Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 06-22-2010 Regular — reading text

The affected concurrency services area when considering a final plat or site plan approval. LDC does not contain concurrency requirements for public schools. 3. The Public Schools Facility Element is not included in the EAR. L. Questions / Additional Concerns Note that the 1. The height limit is less for GC within 150 feet of adjacent residential uses. word " adjacent" was not in the text containing the amendment from 500 feet to 150 feet. No amendment has been identified where the word " adjacent" was deleted by amendment. Therefore, it is not clear whether adjacency of residential uses is still a provision of the Comprehensive Plan, and if so, whether the lower height limit applies to residential uses within 150 feet of the GC land but not adjacent to the GC land. 2. RC is limited to the CRA " which is developed as commercial." This appears to mean that the RC is only applied to parcels developed for commercial purposes on the date of adoption Therefore, this of the Comprehensive Plan. Is this correct? The allowable uses are retail. appears to mean that other businesses, such as offices and possible entertainment uses, would not be included. Is this correct? 3. The land use guidelines call for a " low- rise profile," yet building heights of 150 feet are permissible. This provision appears to be internally inconsistent. 4. The generalized land use statement says that retention of small-town residential character is of primary importance, yet FAR of up to 5. 0 and building heights up to 150 feet are permissible. This provision appears to be internally inconsistent. 5. There appears to be inconsistency in the terminology referring to streets ( collector, major collector, principal arterial, major arterial, and so on). 6. Policies A.3. 15 and B. 1. 6. 3 appear to be inconsistent regarding when sidewalks are required. 7. The Economic Development Element refers to the 2010- 2020 Comprehensive Plan. What is this document? 8. The Garniers Beach Neighborhood Plan ( "GBNP ") was amended in Ordinance 1638. Is this neighborhood plan part of the Comprehensive Plan? Where are the other neighborhood Page 119 123 Council Meeting, June 22, 2010 Fort Walton Beach Evaluation and Diagnosis Preliminary Review of the LDC Land Development Code plans? The GBIvP calls for upgrading development standards for commercial uses to ensure compatibility. Is there more specific direction? Il. Fort Walton Beech Lend Development Code The following is a. preliminary review of the chapters of the LDC to identify instances of In duplication, overlap, internal inconsistency, and inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. the event a chapter is rewritten, a subsequent review must be performed to ensure that all issues are identified and confirm those issues noted in this preliminary review. A. Chapter 12 —General Provisions 1. Does Section 12. 03 still apply? It requires that pending applications be approved within six months of adoption of the LDC. Since six months have passed, this provision, as written, would not apply and should be revised to address the effect of amendments to the LDC on pending applications at the time of amendment. 2. Are the terms " development proposals," " development orders," " application for development approval," and " land use decisions" intended to mean different actions? 3. Section 12. 04 refers to existing uses on the date of adoption of the revised LDC. This should be clarified to address the effect of amendments to the LDC after its initial adoption date, which apparently is the effective date for determining that an existing use is lawful. That is, how are uses lawfully established after the adoption date affected by amendments to the LDC? B. Chapter 13 —Administration and Enforcement 1. Section 13. 10. 2. 1), — this section indicates that fees include consultant time. However, it is often not possible to know the consultant costs up front. Should this section be clarified regarding the pass- through of consultant costs to the applicant? 2. Section 13.20. 1. 13 — what other guidelines might be required? How is the applicant advised of other guidelines that may apply? It is essential that requirements, standards, criteria, and guidelines all be specified. Without such specificity, applicants with identical proposals can be treated differently, leading to claims of arbitrary and capricious requirements. 