Fort Walton Beach Council minutes — 05-25-1982 Regular — reading text

065 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA 5- 25- 82 7: 00 p. m. I NTRODUCTI ON: A regular meeting of the City Council was held May 25, 1982, at 7: 00 p. m. I wi th the fo 11 owi ng members present: Mayor Kate Bagley Counc i 1 members : John Franklin Jerry Miller Pat Thornber John Bishop Al Grant James Baughman Absent: Councilman Harold Sundy Also Present: City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk- Finance Director Mayor called the meeting to order; Mr. Baughman gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor announced the public hearing for June 22 for the Walkedge Drive Boat Ramp. Minutes for the regular meeting of 4- 27- 82 were approved unanimously on motion by Mr. Baughman, seconded by Mrs. Thornber. CINCO BAYOU WATER AND SEWER Mr. Franklin noted Cinco Bayau' sreply a!jreing to the negotiated proposal for water and sewer for Cinco Bayou was self explanatorY and indicated he did not feel the fire protection would be a problem since be understood Cinco Bayou had done some research and possibly felt their best utilization was the fire protection agreement withrort Walton Beach. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MUNICIPAL PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL MEETING OF 5- 24- 82 The Mayor read a portion of the report from the ~ lanning Board regarding variances, for LeBrun Smith' s planned Steamboat Landing project at Lots 10, 11, and 57, Section 24 Metes and Bounds.'" 163 BrooKs St. Tn.e first was recommending approval of an 181 setback, instead of. th.erequired 20" from the south face of the deck to the mean high water line. Mr. Frankltnmoved for approval of no. l. Mot i on seconded by Mr. Baughman.. Vote to approve was aye unanimous ly. Mayor read the secQnd recommendatiQn that the 51' as shown on the plot plan b I observed in c.ons '(deration of the RDA I a Director' s statement that the proposed downtown redevelopment ' plans would suggest the widening of Brooks Street. Mr. Franklin mov.ed for approval. MGltiQn seconded by Mrs. Thornber. Mr. Mi ller asked. if each of those were dealing with adjustments; asking if they should not go to the Board of Adjustment. The Manager said they were variances. Mr~ Millersai~ Council had no jurisdiction over variances. Mr. Miller noted neither c.oul d the Planning Beard grant variances. Mr. Mi ller said this was for plan purposes; they could approve the plan concept but that did not give Mr. Smith a variance. He felt they should go before the Adjustment Board for their variances requests. The Attorney said they had to go before the Board of Adjustment for the variances. The Mayor said all Council could do if that were their wish was to approve in concept.  5- 25- 82 068 PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS, continued. Public Works Director said he went to the Planning Board because it was new construction and he needed. the Planning Board ~ pproval of his plans. Mr. Miller agreed but said the Planning Board did not grant vari ances and nei ther di d Council. ( It was noted that the P 1 anni ng Board had found a discrepancy in Section 23. 12 of the Code with Ordinance 100. 188 and that needed attention.) Mrs. Thornber moved that they rescind the vote they took on comment 1. Motion seconded by Mr. Miller. The City Attorney said they shouldn1t rescind their action. He said typically zoning questinns for amendments to zoning ordinances went to the Municipal Pla~ n~ ng ' Board & then to the Council for approval. He said under the City' s ordlnance variances and special exceptions get approved under the Board of Adjustment and that variance and special exception does not even come to the governing body. He said there was a planned unit deveopment which Okaloosa County calls the plan development project concept and that goes to their planning board and they grant whatever variances that are required within a project and those variances go to the governing body for approval. He said there was no reason they could not give conceptual approval and send it to the Board of Adjustment and allow them to approve if that was what Council wanted to do. The Mayor noted under Board of Adjustment there was no appeal or no jurisdiction- Co,uncil had no jurisdiction. Mr. Baughman said the question was why those went to the Planning Board instead of the Board of Adjustment. It was indicated because it was a new project. Mr. Miller offered the alternative of having new projects coming to Council with concept plans and hav~ Council approving tentatively the concept plan so that the developer knew where they stood. Mr. Smith presented his conceptual plan to the Council. To clear the table, the vote was taken on the motion to rescind the action taken on number 1. Vote was aye unanimously. After looking at the conceptual plans, Mr. Miller moved that they approve tentatively the preliminaryap.proval of, the Steamboat Landing. Motion seconded py Mr. Franklin. This was for 69 units of interval ownership on Brooks St. at the location of the old 98 Motel which was in disrepair. He had offered to dedicate some of- way in cooperation with the right.., RDA1s plan to 4- lane Brooks