Fort Walton Beach Council minutes — 11-27-07 regular minutes — reading text

incorporated in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report ( EAR). Ms. McKim advised there is no height increase recommended in the Plan. Also discussed was that the recommended density increase will increase the type of housing and size of homes which will add to the affordable or workforce housing numbers; that the CRA Plan needs to be approved before the Comprehensive Plan so that Staff has the direction to move forward with the amendments in the Comprehensive Plan; and that request for proposals are being planned that will result in architectural regulations. The Mayor opened the public hearing. There was none. Mr. Minich moved to approve Ord. 1747 on first reading. Mr. Holmes seconded motion and it carried by a vote of 6 to 1 with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Hartwell, and Minich in favor and Pullen opposed. REGULAR AGENDA-FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS I. The City Manager advised that Item # 6 has been added to the agenda items to allow the MPB to hold a Joint Workshop on December 11 to review the EAR process; that an additional workshop meeting be held on January 22 to review the General Employees Pension Plan as the Finance Director will be unavailable on January 8; and that a new date be scheduled for a review of ordinances relating to employee/ employer contributions to Police and Fire Pension Plans as the actuary will be unavailable on December 11. Also, to discuss Item 5, Expand Protocol Guide, after the Charter workshops, and to remove Item #4 regarding an ordinance identifying sexual predators in parks from the workshop agenda to a regular agenda at a future meeting.  237 Regular Council 11/27/ 07 WAIVE FEES FOR HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, 101 HARBESON AVENUE Consideration of a request from Habitat for Humanity to waive the fees for a new single family residence being built at 101 Harbeson Avenue. The CDS Director advised the total amount of the fees, which include the water and sewer tap and building permit, total $ 1, 663. 90, and Staff is requesting a not to exceed cost of $ 2, 000 to allow for unforeseen circumstances that may occur. Council received clarification that the impact fee cannot be waived and is not being requested. Mr. Minich moved to waive the water tap fee in the amount of $500.00; the sewer tap fee in the amount of $600. 00, and the building permit fees in the amount of $563.90, for a single family residence being built at 101 Harbeson Avenue, at a not to exceed cost of $2, 000. 00. Mr. Hartwell seconded motion. Dr. Pullen suggested that in the future Habitat consider building multi- family homes as opposed to single-family homes. Nitsi Bennett, Habitat for Humanity, advised there is not property in the City that is affordable or available. The Mayor called for the vote on the motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. REBATE HOUSING AUTHORITY PILOT TAXES Consideration of a request from Fort Walton Beach Housing Authority to rebate their Payment in Lieu of Taxes ( PILOT) for the FYE 2007, totaling $ 28, 726. 07. The City Manager advised that the Housing Authority is embarking on a 200- unit expansion project at Germany Terrace and is requesting a full refund of the $ 28, 726. 07 so they can use the proceeds to fund the start- up costs for this project. Rev. Earl Tyler, Vice- Chairman of the Fort Walton Beach Housing Authority, advised the tenants presently located in Germany Terrace will have to be relocated during construction of the new units and this money will be used for their temporary relocation. Gail Sansbury, Executive Director of the Fort Walton Beach Housing Authority, advised all 50 families will have to be relocated in the community and the project cannot be started until the families are safely relocated. She stressed it will be mixed- income and will not be public housing. There was no public input. Mr. Holmes moved to waive and rebate all of the Fort Walton Beach Housing Authority f" PILOT fees for Fiscal year Ending 2007, totaling $ 28, 726.07. Mr. Miller seconded motion I and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and I Minich in favor. BUCCANEER GIFT SHOP, REQUEST FOR COCA-COLA BOTTLE Consideration of a request by Jeff Ring to have a 15 foot Coca- Cola bottle on the rooftop of Buccaneer Gift Shop located at 152 Miracle Strip Parkway, S. E. Jeff Ring, co- owner of the The Buccaneer Gift Shop located at 152 Miracle Strip Parkway, advised that the gift shop was given approval from the Coca- Cola Company to have an 8- ounce commemorative Coke bottle made for their business that will feature the State of Florida and a star marking Fort Walton Beach, with a limited edition of 3, 696 bottles. 