Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 09-11-2007 workshop agenda — reading text

BarNo. 239216 Florida Bar No. 283797 Gray, Harris & Robin~on,P. A. Robert O. Beasley, Esquire Post Office Box 3 . Florida Bar No. 148512 Lake1an~ Florida 33802- 0003 Emmanuel, Sheppard &. Condon 863) 284-2251 30 South Spring Street Post Office Drawer 1271 Florida 32501 Pensacola., 850) 433- 6581 George N. Meros, Jr., Esquire Gerald S. Livingston,Esquire Florida Bar No. 026321 Florida Bar No. 112090 Lori S. Rowe, Es~ e Aileen Reilly Wilson,Esqmre Gray, Harris & Robinson,P. A. Florida Bar No. 0092452 Suite 600 Livingston & Reilly, P. A. 301 South.Bronaugh Street Post Office Box 2151 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Orlando, Florida.32802 850) 222- 7717 407) 422- 2524 . J. Jerome Miller, Esquire Florida Bar No. 0128569 Miller & Associates 415 Mountain Drive, Suite 3 Destin,Florida 32541- 2349 850) 837- 3860 . JOINDER Plaintiffs in the following actions: Brown. Brown & Brown. et 81. v. City of Fort Walton Beach. Case No. 00- 2763- CA, in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Florida., et a1 v. Circuit in and for Okaloosa County, Florida; and R. Christensen & S & D Root. 5 jI. Municipal Code Enforcement Board of the City of Fort Walton Beach. Florid~ Case Numbers 00- 2527- CA through 00- 2534- by ~ d through their undersigned attorney. CA., for and in consideration of ten' dollars ($ 10. 00) and O. V. C., the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby hereby join in this Settlement Agreement for the purposes acknowledged., of dismissal of the aforementioned cases pursuant to the provisions of this Settlement Agreement.. By:~ 4~ _/. Robert A. Emmanuel. Esquire 6  103 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 30, 2006 INTRODUCTION A special meeting of the City Council was held on Monday, October 30, 2006, at 7: 00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: . Mayor Mike Anderson Councilmen: Mike Holmes; Bill Patterson; Bob Campbell, Mayor Pro Tem; Jim Tucker;Jim Hartwell; and Mike Minich. Absent: Dr. Wayne Pullen Also present: Joyce Shanahan, City Manager; Finance Director ( Position vacant); Helen Spencer, City Clerk; Toni Craig, City Attorney; and media 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, and then state his or her name and address for the record. PLEDGE The Mayor led in the Pledge of Allegiance. lAMAR ADVERTISING - REQUEST TO MODIFY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Consideration of a request by LAMAR Texas Limited Partnership, doing business as ( d/b/ a) Lamar LAMAR Advertising of Fort Walton, to modify the settlement agreement pursuant to Case No. 00-CA-202 Texas Limited Partnership d/b/ a LAMAR Advertising of Fort Walton vs. City of Fort Walton Beach. to The Mayor stated the meeting will be conducted as a quasHudicial proceeding with the City Attorney Council, and then the public give the oath, then the applicant will address Council, then staff will address will be given an opportunity to address Council. The City Attomey gave the oath to all individuals who expected to speak on the issue. submitted by Lamar to modify Jerry Livingston, attorney representing Lamar, briefly went over the request the Settlement Agreement. He explained the proposal is to remove the existing seven billboard signs remaining within the City and request the right to reconstruct four off-premise monopole signs, with each not to exceed 300 feet in size. He mentioned the four sign limited to two advertising facings square reconstructed monopole signs will substantially advance the aesthetic objectives of the City, particularly in the downtown core area, by reducing the number of sign faces and is within the City's vision to eliminate visual clutter. He acknowledged the Settlement Agreement Lamar is obligated to follow, and expressed of the interests of the City and will advance the they simply have a proposal they think will answer some visioning elements of the City in its growth management plan. He expressed the issue this evening is wooden structures that exist and replace them whether Council wants to pursue the idea of removing the said if Council is interested, with four Cleverly designed monopole structures that are very attractive. He of the City. the attorneys can work out an agreement that protect~ and advances the interest with the modification. Mr. It was noted there are ten findings by staff that recommend not agreeing the proposed elements of the Modification Livingston responded that staff's recommendations state that but what they are offering to the Agreement do not comply with the growth management plan elements, City will substantially advance the visual impact of the structures. 1 0 4pecial Council 10- 30- 06 LAMAR ADVERTISING cont. Concern was expressed over the section in the agreement that stated the signs shall be erected to such height as is reasonably necessary to achieve clear visibility, but not higher than 55'. Mr. Livingston clarified the intent is only to have the signs at a visual height that can be read. The Mayor commented Council did not need to get into the language of the agreement, but to decide whether or not they are interested in moving forward with modifying the agreement, and staff can be directed to work out the particulars of an agreement to bring back to Council. He asked the City Attorney if what is needed is a decision on whether or not to go forward, without getting into the specifics of the language of the modification. . The City Attorney replied it is not an easy issue and it is completely Council' s decision, and how to work out the particulars is Council' s decision. She noted the line item document she prepared and will explain her suggestions when it is her turn. She said whether or not to move forward is Council' s decision, and how to move forward is also Council' s decision. Mr. Livingston stated, on behalf of Lamar, they simply request that Council decide to move forward and direct staff to sit down to work out the particulars as it would be difficult to negotiate a contract modification in this setting. He expressed the hope that Council will decide to move forward as they think there is great benefits to the City is doing so. Missy McKim, CDS Director, emphasized that the City is not under any obligation to consider any amendment to the settlement agreement. She recalled it was a long drawn out lawsuit with over $70,000 to settle the lawsuit and amend the sign code. She noted Mark Miller, the attorney who was originally involved in amending the sign code, represented the City in the lawsuit, and drafted the settlement agreement, is present this evening to provide information to Council.. She then went through a power point presentation that included the sign regulation and lawsuit timeline, the Stipulated Agreement/Settlement Agreement, pictures of the seven existing billboards; In response to a question on the impact to the signs on leased property with a high potential for redevelopment, the CDS Director explained most of the leases have a termination clause and when that property redevelops it will terminate the lease and there will be the removal of the billboard as typically a billboard is not conducive to new mixed use residential and commercial development The CDS Director continued with the presentation which covered a recap of where they have been and current status of billboards, the City of Fort Walton Beach' s vision, the resident's statements on signage, the redevelopment potential of billboard sites, why settle for non- conforming billboards, Lamar's proposed amendment as originally presented. In response to the request for clarification on the request in the proposed amendment for credit to replace the billboard removed at Sunrise, the City Attorney noted she had crossed out those issues in the Agreement she believed would not be legally sufficient if Council went forward with it as drafted. She explained they want credit for the billboard they lost to redevelopment; so if they do a 2 for 1 exchange on some other billboards, they want that counted toward their ability to put in a new one. She further clarified that as part of the Settlement Agreement, relocation would be Council's decision. The CDS Director continued with the presentation which included staff findings that the modification to the Settlement Agreement is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Vision Plan of the residents, the CRA vision for the CRA Plan update, the Sign Regulations, and the Land Development Code; and staff's proposal that Council not amend the Settlement Agreement and Council continue to encourage properties in the CRA to redevelop and eliminate the non- conforming structures, and that the City continue to encourage and provide for the elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent