Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 08-08-06 ‎(regular)‎ — reading text

year., authorize the City Manager to extend-the contract for f,our years ,i,n ona year incr~m~ nts., ;\,,>i; i. '<>:".., 1',;~ '-.,:": . . . ii:",,',: . J RFP ,06. 120. CRA R(jW. GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES'" To award the CRA Medians right-of-way ( ROW)', portion of RFP # 06- 120, Grounds Maintenance Services, to Edwards Management Services, for a d of one year in ~ e.amount of $38, 765. 00. :,{ " peri() Further authorize the City Manager toa,Pprove the extension of the bid with,four(4) opti9, n years', if " it is determined to b~ in th~ b~ st interest of the City. ,.,.. ',." i' i,:' .: 248 6/ 27/ 06 Regular Council PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA-ORD. 1703. ANNEXATION OF 653 COUNTRY CLUB c! The City Attomey read the ordinance by title only. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA; RELATING TO THE ANNEXATION OF LOT 3 AND THE SOUTH 30.75 FEET OF LOT 2, BLOCK B, COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES SUBDIVISION ( 653 COUNTRY CLUB AVENUE NE); PROVIDING FOR AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR PROPERTY ANNEXED; PROVIDING FOR EFFECT OF ANNEXATION; PROVIDING FOR MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Mayor opened the public hearing. David deVaux, 348 Marie Circle, received clarification on impact fees for new construction or development. As there was no one else who wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Minich moved to adopt Ord. 1703 on second reading. Mr. Campbell seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Patterson, Campbell, Tucker, Pullen, and Minich in c favor (Hartwell absent). ORD. 1705-COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS The City Attorney read the ordinance by title only. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING DIRECTIONS- THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH: 2008, PURSUANT, TO FLORIDA STATUTES, CHAPTER 163; PROVIDING ' FOR AUTHORITY; PROVIDI~JG FOR :\ DOPTION OF ^ TEXT AM6NDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE TIONS; PROVIDING ELEMENT RESULTING FROM PENDING PRIV^ TE AMENDMENT .^.PPUc.^, FOR ADOPTION OF TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT INITIATED BYTHE CITY; PROVIDING FOR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS RESULTING FROM PENDING PRIVATE AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS RESULTING FROM CITY INITIATED CHANGES; PROVIDING f~~ FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. T~e requirements of Section 20- 128( b) of the, Land Development Code have been met. PRESENTATION OF STAFF REPORT AND COMMENTS , Len Mitchell, Long- Range Planning Manager, explained the comprehensive plan process and advised that there are seven proposed amendments included in this ordinance; and that each one would be discussed separately. He advised that the MPB/ LPA recommended approval of all 1, requests in the amendment package at the June 1, 2006 meeting, except for Case 06- 12- CP06- which was recommended for denial, and Case 06- 19- CP06- 1, which the Board concurred with Staffs amended recommendation to reduce the zone from 500 feet to 150 feet, and to require a buffer area adjacent to residential land uses with specific landscaping and buffering requirements. ) AMENDMENT 06- 12-CP06- 1. GROSS DENSITY AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT The first amendment to be discussed, # 06- 12- CP06- 1, was a request from David deVaux to amend the Future Land Use Element Policy to allow 31. 0 Dwelling Units/Gross Acre Density and a Maximum Height of 55 Feet in the MDR land use designation. Mr. Mitchell advised that there were no proponents or opponents who spoke at the June 1 LPA public hearing, and that Staff recommended disapproval of the request.  249, Regular Council 6/ 27/ 06 jRO~. 11:0,5. ( CONTI COMMIfiTS ,FROM PROPONENTS/OPPONENTS " a\ fIctdeVau)(, 34~,Marie Circle, advised he withdrew the request for a maximJ! m height of 55 feet as tnehei,gft\tordioance' had been amended and he was satisfied, with that However, the request in d,ensity 1$ ; stUI r~ quested~ :" ,',: ,'."', ,.':>" , H,', i;.'~ ':"'.~~\~ . Ii., Mr. deVaux requested that the City approved the density at 18 units per acre, but woul1( ,: consider 16 or 17 units per acre, as these are numbers that he' could work with to develop' his property. 1 I .~ Mr. Mitchell advised that a request can be made to lower the density; however, there are several property owners in the MDR district who would' beaffected as well:'The other problem is that the City wants to do a comprehensive change, and to do any change in densitY at this time would not be a comprehensive change. Mr. Mitchell advised the proper, course 9f.. ~ ctiol[ ",woulcl, b~,; ', to withdraw the request and resubmit it at a lat~rtime:' " " ",,",". ,,:~::< ,',:: ",. ':;, , ': ,,',' . ',', , ',.", Mr. deVaux advised he would withdraw the request~nd will ~e. appIY"at a later tim~:~ ,; Mr. MitchelL advised ) hat two versions "of the ordinance \ vere ~ ubmitted : to theMPB for consideration, and Staff concurred with the recommendation of the ' MPB/ LPA on the ordinance. I" The City Attorney advised that no action is required by Council since the "request was withdrawn. Chris Gibson, 249 Brooks Street SE, spoke against an increase in density and heigH~ in that area of the.~ ity. ,,',' , ., .' ':; ::, " AMENDMENT 06- 17-CP06- 1. AMEND CITY' S NEIGHBORHO() D MAP f. t;" The second amendment to be discussed was # 06- 17 -CP06- 1, a req~est from the City t()'amend: the Future Land Use element regarding " Neighborhood p'lans , 1999" to amend the City's ' neighbQrhoods map to designate 11 neighborhoods in the' City as fol~ows: East Miracle Strip, Beal Parkway, Elliott' s Point, Ferry Park. Gamier Beach, South Bayou, Northwest, S ' eabreeze, Oakland, WE Combs. and Kenwood. Mr. Mitchell advised that there were no proponents or opponents 'who spoke at the June 1 LPA public hearing, and that Staff recommended approval of the r~quest. t COMMENTS FROM PROPONENTS/ OPPONENTS""'" ,',.. ",'. ,,, ''' 1+:')- The 'Mayor asked for' comments from' proponents/ opponents'~ A.s there\ Nas none, the public hearing was closed. , ";"',..>>,'" AMENDMENToa- 1S.. 1. AMEND FLUE. PLANS FOR WE COMBS, NEIGHBORHOOD ' CP06.. The third amendment to be discussed was 0 #6- 18- CP06- 1, a request from the City to amend the Future Land Use Element ( FLUE) to include amendments to tbe Plans for ~ eighbornood Action P(\JA)~ eve.lo~,ep by tt1~, W. E. Combs Neighborhpod.,;, ,;.'..::.;": ;:;;~ '<, ' ,> i~' n',; '"-",'~,, ,; , i ,>. ,' c"":',..", " Mr. Mitchell explained this would reflect in a name change to the W ., E~ COl]bs ~!eighborhood and J, those ,chang~~ wpuld be incorporated into the FLUE of the COrnpr~~ ensiv.,e PI~ n. ' Mr. Mitchell advised that there were no proponents or opponents who spoke at the June 1 LPA public hearing, and that Sta~ recorru:nend~d approval of the request. COMMENTS FROM PROPONENTS/OPPONENTS The Mayor asked for comments from proponents/opponents. As there was none, the public hearing was closed. 250 Regular Council 6/ 27/ 06 ORD. 1705 ( CONT) AMENDMENT 06- 19-CP06- 1. GENERALIZED LAND USE The fourth amendment to be discussed was 06- 19- CP06- 1, a request from the City to amend the FLUE narrative for Generalized Land Use, Commercial to reduce the distance required from residential land uses from 500 feet to 200 feet for buildings built to the maximum height in the RC, Regional Commercial, and GC, General Commercial, land use designations. Mr. Mitchell explained this land use designation narrative would reduce from 500 feet to 200 feet the zone which allows a 45 feet maximum height. Mr. Mitchell advised that there were no proponents or opponents who spoke at the June 1 LPA public hearing, and that Staff recommended approval of the request. COMMENTS FROM PROPONENTS/ OPPONENTS The Mayor asked for comments from proponents/ opponents.'