Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01142014FSLAgendacrrecF SEBASTI# AN HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND 1225 Main Street, Sebastian, FL 32958 (772) 589 -5330 Phone (772) 589 -5570 Fax AGENDA FSL GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING City Council Chambers TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2014 5:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of April 9, 2013 5. OLD BUSINESS: A. Review FSL Grant Information & Application proposed changes and make recommendation to CRA Board 6. NEW BUSINESS: A. Review of Budget and Funds Available B. Review applications and make recommendation to CRA Board: • River Park Plaza — 480 -484 US Highway #1 — Jay Dick/Joe Cataldo • Buried Treasures —1554 US Highway #1 — Renee Powell • Rella's Bistro — 1550 Indian River Drive — Robert Giambanco • Treasure Coast Thoracic Surgery — 816 US Highway #1 — Michael Green • River Park Plaza Businesses: • The Italian Cousin — 480 US #1 — Gus Rivera • Debbie's Hair Pampering — 484 US #1 — Debra Poli • Tiki Sandals — 484 US #1 — Richard Reppa • Seaside Vapors — 482 US #1 — Linda Stursberg 7. ADJOURNMENT ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ON THE ABOVE MATTERS, WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH APPEAL IS TO BE HEARD. SAID APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE DATE OF ACTION. (286.0105 F. S). IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), ANYONE WHO NEEDS SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR AT (407)- 589 -5330 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. TWO OR MORE ELECTED OFFICIALS MAYBE IN ATTENDANCE. FACADE, SIGN AND LANDSCAPING GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES Tuesday, April 9, 2013 5:00 PM [Chairman Keys was present but had laryngitis and requested Vice - Chairman Robinson to chair the meeting.] 1. The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Tom Haynes Lisanne Robinson Warren Dill Mickey Capp Donna Keys Staff present: Joe Griffin, Community Development Director Jan King, Senior Planner Dorri Bosworth, Planner /Secretary 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Regular Meeting of January 30, 2013 MOTION by Keys /Dill to accept the minutes of the January 30, 2013 meeting as submitted. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. Vice Chairman Robinson welcomed new member Mickey Capp to the Committee. 5. OLD BUSINESS: A. Re- review applications and make a recommendation to CRA Board: Buried Treasures — 1554 US Highway #1 — Renee Powell River Park Plaza — 480 -484 US Highway #1 — Jay Dick Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners — 720 Harrison Street — Sam Desai Buried Treasures — Ms. Renee Powell presented a redesign of her original proposed sign but stated she was already working on another redesign that she didn't have with her tonight because she misunderstood submittal deadlines. The new proposed sign will match the new building and have coquina stone with conch shells as a base, which she will submit as soon as the design is completed. Ms. Robinson stated she had discussed with staff earlier in the day her concerns that the Buried Treasures project did not have a site plan application submitted to the City as of yet. Ms. King verified that staff had had meetings with the applicant and her civil engineer, informally reviewed her site plan, but that it had not been formally submitted for processing. Ms. King suggested Ms. Powell request to table her application until the new funding year begins October 1St when more money may be available and her project would be further along. Ms. Robinson stated she agreed and had already discussed with the City Manager that the Grant program would be continued in the next fiscal year. Mr. Dill stated that after reviewing the packet information that staff had provided for the next item on the agenda, he understood the grant program as being designed for existing structures. Mr. Capp also agreed with staff to have the application tabled. The Committee discussed wording within the grant application with regards to "improvements to any existing building" and "to encourage private investment" as to the intention and meaning. Ms. Robinson questioned if the Committee wanted to grandfather in the Buried Treasures application in case changes were made to the grant application later in the meeting under the next agenda item. Mr. Dill felt that was a City Council decision. Ms. Robinson felt that though the process may be changed, the applicant shouldn't pay the penalty for that. Mr. Griffin stated that Ms. Powell may have seen the grant as encouragement to develop in the CRA district. Motion by Robinson / to recommend to City Council [CRA Board] that the application [Buried Treasures] is grandfathered in for the next cycle. Motion died for lack of a second. Motion by Dill /_ to recommend denial of the application unless the City Council [CRA Board] clarifies this and make clears that the CRA will be investing money in new projects as an encouragement for development. Motion died for lack of a second. The Committee then discussed, and agreed, they were not satisfied with the proposed sign design submitted in the packet. Ms. Powell re- stated that she had another design in the works. Mr. Dill asked if the CRA Board would be reviewing proposed changes to the grant program /application in the near future. Mr. Griffin stated, in hind sight, perhaps the discussion on the grant program should have been discussed by the Committee and the CRA Board before the re- review of the applications so that there was better direction with regards to Ms. Powell's, and the other applications. The Committee discussed changing the order of the agenda for their discussion. Motion by Keys /Robinson to recommend to table her application until we see a final design approved by this Committee. Ms. Keys explained that after Ms. Powell submits her final design, the Committee will approve it if they like it, and the money ($4,320) stays slotted for her application. Mr. Dill stated that he didn't think the Committee should approve money at this time in case the CRA Board determined that the grant was available only for existing buildings. Ms. Keys felt that Ms. Powell was grandfathered in to any changes. ROLL CALL: Ms. Keys yes Mr. Haynes yes Ms. Robinson yes Mr. Dill yes (with the understanding he was not making a commitment, but supported the motion) Mr. Capp yes The vote was 5 -0. Motion passed. ON * ** *Motion by Dill /Keys to rearrange the agenda and move the discussion of the Grant Guidelines into the forefront and then get back to the [re- review of the] applications. ROLL CALL: Mr. Haynes yes Ms. Keys yes Ms. Robinson yes The vote was 5 -0. Motion passed. 6. NEW BUSINESS: Mr. Dill yes Mr. Capp yes B. Discussion of Fagade, Sign, and Landscape Grant Program Guidelines Ms. Robinson started, and stated she was not comfortable approving internally -lit monument signs. She did not feel they were within the vision of the Riverfront District, and would not recommend any to the CRA Board unless they were spectacular. She said she needed to state her position if she was to stay on the Committee. She felt this was the place to not only go over the wording of the program but also open up the discussion on signs. Mr. Dill said he looked at the basics of the grant, and typed up some changes (attached) to begin a dialogue. He went over his proposed changes. Ms. Robinson agreed with most of the changes, reviewed her stand on each, and opined she would like to get rid of the references of the "Old Florida Fishing Village" from any of the riverfront documents. She would like to use a "small town community" type of description instead. She would like to also address the sign requirements, had read the LDC sign section, and noted that pole signs covered with landscaping were still allowed. Ms. King went over the code, and stated that the few signs that were permitted using landscaping had the base die due to neglect or weather, and were usually discouraged by staff. Ms. Robinson referred to the handout previously given to the CRA Board by Ms. Keys showing pictures of preferred small town signs, and suggested ways to allow them in our code, which would bring in some very attractive signs at a less cost than some of the monument signs. Mr. Dill felt that the grant guidelines should be addressed instead of the LDC, and if applicants received grant monies, they could be held to the grant standards established for the appearance of the signs. Ms. Keys stated she liked Mr. Dill's proposed changes. Referring to wording within the application, Mr. Capp asked how the grant encouraged private investment if the applicants did not have to buy the property before getting a sign grant. Mr. Haynes explained that the grant encouraged him to buy his site with an existing building knowing he could get help financially with his sign. Ms. King asked how long a building has to be there to be considered "existing ". Mr. Dill felt as long as its there. Ms. King asked after C/O or under construction? Mr. Dill felt a new building did not warrant a grant as it was not blighted nor needed improving yet. The city was just giving money to a business for a sign, which they would put up regardless. Ms. King stated because of the grant, the City might get a better sign. Mr. Dill restated the monies should be for redevelopment vs. development. 3 Ms. Robinson suggested adding "with the intent and mission of the CRA district" to the end of the first sentence in the Purpose section of the grant application packet, which would allow the Committee to make grant decisions based on blight, historical significance, and the premises of the CRA District and Master Plan. Mr. Griffin verified it was the consensus of the Committee to leave "improvements to any existing building" in the same section. Ms. Robinson stated yes, and re- stated the two changes proposed to the Purpose section. "Old Florida Fishing Village" could stay, and Ms. King noted that that phrase was also used throughout the LDC. The Section 2: Eligible Improvements portion was discussed. With regards to the deletion of Exterior signage, Ms. Robinson also wanted to remove "and replace with monument style signs." Various proposals for re- wording the sentence were considered to accommodate different scenarios. The Committee found it difficult since they were not sure of the intentions of the grant — to remove blight and improve the properties, or to pay for new improvements and help businesses. Ms. Keys noted at least the design could be controlled if it received grant money. Ms. Robinson stated that it also depended on funding, that the Committee would most likely grant monies first to the most blighted applications, and then if funds were remaining, help out the other applicants. Ms. Keys suggested the wording could be "to remove existing non - conforming signs and to replace non - village designed with village designed signs." Ms. Robinson agreed, and wanted to still keep it open for existing buildings for businesses who want to come into the CRA. Mr. Griffin suggested using Mr. Dill's last sentence under landscaping. The Committee agreed to "New signs as part of an overall improvement program for an existing improved property, and removal of existing non - conforming and blighted signs." Section 4: Available Fundinq and Matching Requirement was discussed next. Mr. Dill suggested that if the application was for one item — signage, landscaping, or a fagade improvement — then $7500 could be awarded; two items - $10,000, or all three - $15,000. Staff noted that fagade improvements alone can be pricey. Mr. Haynes asked if landscaping had to be a part of an improvement, or could it be by itself. The Committee discussed landscaping as part of the original site plan approval, maintenance responsibility, cost of landscaping around a sign, enforcement of the requirements, and landscaping upgrades for existing sites. Mr. Capp suggested that grant monies be awarded to the applicants that are going to use cold and draught tolerant plants, and have an irrigation system on site. Ms. Keys asked if any code enforcement action has been taken with the properties who received grant money for landscaping projects that have let the landscaping die. Staff stated the city was still trying to use a "business friendly" status quo. Mr. Haynes opined that the CRA grant program helped the city immensely, and he hoped the grant did not become controlling and punishing, but encouraging and helpful. The Committee discussed putting a lien on grant properties if the project was not maintained. Staff suggested having the CRA Board guide staff in how it wanted to handle enforcement issues. The Committee agreed they liked the following proposals: up to $5000 for landscaping only, up to $7500 for signage & landscaping and /or just signage, up to $10000 for fagade only, and $15000 for fagade and /or landscaping and /or signage. 2 Section 6: Recurrinq FSL Grant Applications: Ms. Robinson felt the three years may be restrictive if you are investing a lot of money on improving a blighted building, used Washington Plaza as an example, and stated as long as an additional grant was not replacing what was previously improved with grant money, she was OK with modifying the section. Mr. Dill noted that the intent [of the section] was to ensure that the money was spread amongst the businesses. Staff stated the confusion for them was the wording "received maximum grant funds within three previous fiscal years ", and did it imply that if you received a grant of $7500, was the applicant eligible to apply for another $7500 in the next cycle year, or did they have to wait for three years. Mr. Dill suggested changing "maximum grant funds" to state $15000. Ms. Robinson stated since the Committee reviews the applications, they would know the history of the projects and site improvements, and were awarded discretionary by the CRA Board. She was not sure of needing the three year waiting period. Mr. Capp suggested changing it to two years. The members discussed ownership and owning multiple properties with regards to grant awards. The Committee agreed to the two changes discussed in Section 6. Section 7: FSL Grant Improvement Ranking Criteria: Ms. Bosworth stated the referenced point system had not been used for quite a while. She suggested leaving the criteria paragraphs in tact as reference for the applicants, but removing the points. After discussion, the Committee recommended keeping the points listed but to change wording in the first paragraph that the "following selection criteria may be used ", and to correct #5 to use "two years ", based on the change to Section 6. Ms. Keys also wanted to discuss the item on Page 3 of the application — the requirement that the project must be approved by the CRA Board before construction [a part of Section 5: Application Process and Deadline]. She would like to see it enforced, even though the CRA Board has granted precedent twice before (Capt. Hiram's and Tire Kingdom). The recommendation was to add stronger language /wording to Section 3: Non - Eligible Improvements, and forward their position to the CRA Board. The Committee then discussed Design Guidelines, and what they could require and approve. Ms. Robinson stated, after reading the LDC, that it did not tie their decisions to monument signs only. She wanted the Committee to start encouraging the applicants to consider signage that fit the "village" theme and CRA intent. She relayed she had discussed sign types, prices, and construction with Brister Signs, and stated that there were alternative yet affordable types of signs for the small businesses to consider using besides a back -lit square monument sign. She really liked the signs Ms. Keys presented to the CRA Board, feels the awards for signs may have gotten off -track from the intent, and hoped to get City Council, the Committee and staff all on the same page. The Committee debated if they should review and change the LDC's. Mr. Dill suggested City Council adopt specific guidelines for the CRA for recipients of grant money only. Mr. Haynes stated the LDC verbiage was adequate and that if it became too restrictive applicants would dwindle