Fort Walton Beach Council minutes — 03-27-07 regular minutes — reading text

213 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 27, 2007 INTRODUCTION A regular meeting of the City Council of Fort Walton Beach, Florida, was held on Tuesday, March 27, 2007, at 7: 00 p. m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, with the following members present: Mayor Mike Anderson Councilmen: Mike Holmes, William Patterson, Bob Campbell, Jim Tucker, Dr. Wayne Pullen, Jim Hartwell, and Mike Minich Also Present: Joyce Shanahan, City Manager; Helen Spencer, City Clerk; Lisa Absher, Finance Director; Toni Craig, City Attorney; Department Directors and Media. CALL TO ORDER The Mayor called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone. He requested anyone who wished to address Council to approach the podium after being recognized, then state his or her name and address for the record. INVOCATION Pastor Charles Sansom, Sr., Family of Faith Church, gave the Invocation. PLEDGE Councilman Tucker led in the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION- BOYS & GIRLS CLUB The Mayor read a proclamation proclaiming March 25 through March 31 as Boys & Girls Club Week, and presented the proclamation to 11- year old Myalexis Lane, the Youth of the Year, and Club representatives Peggy Mahon and Bernard Weaver. PROCLAMATION- FORT WALTON BEACH WOMAN' S CLUB The Ma~ or read a proclamation congratulating the GFWC Fort Walton Beach Woman' s Club on their 851 anniversary, and presented the proclamation to Maureen Taylor, Vice- President. PROCLAMATION- CHARLIE CARSON RETIREMENT The Mayor presented a proclamation to Charlie Carson upon his retirement from the City after 32 years of service. PRESENTATIONS Awards by the Government Finance Officers' Association of the United States and Canada were presented by Representative Patricia Sheldon. The FY 2006- 07 Distinguished Budget Award was presented to Charlotte Dunworth, Budget/ Grant Manager, and the FYE 9- 30- 05 Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting Award was presented to Chief Accountant Melissa Jones. Councilmember Jim Tucker presented gifts to the Appointed Officers and Council members and shared what he has learned in eight years as a public servant. CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Patterson moved to approve the following Consent Agenda items. Mr. Minich seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Patterson, Campbell, Tucker, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. 214 03- 27- 07 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes of the Council Workshop of March 13, 2007, and the Regular Council Meeting of March 13, 2007. PURCHASE OF GOLF COURSE EQUIPMENT To award Bid # 07- 111, purchase of golf course equipment: (2) Hybrid Diesel Greens Mowers no extended warranty) to Beard Equipment of Pensacola, for the bid amount of $48, 250.00; ( 3) Diesel Fairway Mowers with extended warranty, 4- post ROPS and sunshade canopies, to Jerry Pate Turf of Pensacola, for the bid amount of $ 115, 675. 56, and ( 2) Diesel Trim Mowers, to Jerry Pate Turf of Pensacola, for the bid amount of $58,312. 00. :! ' PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELATIONS COMMISSION PETITION J To authorize the City Manager to execute a recognition/ acknowledgement petition to the Public Employee Relations Commission to establish a separate bargaining unit for Fire Department Battalion Chiefs. PROMOTIONAL REDUCTION IN ADMITTION PRICE- HERITAGE PARK To approve a promotional reduction in admission price to Heritage Park and Cultural Center on four Sundays in June to coincide with the 451h Anniversary of the Indian Temple Mound Museum. AGENDA- AL TA VISTA SITE PLAN EXTENSION REQUEST QUASI-JUDICIAL Consideration of a request by Crews Investments Miracle Strip LLC, for a 12 month extension of the approval of a site plan for Alta Vista Condominiums, to be located at 220 Miracle Strip Parkway, SW. Before discussion of the request, Dr. Pullen advised he had requested from the City Manager on March 23 information regarding payment of fees for the Alta Vista as well as the Presidio project. He againquestioned whether the proper fees have been paid by the developer for the site plan requests. The City Manager advised the fees that Staff believe are necessary were paid. Dr. Pullen stated if this is a land use and zoning application it shall be accompanied by such fees and charges as may be established by the City Council by resolution for proper filing and processing. He questioned if this is a land use and zoning application request. Missy McKim, CDS Director, advised the Alta Vista was a CRA site plan application and this is a site plan extension. Dr. Pullen asked the City Attorney for her legal opinion as whether this is a land use and zoning request. The City Attorney advised it is her legal opinion that it is either a land use and zoning application or a development agreement amendment or modification, one of the two. She further advised it is her opinion that some fees should have applied, whether it be for a Development Review Committee ( DRC) meeting, or some other element within the fee schedule, but she cannot determine the fee at this point. Dr. Pullen stated his thought that because fees were not paid, he does not feel this application should be brought before Council, and wanted to make a motion that the issue be returned to the CRA to reconsider and brought forward in a proper manner, and that the CRA be provided Ord. 1701, which established height limitation at 70 feet, since this project exceed this height.  