Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 10-23-2007 regular agenda — reading text

MAYOR: ATTEST: CITY CLERK Ive J  165 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 9, 2007 INTRODUCTION A regular meeting of the City Council of Fort Walton Beach, Florida, was held on Tuesday, October 9, 2007, at 7: 00 p. m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, with the following members present: Mayor Mike Anderson Councilmen: Mike Holmes, Virgil Miller, Dennis Reeves, Bill Garvie, Dr. Wayne Pullen, Jim Hartwell, and Mike Minich Also Present: Joyce Shanahan, City Manager; Helen Spencer, City Clerk; Toni Craig, City Attorney; Department Directors and Media. Absent: Lisa Absher, Finance Director 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. He mentioned the Finance Director is out of town teaching a finance class at the City Clerk' s Conference. INVOCATION Reverend Roger Peadro, First Christian Church, gave the invocation. PLEDGE Youth members from First Christian Church led in the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION The Mayor presented a proclamation to representatives from Shelter House on Domestic Violence Awareness Month. PRESENTATION to The Mayor presented a letter of appreciation and a historic plate of the " Old School House" Martha Garvie for her eight years of service on the Historic Sites Board. APPROVAL OF AGENDA and it Mr. Minich moved to approve the agenda as presented. Mr. Holmes seconded motion Minich in carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and favor. CONSENT AGENDA on separately. Dr. Pullen moved to remove Items 3 & 4 from the consent agenda to be voted and it carried vote of 6 to 1 with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Mr. Miller seconded motion by a Garvie, Pullen, and Hartwell in favor and Minich opposed. Mr. Hartwell Mr. Minich moved to approve the following consent agenda items remaining. seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor.  Regular Council 10- 9- 07 166 MINUTES Approval of the minutes of the Special Council Meeting of September 19, 2007; and the Regular Council Meeting of September 25, 2007. EASEMENT FROM HABITAT FOR HUMANITY Accept an Easement from Hab,itat for Humanity for utilities, sidewalk and streets on property located at 101 Harbeson Avenue, SE. THE FOllOWING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WERE VOTED ON SEPARATELY GOLF COURSE CART PATH Consideration of a request for additional funding in the amount of $ 19, 056 for golf course cart path construction. If approved a budget amendment will be necessary. The City Manager explained during the year there were problems with pine bores at the golf course that resulted in an unanticipated expense to remove the infested pine trees and the expense drained the resources that would have been available for capital improvements. The FY 06/ 07 budget included $ 30, 000 for cart path construction, $ 10, 944 was spent but the unspent funds of $ 19, 056 were not carried over because there was no corresponding revenue source to carry over. She requested that $ 19, 056 be added back to the budget and staff will return with a formal budget amendment during the year with an appropriation from golf course revenues and if that is not sufficient, the monies would come from the General Fund. She noted that cart paths are needed in order to maintain the turf so there is a policy of trying to commit $ 30, 000 a year in order to maintain the appearance of the golf course. Upon request the City Manager went over carry over funds and explained at the end of each year onprojects that are not completed they ask permission to carry those funds over to the next fiscal year. Mr. Minich moved to authorize an additional $ 19,056 to continue cart path construction during FY 2007- 08, for a total of $49, 056. Mr. Reeves seconded motion. An exchange of views included comments on the necessity of the budget amendment, the need for the cart paths, and objections to increasing the budget. The Mayor called. for the vote on the motion and it carried by a vote of 5 to 2 with Holmes, Reeves, Garvie, Hartwell, and Minich in favor and Miller and Pullen opposed. EASEMENTS FROM PRESIDIO Consideration of a request to accept two Grants of Easements from Presidio Developers, llC, for sidewalk and utilities along the south side of Miracle Strip Parkway ( US Hwy 98) and a boardwalk along Santa Rosa Sound on the Presidio Condominium property; subject to the design approval by the CRA on 5 September 2007, and all federal, state, and City Code permitting requirements. Dr. Pullen expressed his belief that the plans for the boardwalk were to come back to Council for approval, that it went to the CRA in September and he expressed difficulty in approving an easement for a boardwalk when Council has not seen the plan. The City Manager explained the Development Order specifically said that the CRA would approve the placement of the boardwalk, it was brought to Council and it was approved, so that is why it did not come back to Council for specific approval.  Regular Council 10- 9- 07 167 EASEMENTS FROM PRESIDIO cont. The CDS Director recalled when the applicant proposed to amend the site plan for Presidio it went to the CRA, then to City Council and Council requested it go back to the CRA; it went back to the CRA and finally to City Council. She stated from the very beginning the condition for the boardwalk in the Development Order remained the same and states " The applicant shall construct the boardwalk along the entire waterfront, protecting the trees that are in close proximity to the water. The design of the boardwalk shall be approved by the CRA Board of Commissioners prior to issuance of the building permit. The boardwalk shall be constructed prior to a Certificate of Occupancy for the building." She said the design did go to the CRA in September, it was approved and before Council tonight is the easement that is also required for the boardwalk. Mr. Miller wished to know if Presidio had approached staff with a change to the design of the boardwalk since September. The CDS Director replied they had not approached her or Malcolm Foley to her knowledge. Dr. Pullen commented that Presidio should not be able to build within the 10' easement because that easement belongs to the City. The CDS Director explained the easement is for the boardwalk, that the regulation is written to provide bonus points for additional density and a 10' easement is required by Code in order to obtain density bonus points. She said the applicant did propose to provide the 10' boardwalk easement because they did want the density point for the but project they had not intended to construct the boardwalk on the easement along the entire waterfront, only in front of the pooL," Dr. Pullen asked the City Attorney if approval of the boardwalk design should come back to Council for approval. The Mayor received clarification that Council is only granting easements at this time, not approving the boardwalk or design, and Dr. Pullen wished to know if Council should see the design. The City Attorney replied whether or not the design of the boardwalk should come back to Council is within their prerogative. She mentioned there was an added layer of review by having the CRA Board review it because it hasn' t been done on other projects; that once site plans are approved they are handed off to staff to deal with. She said it is also customary that the CRA only has recommendation authority and pursuant to the Code it would make sense for it to come to Council as well; however it is completely up to Council in how it is handled. She said she is quite satisfied that the easement, and the language in the easement, covers any problems of variations within the 10' easement from what she has seen on the boardwalk layout and design. She is not concerned about the language in the easement at all and thought the concerns may be outside of what the easement grants. Dr. Pullen questioned whether Council could approve the easement at this point and also require the plans to come to Council for approval because the CRA could not approve the plans as they are not complete at the present time. The City Attorney confirmed Council could separate the two, J entire acceptance of the easement as is, subject to the approval that was made by the CRA on September 5th where they did review the design, and it is subject to any federal, state, and local