and not come in. He felt the businesses liked the back -lit signs better, they needed to sell their products, and that the hand - carved signs were pricey. Destination businesses (offices) tend to use the hand - carved signs. He also opined that almost all of the businesses in town liked the "Old Florida Fishing Village" theme. He did not want to "control ", liked the code's language with "encourage ", and stated when businesses are told what signs they have to use, they will not use the City's money, and find a way around it. He suggested 5 having a catalog of various conforming signs allowed, and marking the ones that rank high with the Committee. Ms. Robinson clarified that her preferred signage did not necessarily have to be hand - carved, and referred to the Washington Plaza sign which looked handcarved, but wasn't, and could be modified easily. There was a discussion on the effectiveness of various sign types. Mr. Capp stated that the signs would also need to meet structural windload requirements and that it may be hard to install a "village" post sign without required concrete footers. Staff will check with the Building Department. Ms. King asked the Committee if they would like to create a list of sign criteria they would like to have the grant applicants use, or to reinforce Section 7 of the application regarding ranking of the applications and add wording that that additional consideration and /or points would be given to signs meeting certain criteria. Ms. Keys liked the bonus point suggestion. Ms Robinson reiterated she would like to see more creative sign designs presented instead of the standard monument style. Ms. Bosworth noted that some of the applicants told her they were not sign designers and were having a hard time getting sign companies to give them bids for the grant, which gave them few choices, also. She would prefer being able to give the applicants a list or handout that they could also give to the sign companies. The Committee agreed that they could be discretionary in awarding monies to applicants that met their criteria and vision for signs since the applicants would be receiving CRA money. The businesses could still put up signs they preferred without applying for a grant. Mr. Dill suggested the Committee bring in their criteria ideas to discuss at the next meeting. Motion by Dill /Keys for staff to convert our changes into a readable, logical document and present to the [CRA Board] at the next appropriate meeting for consideration. ROLL CALL: Mr. Capp yes Mr. Haynes yes Mr. Dill yes The vote was 5 -0. Motion passed. 5. OLD BUSINESS Continued: Ms. Keys yes Ms. Robinson yes A. Re- review applications and make a recommendation to CRA Board: Buried Treasures — 1554 US Highway #1— Renee Powell River Park Plaza — 480 -484 US Highway #1— Jay Dick Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners — 720 Harrison Street — Sam Desai River Park Plaza — Mr. Joe Cataldo, representative, stated they had experienced a lot of what was just previously discussed, and they did not find a lot of help from the sign companies or ideas to generate a design that was functional for their site yet reflected the Fishing Village theme. He stated they were primarily a landlord who needed to cater to their tenants [with regards to signage]. He agreed with Mr. Haynes in that the sign needed to be readily seen by drivers to pull them in. They were applying for a sign that would be M adaptable to their future needs, and they were replacing a 50's -style non - conforming pole sign. Ms. Robinson reviewed that $4,320 had been set aside for Buried Treasures tonight, and ask staff how much was still available. Ms. Bosworth stated that after the Buried Treasures recommendation, there was still $4,320 remaining. She explained that the three applications were brought back to the Committee because the CRA Board had tabled them without granting award amounts until the Committee had re- reviewed their revised sign designs. Ar- Pat's was not present at this meeting but had forwarded sign examples he would use if the Committee gave their direction on which one they liked. Ms. Robinson reminded the Committee that their last recommendation to the CRA Board did not include an award for River Park Plaza because they were not present, and they had recommended $4,320 to both Buried Treasures and Ar- Pat's. Mr. Dill wanted to re- consider Ar -Pat's because he felt they were not replacing any non - conformities. The Committee discussed the CRA Board's motion at its February meeting and concluded formal awards had been approved only for Sebastian Vacation Rentals and Alpha Ace Hardware. Ms. Keys and Ms. Robinson suggested the River Park Plaza apply in October for the next cycle when more funds would be available, and they would work with him on sign designs. Mr. Cataldo stated six months may be a long time for his tenants to wait for a sign, and development was proceeding at a good pace, but he would like to work with Committee members on a design. Ms. Keys inquired if they approved a sign, could he be reimbursed out of the next budget. Mr. Dill reiterated that the Committee had already postponed Buried Treasures, possibly Ar- Pats, therefore it was status quo with the previous recommended award amounts, and stated River Park Plaza was a good project to get grant funds but felt their hands were tied with this year's monies. He would support a future application. Ar -Pat's — The Committee took no action since they had not received any revised drawings, and the applicant was not present. Staff summarized decisions made at the meeting from the reviews which was that the Committee was still looking for revised sign designs from Ar -Pat's and Buried Treasures, and keep the previous award recommendation - $8,640 between the two, and depending on their time -line for installation River Park Plaza should return for the next cycle. Ms. Robinson stated if Buried Treasures or Ar -Pat's does not go thru, there would be money available for River Park Plaza in the current cycle. Motion by Dill /Capp to table Ar -Pat's [application]. A voice vote was taken. All were in favor. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 PM. Approved @ Regular Meeting of by Chairman, FSL Grant Review Committee 7 /db DRAFT 5u8mlrrE13 IBY w.Dr"_ 14M11_-:S WWD 4-9-13 FACADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT PURPOSE The Sebastian CRA Fagade, Signage and Landscaping Improvement Grant Program (FSL Grant Program) is a program designed to encourage visible, exterior improvements to any existing building (residential or commercial) and-to encourage private investment within the Sebastian Community Redevelopment Area. The program provides up to $15,000 of public funds per building to match private funds to pay for improvements with the Sebastian CRA. Funds are appropriated annually in the CRA budget, and funding is available on a first come first serve basis. However, the program may be subject to the availability of funds. Facade si ng_age and landscaping (FSL) grants must support the goals of the Overlay District for the CRA area. Applicants are required to use are also a d to eensider—the design guidelines specified in the overlay district to achieve the "Old Florida Fishing Village" theme. SECTION 2: ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS The FSL Grant Program shall provide matching funds for the exterior (street side) improvements to existing buildings that are consistent with and further the implementation of the Land Development Code, CRA Redevelopment Plan and City Comprehensive Plan. Funds may be used for the following illustrative improvements: • Replacement of windows and doors; • Exterior painting or siding as part of an overall fagade renovation program. For example, painting is an eligible expenses when done in conjunction with changes in a flat roof to a pitched roof, dormers, gables. Painting otherwise is not an eligible expense; • E?Ete ' To remove existing non - conforming signs (including pole signs) and replace with monument style signs; • Landscaping b when associated with a Fagade Renovation Program; replacement of a non - conforming sign; or an overall improvement program for an existing improved property; w:ldill, warrenlfacade signature and landscaping grant.docx I r" nr LU S r-OCU" C A*lt /nT'(r =City eting F&e In r sponse to Mr. Hill, Ms. Bothwell said there were other similar progra but the differ ce with them is if the property has a mortgage lien, the owner ust get the consent he lender. 7:20 pm Mr. Hill asked if The government would have to collect on t property if the owner loses the property. Ms. B well said the benefit stays on th uilding as well as the assessment which woul tay with the tax certificateewith the new owner. C. Brief Announcements Mr. Hill reminded the public that Seba ' n has a St. Baldricks Help Kids with Cancer team and invited everyone to parti ' ate c ing out or donating at www.stbaldricks.org/participants*nvoacie/583bv March 2. He said SeaCoast National Bank is donating $2,000 to Sebastian's team their volunteer work at the Fellsmere Frog Leg Fes ' aI. Ms. Coy said she tended the County Commissioner meetin here she opposed the three -year, $ contract extension for the Senior Resources A ciation on the consent a nda to be passed without any discussion by the agencies MPO. She said the Co missioners agreed and it will go through the normal channels for mment. kfr. Wright reminded the pubic of the Chamber's Concert in Riverview the Park featuring the band Remember When this Friday night at 5:30 p.m. 7. RECESS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor McPartlan recessed the Regular City Council meeting at 7:26 p.m. 8. CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING (CRA Packet Under Separate Cover) A. Mayor McPartlan called the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting to order at 7:26 p.m. B. Roll Call CRA Members Present: Mayor Bob McPartlan Vice -Mayor Don Wright Council Member Jerome Adams Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Jim Hill C. Approve January 9, 2013 CRA Minutes MOTION by Mr. Wright and SECOND by Mr. Adams to approve the January 9, 2013 minutes passed with a voice vote of 5 -0. Regular City Council Meeting February 13, 2013 Page Four D. Facade Sign and Landscape Grant Awards The Community Development Director said the Committee met January 30, there were five applications considered and two Committee members were currently present to address the Board. Mr. Wright asked the Board to consider the general comments the Committee members were about to give along with their individual comments on each application. Ms. Keys, Chair of Committee, displayed improved sign pictures of previous grant recipients and noted as the program continues, the Committee has been seeing trends in that requests coming in are for monument signs with plastic fronts, internal lighting which does not encourage the fishing village theme noting they do not have authority to enforce the fishing village look. She displayed a few conforming sign pictures. She said another trend is the business owners are changing the signs after they are paid for and installed. She suggested that changes be approved noting the Committee can meet quickly if needed. She also said the Committee is concerned with the lack of maintenance to approved projects. Warren Dill, Member of the Committee, said the applications are often approved with conditions and the property owners have a responsibility to comply with them. He suggested having a written contract with each applicant requiring them to pay the money back if the conditions aren't met; future changes would have to be reviewed by the 7:39 pm Committee; or have Code Enforcement enforce the rules through an ordinance. He said this will ensure better compliance in the future. The Community Development Director noted the program was not drawn up by ordinance and staff has noticed the non - compliant recipients and used Code Enforcement in the past. He noted some of the altered signs displayed by Ms. Keys have been approved by the Community Development Department. Ms. Keys interjected that staff only has the right make sure the sign meets code, the Committee looks at the design of the sign. The Community Development Director said the program instructions are not the best and they should probably work with the Committee, public, and staff to improve the instructions. He pointed out that the program has had some great success stories. Ms. Keys requested the authorization to have a workshop with staff to improve language to give them the ability to control some of this. Ms. Coy said she liked the suggestion to come up with more signs like Southern Sisters'. Mr. Hill said the program has really enhanced the CRA district, they are talking about a few isolated incidents, and it already falls upon the City to make sure all properties are compliant and maintained, not just those in the CRA district. rd Regular City Council Meeting February 13, 2013 Page Five Ms. Keys clarified that a sign change can be approved by staff as long as it meets code but the Committee is needed to make sure it complies with the grant. The City Manager said the City does need to use Code Enforcement on some of the nonconforming businesses. He suggested changing the program by setting specific stylistic modifications that provides more of the fishing type feel; they could consider liening the property which would make a contract part of the program; and one of the requirements could allow a new sign to be erected for a business that didn't have one. Mr. Wright said any property owner can request a sign, but when the City pays for it and the Committee has ideas that exceed the code, they should go along and maintain their ideas as well. Mayor McPartlan pointed out there are always a few bad apples in the bunch and suggested requiring maintenance of the sign for three to five years as opposed to eternity. Mr. Adams asked if the money is paid before or after the work is completed and why the business is reimbursed if they aren't compliant. Ms. Keys explained the City reimburses the applicant after the work is done and the changes normally occur after payment. The City Manager noted in pictures displayed by Ms. Keys, the City did an inspection and it was good that day, the landscaping was fresh. In the Squidly Books case, the copy changed and the City didn't have ability to stop that because the sign didn't change but the displayed Man Cave sign was non - compliant. Mr. Adams said he agreed if there is a particular style they want to maintain. Ms. Keys displayed pictures of businesses along U.S. 1 that are supposed to have landscaped buffers. It was the consensus of Council to allow staff to conduct a workshop with the Committee. Damien Gilliams, 1623 US Hwy 1, said the agendized applicants should be tabled until the City Attorney can review program wording to hold the businesses' feet to fire. He did not want to see more money spent when there are problems with the existing signs. He also said they should be getting the highest and best use by matching the program with other funding such as the SBA. He said Council should take Ms. Key and Mr. Dill's advice. Mr. Wright asked the Board to discuss each application individually, the majority of the program has been successful, and to stop completely would be a shame. Mr. Hill agreed. Mr. Adams asked if the Committee works on the rules, can they be retroactively applied to tonight's applicants. Mr. Wright suggested having the City issue a memorandum of understanding with each applicant. 