215 03- 27- 07 AL TA VISTA SITE PLAN ( CONT) The City Attorney announced a quasi-judicial proceeding and swore in those who planned to testify. Dr. Pullen moved that the City Council not consider this issue and that it be returned to the CRA to reconsider and brought forward in a proper manner, and that the CRA be provided all I"" pertinent information, including Ord. 1701, so they can make an informed decision. Mr. Hartwell seconded motion. Discussion ensued whether there would be any harm to the developer in returning this to the CRA. The City Attorney stated that, in her opinion, there would be no harm to the developer since he has applied for an extension and the Development Order is not going to expire. The Mayor requested Staff' s response to Dr. Pullen' s motion so everyone is aware of the information that was provided to the CRA Board when they considered this request. The CDS Director reiterated that this is a request for an extension of a site plan previously approved by the City Council and it has to be made prior to its expiration, or 12 months after approval. In this case the requirements for an extension include a letter from the applicant requesting an extension and the reason. The CDS Director advised Staff transmits the letter to the CRA and to City Council with the CRA' s recommendation, and backup contains all backup provided for the original approval including the CRA memo, the CRA site plan, the Staff Report, minutes of the CRA meeting requesting approval, City Council minutes approving the original project, and a copy of the site plan application submitted. She stated this is the same information provided on all previous requests for site plan extensions that the City Council has approved. Dr. Pullen questioned whether the CRA packet contained Ord. 1701 in reference to height limitation.The CDS responded that it is her understanding that projects approved under previous zoning were approved under the zoning pertinent at the time; therefore, Ord. 1701 would not be relevant to the approval of this project. Dr. Pullen asked the City Attorney for her legal opinion. The City Attorney stated her opinion that the answer depends as to whether a Development Order or a Development Agreement is pertinent; and if either is the case, then there are certain vested rights that continue with it, if it is not a Development Order or Development Agreement, it is, in her words, ' back up for grabs.' The CDS Director advised the application is considered a Development Order, and explained the difference between a Development Order and a Development Agreement in that an agreement is outlined in State Statute and is provided within the City Code for a very specific project process, such as the Home Depot and Joe and Eddie' s applications. Dr. Pullen questioned the City Attorney on her legal opinion as to whether the height limitation ordinance adopted by Council does not apply in this case. The City Attorney again explained that it depends as to whether it is a Development Order or a Development Agreement, and that Staff has determined it to be a Development Order, and that it is Council' s decision whether or not to apply Ord. 1701. Clarification was given in that the purpose of Dr. Pullen' s motion is to send the request back to the CRA Board for their consideration in the light of Ord. 1701, and if the motion fails, the agenda item as presented for an extension will then be considered. 216 03- 27- 07 ALTA VISTA SITE PLAN ( CONTI Mike Crew, applicant, advised that all applicable fees were paid and were confirmed with City Staff. Mr. Crew stated he wants his request to be treated fairly like all other requests previously approved, and that the CRA Board and Council are charged with all ordinances enacted by the City, and he does not feel the request should go back to the CRA, since it was approved under the ordinance in force at the time of approval. J Mr. Crew continued there has been a lot of changes and he has worked diligently with Staff in meeting all the conditions that were applied to the project, and he does not think it is fair to meet a new code that was not in effect at the time the project was approved. During further discussion, Mr. Crew was questioned about the accuracy of signage on the property as transient or office/ residential. Mr. Crew clarified that the project is office/ residential and that a transient condo is considered a residential condo and that is what the sign on the property depicts. Mr. Minich stated that the applicant had reduced the height to meet the new height limitations and it was approved by Council, and all he is requesting is an extension to move forward with an already approved project. The City Manager stated she received today the City Attorney' s legal opinion that Development Order or Development Agreement fees should apply in this case. She advised fees have not been applied in the past, but if the City Attorney believes that fees should apply, Staff will go back and revisit those issues as they apply. The City Attorney