in the foundation course, which had a total thioknees of 7 inches. The lower stratum (5 inches think) was well bonded, but the upper stra- tum was loose and no apparent bond. I then selected another looation for teat in the center of the street, immediately north of last test. in this looation, the foun- dation oourse was well bonded, but was only 3i inches in depth. No. 7. N. W. 7th Avenue and 7th Street, 50 feet north of in- tersection, location seleoted by Mr. Grimahaw. Depth of foundation oourse after being compacted, 4 5/8 inches, bond fair. Under strict interpretation of the specifications, does not comply. No. 8. On N. E. 19th Street, approximately 15 feet east of drive into City'e slat house. Depth of foundation course, 3 1/8 inches; bond poor. Does not comply with epeoifioationa. No. 9. At the intersection of North Bay Shore Drive and N. E. 15th Terraoe. Depth of foundation course after being oompaoted, 4} inohee; bond fair. Does not comply with specifications. In each of these testa where new rook was laid on top of sand, the depth was measured to the first indication of sand. mere an old street was used as a base, the measurement was taken to the first indication of old oil treatment. Since one of the charges presented in oonneotion with this work was that the rock. used contained a large proportion of material other than rook, samples of the very fine material taken from the holes was brough to the laboratory. These samples came from the locations designated No's. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8. Numbers 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8 were apparently the same material, while the sample from No. 2 had a red- dish appearance. Samples from No'e. 2 and 5 were subjected to an said teat to determine the lime content, as the limeis the active bonding or cementing property of the rook. The material from sample No. 2 showed approxi.rately 10cjo lime oontent, and that from No. 5 show- ed approximately 30% lime oontent. The pit run rock, when laid loose for the foundation course, oontaine about 30% voids, which are filled during the process ofcom- paoting, by the fine material such as was tested above. Several tests on different samples of what is known as "rook" in South Flori- da, show a lime content of from 45 to 60 percent, and it would appear from the teat of fine material taken from No. 5, whioh was seleoted as being representative of the material taken from five of the test holes, that 85 to 90 peroent of the fine material is the same com- position as the rook. I should say that at the very least 75 to 80 peroent, but more probably d5 to 90 percent of the material of whioh the streets are constructed, is rook according to the meaning of thw word as used locally. These tests, of oourse, were scattered, being p raotioally one test to each street, but I believe are as fair to the oontraotor as to the City, and vine versa. Yours very truly, (Signed) CHARLES E. HLSTTL,IW. County Engineer, Palm Beach County. Florida Lngineer's Certificate #87. "Report of Direotor of Publio Servioe• Mr. F. H. Wharton, City Deinager, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir: January 7th, 1824. 1111111111111111 1111 11111111 • 1IE II1IIE111111II II11111 I IUII11 IIIII II 111111 is 051111.1MinnniniCI®`11111111Min i 1111 1111111111111111101 508 January 8, 1924. I wish to report the following oovering oonditione found on inspection of the foundation course on the MoQahey oontraots covering NW 7th Avenue, NW 9th Street, NW llth Street, NE 10th St., North Bay Shore Drive and NW North River Drive: NW 7th ,Avenue: No. 1 — 9' east of west ourb opposite residenoe, No. 611, Foundation oourse 6fr" thiok. No. 2 - 6' west of east curb, opposite residenoe No. 639, foundation course 5" thiok. No. 3 - Center of street opposite north property line of N W 7th Street, Foundation course 6-5/8 ". No. 4 - 10' east of west curb and 100' north of the north property line of NW 7th Street, founda- tion course Alt" thiok. No- 5 - 8' West of east ourb at the south property line of NW 8th Street, foundation course 6-3/8" thiok. No. 6 - 'Center of street opposite residenoe #813 Foundation 7" thick. No. 7 - Center of street opposite residenoe #821, foundation 6i" thiok. No. 8 - 4-' east of west curb opposite residenoe #835, Foundation 2-3/4" thick. At this point founda- tion was ravelled and the sub -grade not excavated to its proper depth, or else the rolling of the other street had bulged foundation so that we defined the limits of this area on the west side of this street which extended for a distance of approximately 200' where the foundation varied from 2" to 4" in thiokneee only. This area was marked and the Inspeotor on the job was given instructions to have the foundation removed and sub -grade carried to its proper depth, and street re -filled with sufficient foundation rook. No. 9 - 6' east of the west curb opposite residenoe No. 814, foundation 5i" thick. No. 10. - 5i' west of east ourb opposite south proper- ty line of NW 9th Street, fo ndation 4-5/8" thiok. No. 17 - 5' east of west gutter, opposite residenoe No. 909, foundation6" thick, wearing course 24" thiok. No. 18 - 4i' west of the east gutter, opposite resi- dence No. 1021, foundation 5i" thick, wearing course 2" thiok. NW 9th Street: NW llth Street: No. 11 - Center of street, 150' east of the .east pro- perty line of NW 7th Ave., foundation 4-5/8" thick, wearing course 2" thiok. No. 12 - Center of street opposite residence #652, foundation 5" thick, wearing course 2" thick. No. 13 - 8' south of the North curb opposite residenoe No. 611, foundation 5-" thiok, wearing oouree 2" thiok. No. 14 - 6' North of south curb, opposite residenoe No. 557, founaatiou 5-3/4" thick, wearing course 2-1/8" thiok. No. 15 - 10' south of the north curb, opposite resi- denoe No. 514, foundation 5-" thick, wearing course 2" thick. No. 19 - 7' eouth of the north gutter line opposite residenoe No. 711, foundation 5-3/8" thick, wearing oouree 2-1/8" thick. No. 20 - 10' North of south gutter, opposite residenoe No. 762, foundation 5" thick, wearing course 2" thick. No. 21 - Center of street, opposite residenoe No. 794, foundation 6-7/8" thick, wearing course 2" thick. No. 22 - 4i' south of the North gutter, opposite resi- dence No. 878, foundation 4-7/8" thiok, to top surfaoe of old oiled surfaced road, Wearing oourse not yet installed. No. 23 - 6' south of North gutter and 82' east of east line of Northwest 8th street road, foundation 5-7/8" thick, wearing Course 2" thiok. NB 19th Street: No. 24 - Center of street 50' west of the southwest corner of NE 2nd Ave. foundation 6" thick, wearing course 2" thick. No. 25 - 6' south of north gutter opposite residenoe No. 161, foundation 4-7/8" thick, wearing course 2" thiok. No. 26 - 6' North of South gutter, opposite residenoe No. 101, foundation 4-9/16" thick, wearing course 1-15/16". No. 27 - venter of street opposite residenoe No. 57, foundation 6-3/4" thiok, wearing oourse 2" thick. No. 28 - 6' North of south gutter line opposite west end of Slat Rouse, foundation 5-3/16", wearing course 2-1/16". North Bayshore Drive: #29 West Drive: Center of street 30' south of south property line of 17th Terrace, foundation 7i", wear- ing oourse li". No. 30 - East Drive: 4' west of east gutter opposite North property line of NE 17th Street, foundation 7i" thick, wearing oourse 1-7/8" think. No. 31 - West drive: 5' east of west gutter, opposite south properly line of NE 17th Street. Foundation 6-3/4" thick, wearing course an thick. No. 32 - West Drive: Center of Street 90' North of North property 6-7/8" thi� thiok: wearing oourse, 1/15/16" "thiok. ,'annary 8, 1984. 1 ®ill 11111®111 ®®11®1® ■III IIII I IIII IIIIIIIII IIII 1111111111111 1 l Heysham Drive, south of Causeway; NW N River Drive: No. 33, Rest Drive; Center of Street 18' north of north property line NE 16th Street; foundation 7*" thiok, wearing course 1-3/4" thiok. No. 34 - West Drive: 3' west of east gutter op- posite residence No. 1636, foundation 7-5/8" think, wearing oouree 2" thick. No. 86 - East Drive: 3' east of west gutter and 62' south of south property line of NE 16th Terraoe. foundation 5" thiok, wearing oouree 2-7/8" thiolt. Na. 36 - West rive: Center of street 60' eouth of south property line of N. E16th Terraoe, founda- tion to top of old street 5" thick, wearing course 2-1/8" thiok. No. 37 - East Drive: 50' south of south line of 14th Street, foundation to top of old street 8", wearing course 2". No. 38 - West Drive; 4' east of west ourb, 110' south of south line of oauseway garage.iokness of foundation