5 Regular City Council Meeting February 13, 2013 Page Six 8:13 pm The City Manager said of the 15 -20 completed signs, three are delinquent, and the City should have been more active. He said if they want to ensure the code is followed, the sign is maintained, the lien is the way to protect the City's investment, but they have to consider how friendly they want to conduct business. He advised the program is very successful and they should move forward. The Applicants Mr. Wright noted what is depicted for Alpha Hardware & Marine Supply in the packet is not how the sign will end up looking. Ms. Keys explained every applicant asked a sign company for a sign and they were given standard design that they didn't care for so the Committee thought they should receive approval and meet again with them to come up with a final design. She continued to explain that the Committee felt Buried Treasures and Ar -Pats were non - conforming signs that should be tabled but the Committee was happy with Alpha Hardware and Sebastian Vacation Rentals. MOTION by Mr. Wright and SECOND by Mr. Hill approve the Alpha Hardware and Sebastian Vacation Rentals applications as expressed by Committee with a final review and hold the other applications until the Committee has further discussion with the business owners. Mr. Adams noted Riverview Park Plaza did not have a recommended award for landscaping but asked about the sign. Ms. Keys said the program ran out of money, the applicant was not at the meeting; his project site is being planned which requires landscaping so the Committee would like to see what is installed first before making any decisions. Ms. Keys offered to contact the owner. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: All NAYS: None Passed 5 -0. E. Mayor McPartlan adjourned the CRA meeting at 8:21 p.m. 9. RECONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor McPartlan reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 8:33 p.m. All City Council Members at the previous roll call were present. 10. CONSENT AGENDA All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of consent agenda items unless a member City Council so requests; in which event, the item will be removed and acted upon separately. If a member of the public wishes to provide input on a consent agenda item, he /she should request a Council Member to remove the item for discussion prior to start of the meeting or by raising his/her hand to be recognized. A. Approval of Minutes — January 23, 2013 Regular Meeting Gol MY OF �7 -kN r HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND AGENDA TRANSMITTAL Subject: COMMUNITY Agenda No. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) Dept. Origor. Communit y Development v 1. Approval of Minutes — 1/9/13 Meeting Finance: City Attorney: 2. Approve Grants in Facade, Sign and City Clerk: Landscaping Program Date Submitted: February 6, 2013 r d for Submittal by: For: February 13, 2013 CRA meeting �i I 10ift, City Manager Ex ibits: 1) Minutes of CRA meeting of 1/9/13 2A) FSL Grant Funds Summary to Date 26) FSL Grant Information and Application 2C) New applications and backup material 2D) Minutes of FSL Committee meeting of 1/30/13 (draft) EXPENDITURE AMOUNT BUDGETED: APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $26,000 FY 2012 /13 REQUIRED: total $31,139 available Background: The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) created the Facade, Sign and Landscaping Grant several years ago and has programmed $226,000 into the program to help businesses fund improvements to their properties. To date, $189,278 has been disbursed and an additional $5,583 has been awarded but not yet disbursed totaling $194,861. The $26,000 funded by the CRA Board for fiscal year 2012/2013 along with $5,139 unused funds from the Southern Sisters Phase II grant brings the total available funds for this year's program to $31,139. In accordance with the Facade Sign and Landscaping Grant Information and Application, as approved by CRA (latest revision 09/23/09), eligible signage and landscape improvements may be considered for 80% of costs, up to $7,500. Eligible exterior facade improvements (including signage and landscaping) may be considered for 80% of costs, up to $15,000. 201212013 Application cycle: The following five applications have been submitted for consideration: • River Park Plaza — 480 to 484 U.S. Highway #1 • Alpha Hardware & Marine Supply — 712 Cleveland Street • Buried Treasures - 1554 U.S. Highway #1 • Sebastian Vacation Rentals —1301 US Highway #1 • Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners — 720 Harrison Street These applications were reviewed by the FSL Grant Committee on January 30, 2013. The FSL Grant Committee recommendations are as follows: River Park Plaza — 480 to 484 U.S. Highway #1 — Jay Dick The new owner of the River Park Plaza property, which consists of two existing buildings and a partially constructed site plan for a third building, has begun permitting activities to complete the project. The approved site plan elements are being implemented and the two existing buildings are having their exterior facades renovated. Mr. Dick is requesting grant money reimbursement for proposed landscaping improvements and removal of the non - complying pole sign adjacent to US Highway #1. The small existing sign for the River Grille Restaurant received $3,398 of grant funds in the 2010/11 application cycle. It was the consensus of the FSL Grant Committee that the landscaping was a required element of the site plan and therefore should not be considered for grant funds. Also, since there are not enough funds to cover all of the requests, the Committee felt the funds could be spent better on other applications. (Total recommended award $0) Alpha Hardware & Marine Supply — 712 Cleveland Street — Edith Humphrey Mrs. Humphrey is currently in the process of making necessary repairs to the Alpha Hardware building on Cleveland Street, which was also the Sebastian Post Office Building in the 1950's. She would also like to renovate the exterior elevations with paint and new hardi -plank siding, and