238 Regular Council 11/27/ 07 BUCCANEER GIFT SHOP REQUEST ( CONTI Mr. Ring further advised the gift shop was also offered by Coca- Cola a 15- foot Coca Cola Display bottle that was used during the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. Mr. Ring is proposing that the 15-foot Coke bottle be displayed on the roof of the gift shop. He stated he and the other owners of the shop feel it will serve as a landmark in the promotion of downtown Fort Walton Beach, that it will be unique to the area, and that the owners have the I support of the majority of downtown merchants. Mr. Ring advised the bottle will look exactly like the 8- ounce commemorative bottles and will include the State of Florida and the star marking Fort Walton Beach, and requested Council' s approval to place the sign on the roof of the Buccaneer Gift Shop. Mr. Ring advised that placing the bottle on the ground is not feasible due to the fact it would be vandalized, which is why they are requesting approval for it to be placed on the roof of the building. Christy Johnson, City Planner, advised that the request does not conform to the sign ordinance of the City of Fort Walton Beach, and that Staff is recommending the bottle be placed at grade along Brooks Street. She advised Staff understands the concern about the vandalism, but there is no mechanism to approve placing the bottle on the roof. Missy McKim, CDS Director, advised that this is a new issue and that there are two options for the City Council to consider, the first is to approve with the bottle being located on the ground, whereby a building permit would be issued as an accessory structure. The other option would be for Council to direct Staff to develop an ordinance that would allow the City Council to consider the request. Council discussion included the definition of a landmark sign, and the fact that when the ordinance was adopted the present landmark signs were identified that were already there, and that the ordinance states that signs that are current when the ordinance was adopted could be identified as a landmark sign in the future, and it does not include signs that come into existence after the ordinance was adopted. The City Attorney clarified that a code would have to be created to allow the sign, and that consideration should be made as to whether the Code should be altered for one business person. She advised of the need to take a look at the code and take all concepts into review and then make a comprehensive change if necessary. Also discussed was if the placement of the bottle could be considered a conditional use. The Mayor asked for public input. Ted Corcoran, Chamber of Commerce, expressed the support of the Chamber and the business merchants on the placement of the Coca- Cola bottle on the roof of the Buccaneer Gift Shop. Further discussion included various views regarding whether or not the bottle would be considered a landmark sign if placed on the roof; whether it would be considered a sign or art; whether the Code should be amended for one business to allow for a non- conforming issue; and Resolution 07- 28 that was placed in the Council agenda which approves a landmark I sign at the referenced location per Section 12. 82. 04 of the City Code. Mr. Reeves moved to adopt Res. 07- 28. Mr. Garvie seconded motion.  239 Regular Council 11/27/ 07 BUCCANEER GIFT SHOP REQUEST ( CO NT) Mr. Reeves voiced his strong support of this request, stating Mr. Ring is a fellow businessman and that such a venture would be good for the City. Mr. Garvie stated the uniqueness of the bottle, and stated his feeling it would definitely be a landmark shortly after it is put up. I""" Upon questioning by Council, the City Attorney advised she has not reviewed the resolution and would not sign it if adopted by Council. She has advised she believes it is not a landmark sign and that the resolution states it is a landmark. She advised if the Council votes to place the bottle on the roof, that Staff be given the time and to draft a opportunity into the Code provision and process for approval. The City Attorney clarified that per the City Code, to be considered a landmark sign a sign must be a prominent feature of the landscape, and since the coke bottle does not exist on currently any building, it cannot be a prominent feature of the streetscape, thus it cannot be considered for a landmark designation. She expanded that this is an exception to the sign code, that Council can formulate any exceptions they want, they can the change code but it must be sign done within the process of amending the LDC which the MPB and