course to top of old road 2-5/8". wearing oouree 24" thick. No. 39 - West Drive: 3' west of east ourb 110' south of south line of Causeway Garage, foundation 10", wearing course 2-1/8" thiok. No. 40 - East Drive: 3 ' west of east gutter 63' south of south line of Pershing Court, foundation to top of old road 6-7/8", wearing oaurse 2-3/8" th ick . No. 41 - West Drive: 18' east of west gutter ap- posite north line of Waldin Court, foundation to old road 6.7/8" thiok, wearing oouree 2-1/8" thick. No. 42 - East Drive: 3' east of west gutter oppo- site residence No. 1303. foundation to top of old road 2-1/16" thiok; thickness of old road 7-3/4"; wearing course 2-3/16". No. 43 — 8' east of west gutter and 8' north of the north line of Belcher Building, foundation course 11-1/2" thiok. No. 44 - 13-1/2' west of east gutter and 3b' south of the south line of Belcher Building. foundation to old road 9". No. 46 - Center of driveway, 110' south of the north line of 12th Street. Foundation 11" to old road. No. 46 - 12}' east of the west ourb and 65' north of the north line of NE llth Terraoe, foundation 13-3/4" thiok. No. 47 - 25j' west of the east curb on north line of NE llth Terrace, foundation 19" plus. No. 48 - 6' west of east gutter and 80' north of the north line of Flagler St., foundation course 2-3/4" thiok to old road, and we dug into old road an additional depth of 6.*N, but did not find other than good rook. No. 49 - Center of street opposite residence No. 26, foundation 4i•" to surfaoe of old road, and we dug an additional 5i" in this old street and found good rook. No. 50 - 6' east of the west gutter and opposite south property line of NW let St. Foundation 3i" to old street surfaoe, and dug 6-7/8" below this in- to the old street finding good rook. No. 51 - 7j' west of east gutter 56' north of north property line of LW let at., foundation 64" to old street surface,; and we dug an additional 5" into this old street, finding good rook. No. 52 - Center of street 150' north of north pro- perty line of NW let St., 6" to old street surface, and we dug an additional 5" into this old street, finding good rook. No. 53 - 5' east of west gutter, opposite residenoe No. 147. Foundation 4" thick to old street surface, and we dug an addit ional 6" in the old street find- ing good rook. Na. 54 - 8' west of east gutter and 12i' north of north property line of NW 2nd St. Foundation course 11fr" thick. This foundation course was rather dirty looking as though it were mixed with over -burden. No. 56 - center of street in oenter of block between 2nd and 3rd streets. 64" to old street grade, and we dug an additional in the old street finding good rook. No. 56 - 6' east of west ourb, 90' south of south property line of NW 3rd St. foundation course 6" think. No..57 - 9' west of east gutter and 37' north of north property line of NW 3rd St. Foundation course 3i•" thick to old street surfaoe and we dug an additonal 10" into the old street finding good rook. No. 58 - Center of street 200' north of north proper- ty line of NW 3rd St. Foundation to old street eurfcoe 4" thick and we dug an additional 7" into the old street finding good material. No. 59 - 7f0 east of the west ourb and 28' south of south property line of NW 4th Street. We found three distinct layers of rook. The first one 3" thiok the seoond 3i" thiok, and the third 6 •" thiok. 1 1 1 e 1 i 1 i 1 e ■ 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■ ■ SdSi' ".41, r'3M1 t' •. � .1 tfa`.. 510 January g, 1924. At a number of the above looations, aamples of the foundation course were secured and these samples we have in our offioe. The foundation oouree as revealed by the tests, shows it to be oomposed of what I would aooept as pit -run rook under the speci- fications, and is, in all instances, examined, except at the one point mentioned in the notes, in full agreement with the specifica- tions. The fine material in this foundation oouree is apparently of the same general obaraoter as is the rook or larger particles, and this fine material is in oorreot proportions to entirely fill the voids or interetioes between the larger pieoes of the aggregate so as to give a dense course that to well oompaoted or bonded so that it ie diffioult to dislodge the larger pieoea. This foundation course is, for a