Street. He mentioned a trade off with sewer taps in exchange for the right~of- way. He indicated the right- of- way transacti.on would help the City be able to do something about the drainage problem on Brooks Street. The Public Works Director said he felt Mr. Smith came to discuss the whole range of things he had just thrown out before Council and he felt that Mr. Smith did so at his advice that he could do that. Public Works Director said he ' himself could not grant the tap request. Mr. Miller asked the RDA Director for a report on the project. Mr. Seibold said they looked at it and approved it in concept which was all they could do; they felt it was a geod project to start off in theRDA area and the fact that he had provided for the eventual Wi d~ nrna' _ of Brooks Street fitted in and they felt it would be a good for prtYJett"" the area. Mr. Smith said apparently, he had gotten some bad advice however, there were no public funds involved; he had his own money and he was ready to go with the project.  5- 25- 82 067 PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS, continued. He asked what delay this would cause. It was noted the motion was for preliminary approval of his project. Vote to the motion for preliminary approval was aye unanimously. It was mentioned that the Board of Adjustment was meeting that same night in the Conference Room. The City Attorney said he would like . them to define exactly what the motion was - preliminary conceptual approval. He felt for the purpose of the developer he needed to know how preliminary and how conceptual, I whether he was going to come back there and if so, when - would he have to come back to Council for final approval before he could get a building permit. Mr. Smith said he understood there were legal advertising requirements for being heard before the Board of Adjustment and that left him dead in the water. Mr. Baughman thought the word preliminary should be removed. Public Works Director indicated this was the first project of this nature to come up. He said this was not really preliminary it was final sketches. The Attorney suggested the approval be made conditional, conditional upon approval by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Miller said all they did was to deal with the variances and not with the concept. It was suggested he perhaps might get the Board of Adjustment even with the advertising requirements to hold a special meeting. Mayor suggested that Mr. Smith go next door to the Board of Adjustment to clarify what he needed to do even though they could not hear his request that night The Mayor apologized that Mr. Smith was being inconvenienced. Mr. Smith said he was just following advice from several people. The City Attorney said without being crjtical to anyone just looking quickly at the ordi nances he thought there were some th i ngs' '; n those ordimnces that they could do to make the city operate better by granting some of the authority to one board than having two or three boards enter into the question. Mr.. Miller said there had been substantial changes of those procedures which had eliminated steps and simplified them, in particular a review of adjust- ments or variances by the Council. The Attorney asked if there were a plan development ordinance by the Council for the City. It was determined there was not. Mr. Miller said if Mr. Smith' s project had no variance requests then he would not have any delay of his project - he was basically through. Mr. Miller said the variance aspect was what had caused him additional requirements. The Mayor . said her only comment she had on this and she felt they had the matetrial in front of them since Thursday and if some of them knew it was not properly placed it should have been made known at that time. It was noted that the Planning Board had a special meeting on Monday and the report had been available only since Tuesday morning. Mr. Franklin asked the Attorney. if the ordinance were written as Mr. Miller said it was, could they not ask the City Council to approve a variance. Mr. Baughman said they had deneit before. . Mr. Miller I said the Council used to have authority but does not at this time. The Attorney said unless' Council had a most unusual zoning ordinance the answer was no. It was noted the next appeal after the Board of Adjustment was the Circuit Court . Mr. Mi 11 er explained to Mr. Smith that he had a preliminary concept approval and he must go to the Board of Adjustment for the, vartances. The Attorney said if Council had granted conceptual approval of the project Mr. Smith did not have to come back to Council; if what they were approving 'was preliminary approval he himself hadquestiens about whether or not he was to come back or not. The Attorney said as he understood everyone they were saying they did not intend for him to come back.  I ... r 5- 25- 82 068 PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS, continued Mr. Miller said he would ltke, tQ, cl~ rtf~ that and that the Attorney might ought to give some attention to the ordinance to render them that opinion and he would live by whatever the Attorney' s attitude was. The Attorney said he would work with the gentleman to see if there were a