Fort Walton Beach Council minutes — 08-28-1984 Regular — reading text

for manufacturing or industrial type operations would instead be used for employ~ e parking space, enployees who would then leave the site for the day to do their work. Mr. Miller said that he does not feel that the Park should be used for 8/ 28/ 84 124 PLUMBER SMITH a vehicle storage area, and that we will have a real prob- CORP. ( CONT' D.) lem when we advertise this property for bid, as the bid . advertisement ordinarily sets out certain criteria an appli- cant must be prepared to meet, which includes the Park criteria, and that he assumes the advertisement will have to advertise bids for a parking lot in the Industrial Park. Mr. Miller stated that if there is parking lot a need for a in the Industrial Park, the City should things: do one of two either build a parking lot, or lease the property year to year to a tenant at the Park who is willing to pave it at their expense, knowing that it may have to be returned to the City for its appropriate and intended use upon the election of the City and with appropriate notice. Mrs. Thornber asked what the application stated was the intended use of the property, and if the application stated the employee criteria would be met. Mayor Bagley recognized Mr. Gene Langley, Secretary of Plumbersmith Corporation. He stated that he felt the question of on site and off site employees did not effect the local economy, as long as the people were employed in the City and local area. He stated that their employment had increased from approximately 40 persons to over 80 since the first of the year. Mrs. Thornber asked again about the application. City Manager stated that the application said they would double their number of employees, and on that basis, the Public Services Committee approved the application and sent it to Council. Mr. was under the impression that they Smith stated that he were going to enlarge their present facility, and when they did, they would take up most of their present parking space, therefore requiring that they have more property. Mr. Langley stated that was correct. Mr. Langley further stated that they are now using a vacant clayed lot next to them to meet their parking needs. Mrs. Thornber stated that the purpose of the Park is on site employees, and it does make a difference as far as the purpose of the Park is concerned. Mr. Miller stated that the established criteria does call for on employees, and the issue before the Council is site the approval of the application and its validity as to on site persons, and whether or not that ought to be the standard or not is an issue for another day. But as of this time, that is the criteria, and it is not being met. Mrs. Battle asked the City Attorney if this would pose a legal problem with advertising. City Attorney stated that the advertisement has to say that it meets the criteria of our resolution which establishes criteria. And the deed  8/ 28/ 84 125 PLUMBER SMITH CORP. incorporates provisions of the advertisement and , the resolution. CONT' D.) Mr. Miller asked if the present practice is to put a reverter clause in the deed, in case criteria is not met. City Attorney stated that it was. Mr. Patrick stated that there is problem with this business a existing in the Park in the first place. Mr. Miller stated 1 that the applicant and the committee reviewing the applica- tion certified to the Council that the criteria was met. Mr. Miller stated that Mr. Rivers had, as a contractor himself, confirmed that contractors could not meet the on site employee criteria. Mr. Rivers asked what would happen if it came down to the City having to foreclose on someone. Mrs. Thornber stated that the City would have to purchase the building. Mr. Rivers stated that he didn' t think we could do that. Mayor said that we couldn' t expect to get the property back for nothing. Mr. Smith said that if it was in the deed we could. Mr. Smith stated that we could not turn down one application if the applicant stated he would meet criteria, and approve another one which says the same thing. The thing that we will have to do is enforce the criteria after the business is installed by checking up on them. Mr. Patrick asked if the original Plumbersmith deed had the reverter clause. City Attorney stated that it did not, that this was a new procedure. Mr. Patrick stated that in that case, the old deed would not have a reverter clause, but the new one would. Mr. Patrick stated that he has sympathy for existing businesses in the Park who need to expand, since they were allowed to enter the Park, whether they were qualified or not. Mr. Patrick stated that we needed to have some legal questions answered. Mrs. Thornber said that the Council had consistently made the same comments, but have never looked into the matter, and keep letting people enter the Park when they probably should not. Mayor called for a vote on the question. Mr. Franklin then withdrew his second to the motion, and moved that the item be postponed until the September 1984 Council meeting. 11, Motion was seconded by Mr. Patrick and carried by a vote of I 6- 1, with Mr. Smith opposing. Mr. Miller stated that if there is a parking problem in the Industrial Park, the Council should address that matter. Mr. Smith stated that the application was not presented in that light, but that the business was expanding and was going to use some of their existing parking space for their building expansion and would need extra property to use for parking area. 8/ 28/ 84 126 SCOTT STEEL, INC. Mrs. Battle moved that Scott Steel, Inc., acting as agent AS AGENT FOR for Company " X", be authorized to exercise option ffl at COMPANY " X" REQUEST the same time the.rmake the initial purchase of property in TO EXERCISE OPTION the Industrial Park, with criteria for the additional 10 111 AT SAME TIME AS acres of option ffl to be met within five years after the INITIAL LAND PUR- purchase date. Motion was seconded by Mr. Rivers. CHASE Mr. Miller stated that he had this item