considerable extent, still under traffio and has been for thirty days or more without the wearing oourse. The surface is hard and heavy trunks in hauling over this foundation oouree do not make impressions on it. Further- more, even with the dry weather thet we have had, the surface had not dusted or worn to any extent. We have made as many examinations as time allowed, and as you will see from the above notes, these examinations were made on dif- ferent parts of the streets without any attempt to piok locations. The fact that traffio has been turned on this foundation course before the wearing oouree was added, gives us the very best oppor- tunity to try out this foundation course so as to determine whether or not it is bonded, and if it is not bonded ravelled places develop, which oan be and are being oured before wearing course is installed. It 18 my judgment that the foundation as installed could not be rejeoted under the epeoifioations, and I thoroughly believe that the streets when finished will give permanent satisfaction. Respeotfully submitted, ERNEST C CTTON Direotor of public Service DEDICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR STREETS AT CORNER OF W. FLAGLER AND 12TH AVE. Mr. John Seybold appeared before the Commission in reference to dedication of a point of land at the interseotion of West plagler Street, West 12th Avenue and the Old County Road for street purposes and submitted deed of oonveyanoe of the property deeoribed therein. Thereupon an ordinance accepting the dedioation of the property deeoribed in the said deed and reoited in the ordinanoe was introduced by Mr. Gilman. On motion of Mr. Gilman, seoonded by mr. Lummus, it was resolved that the charter requirement for reading ordinances on two separate 000asione be dispensed with. On roll call the vote was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. The resolution passed by a unanimous vote of the entire Commission, and thereupon, up- on motion of Mr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Leffler, the said ordinance was given its f bst reading and read by title only. Moved by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Leffler that the ordinance be passed on its first reading. Roll called and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion carried unanimously and the ordinanoe passed on ite first reading by title only. On motion of Mr. Wilson, seoonded by I. Leffler, the said ordinanoe was put on its second and final reading and was read in full. Moved by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Leffler that the ordinanoe be passed and adopted on its second and final reading. Roll called and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummue, Wilson, Leffler, Gilman. NOES: None. Motion unanimously oarried and the said ordinanoe passed and adopted on its second and final rea ling in full. The ordinanoe is numbered 212 and 1s shown in Ordinance Book 1 at page/ ,5"as passed and adopted by the City Com- mission. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission at this meeting, on mo- tion duly made and eeoonded, the meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: CiTV OF MIMI DOCUMENT INDE MEETING DATE: January 8, 1924 ITEM NO DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION COMMISSION ACTION RETRIEVAL CODE NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 APPROVING ESTABLISHMENT OF NAVAL RESERVE UNIT IN THE CITY OF MIAMI DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO CHECK PETITIONS FILED BY CHAS. A. MILLS, CHAIRMAN OF PETITIONERS EXECUTION OF LEASE FOR STREET RAILWAY TO MIAMI B. ELECTRIC COMPANY APPROPRIATING $475.00 FOR ALTERATIONS TO B & C S. S. CO. WAREHOUSE ON CITY DOCKS PAYMENT OF CERTAIN BILLS OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ORDERED FROM PUBLICITY FUND DENYING REQUEST OF MRS. ANNA J. GOUGH FOR REDUCTION IN ASSESSMENT ACCEPT BID-OTIS & COMPANY FOR $177,000.00 SERIES "V" SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS CONFIRMING PRELIMINARY ROLL ON HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT NO. 180 ACCEPT WORK IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS No. 150 THROUGH No. 187 v R-1178 R-1179 R-1180 R-1181 R-1182 R-1183 R-1184 R-1185 R-1186 01178 01179 01180 01181 01182 01183 01184 01185 01186 1