3. Section 13. 20. 1. 1B — the guidelines may need to be clarified to avoid conflicting interpretations of " significant" financial liability and " unreasonable" hazard. Vague, undefined terms can lead to claims of arbitrary and capricious requirements because the standard can easily be defined differently for applicants with similar proposals. 4. Section 13. 20. 1. 0 — the last sentence requires proof of permits or exemptions prior to a development order. Should this also include building permits? 5. Section 13. 21. 1— is a development plan an application for a development order? 6. Section 13. 21. 2 — is a site plan the same as a development plan? ( Consistent terminology should be used throughout). 7. Section 13. 21. 3.A. —recommend a time limit for the determination of completeness and that the notification to the applicant be in writing. In light of the fact that applications are not accepted without a fee, what happens to the fee when an application is returned? It is recommended that this section be expanded to allow a notification to the applicant of deficiencies, a time period to correct deficiencies, and that the application and fee be returned at the end of that time period if the deficiencies have not been corrected. It should Page 120 124 Council Meeting, June 22, 2010  CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 22, 2010 Discussion - Direction - Action Discussion Legal Team Costs Synopsis: Requested by Council Member Reeves Agenda Item Number: 14. 5  Page 1 of 1 Carole Jones From: Robert Mearns Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 8: 10 AM To: Carole Jones Subject: FW: Council Request Legal Team Discussion Robert T. Mearns City Manager Office of the City Manager City ofFt. Walton Beach 850- 833 -9504 850- 833 -9640 (Fax) Please Note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communication to or from the City of Fort Walton Beach officials are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e- mail address and communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure. From: Dennis Reeves [ mailto: darfwb @yahoo. com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 11: 48 AM To: Robert Mearns Subject: Council Request Legal Team Discussion Bob, I am requesting a complete review of our Legal team and what costs each Attorneys total charges for complete 2008, 2O09,thus far 2010 ( not Detail, Just totals please).. At a upcoming council meeting discuss the individual performance of those attorneys representing the city ...also if their are any contractual agreements with those attorneys for services that must be upheld. I would like to address the need for City Manager to go through City Attorney as acting " gatekeeper capacity "in the future legal need for services. Thank you, Dennis Reeves Seat 3 125 Council Meeting, June 22, 2010 6/ 1/ 2010  CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2010 TO: Bob Mearns, City Manager FROM: Brandy Wunker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Attorney information 1. Background 1. 1. On May 26, 2010, Councilman Reeves requested a complete review of the City' s legal. team. 1. 2. In addition, the total cost to the City for the legal services received during FY 20085 2009, and 2010 was requested. 2. Discussion 2. 1. The following is a breakdown of each legal firm/attorney and the total amount paid for each of the three fiscal years referred to above. Vendor Name Function FY 2008 FY 2009 FYTD 2010 ALLEN, NORTOTI & BLUE PA Labor 55, 287. 64 28, 690. 38 10, 200. 01 CHESSER & BARR, P. A. Code Enforcement 1167. 50 CHRISTIANSEN & DEHNER Fire Pension 7, 930.52 6, 520. 52 1, 754. 09 CHRISTIANSEN & DEHNER Police Pension 16, 377. 14 9, 224. 59 7, 710. 27 GRAY ROBINSON Audit Letter 296. 52 JAMES R MURRAY Forfeitures 22, 229. 35 17,450. 10 JOSEPH D LORENZ ESQUIRE Code Enforcement 5, 709. 50 11, 204. 52 11, 629. 48 LEWIS, LONGMAN & WALKER, P. A. Soundside ( CRA) 2, 989. 95 LEWIS, LONGMAN & WALKER, P. A. General Pension 47, 771. 35 24, 834. 87 11, 942. 30 MILLER, CANFIELD, PADDOCK & STONE Bond Counsel 750. 00 State Attorneys Office Ord. Violations 6, 650.00 3, 800. 00 2, 875. 00 SUZANNE BBROWNLESS, P. A. General 1, 860. 19 THE CARDWELL LAW FIRM CRA 300. 00 TONI L. CRAIG, P. A. General 100,465. 36 92, 657. 55 68, 615. 50 ZIMMET, UNICE, SALZMAN, P. A. General 3, 888. 23 3, 221. 48 Total Per Fiscal - Year 1 1 270, 683. 30 197, 604. 01 117, 716.60