replace the non - complying freestanding sign. The FSL Grant Committee recommends approval of 80% of costs, up to $7,499 for the sign and fagade improvements, but requests to re- review the signage for final design. (Total recommended award $7,499) Buried Treasures — new location 1554 US Highway #1 — Renee Powell Ms. Powell recently purchased property on US Highway #1 for the new location of her antique and gift shop. She is requesting grant money reimbursement for signage and landscaping. The FSL Grant Committee recommends approval of 80% of costs, up to $4,320 for the new sign, but requests to re- review the signage for final design. (Total recommended award $4,320) Sebastian Vacation Rentals —1301 US Highway #1 — John Conway Mr. Conway, the new tenant of this property, in coordination with the owner, has started the permitting process to rehabilitate the structure and add visible improvements to the site. Mr. Conway has applied for grant money reimbursement for fagade improvements, landscaping, and signage. The FSL Grant Committee felt this was a very worthy project and recommends approval of 80% of costs, up to the maximum allowed of $15,000, but requests to re- review the signage for final design. (Total recommended award $15,000) Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners — 720 Harrison Street — Sam Desai Mr. Desai has applied for grant money reimbursement for a monument sign. Currently, the property does not have any type of freestanding signage, only the fagade signage on his covered driveway. The FSL Grant Committee recommends approval of 80% of costs, up to $4,320 for the new sign, but requests to re- review the signage for final design. (Total recommended award $4,320) Summary: Total application requests far exceed the $31,139 of available funds in the grant program. The FSL Grant Committee based their decisions on which applications they felt best supported the goals of the Overlay District for the CRA area. In an effort to allow the projects to proceed, the following recommendations, as detailed above, are being forwarded to the Community Redevelopment Agency for final grant award. However, the FSL Grant Committee would like to re- review all the proposed signs with requested revisions before a final design is approved by the Committee. Sebastian Vacation Rentals $15,000 Alpha Hardware & Marine Supply 7,499 Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners 4,320 Buried Treasures 4,320 River Park Plaza 0 Total grants to be awarded this cycle Available funds to be awarded Less grants awarded this cycle Remainder of grant funds to be awarded Recommendation: 1) Review and approve CRA minutes from meeting of 1/9/13 $31,139 $31,139 31.139 $ 0 2) Review applications and consider FSL Grant Committee recommendations. Award grants accordingly with condition that the FSL Grant Committee re- review signage and finalize design. FAQADE, SIGN AND LANDSCAPING GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Tom Haynes Lisanne Robinson Warren Dill Donna Keys Excused: Carolyn Anderson Staff present: Joe Griffin, Community Development Director Jan King, Senior Planner Dorri Bosworth, Planner /Secretary Mr. Dill nominated Donna Keys for chairperson. All were in favor. Donna Keys nominated Lisanne Robinson for vice - chairperson. All were in favor. 5. OLD BUSINESS ® Minutes of Regular Meeting of 1/9/2012 Mr. Dill verified that the money amounts shown in the minutes for Suzi's Tiki were correct with regards to the funds indicated in the summary chart. MOTION by Dill/Lisanne to accept the minutes of the January 9, 2012 meeting as submitted. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Review of Budget and Funds Available Ms. Bosworth had previously explained that the Tiki Bar & Grill (Suzi's) had requested a six month extension, until July 2013, for their grant funds awarded for landscaping plans. These monies were set aside and not included in the available funds figure. Mr. Griffin stated that a portion of the Southern Sisters Phase II monies was not used and therefore now available for this year's applications. Total funds available for the 2013 applicants is $31,139. B. New Applications The Committee decided to review all the applications and then discuss @|koCad0n of the funds. K8a. Robinson Stated she felt the Committee had become more of a Si n3ge group, which was dia@ppOinUng, instead of reviewing projects that were geared towards the development of a Fishing Village. She was unhappy with the line-up nf lit billboards along US Highway #1 and felt the signs should be establishing unity within the CR/\. and that grant monies should be used OD older properties or those no longer in compliance with the overlay district regulations. She preferred hand-carved, non-lighted SigOage that appeared small village- like. Ms. Keys gave the members a hand-out for dimensional signs (attached). K8[ C)\|| agreed. and stated he was looking more @1 the fagode and landscaping projects this year, though not disregarding aiQnG0e. K8a. Robinson discussed asking [|dv C|OUnCi|/CR4 t8 allow the FGL Grant Committee to only approve m more creative type Of sign if grant monies were being used. MS. Keys was in agreement, and stated that staff has to approve signs that meet code but, aa8nadvisory board they can approve aesthetics. She stated she would also like toget away from the internally lit, monument based signs and nn0va towards nice sand-blasted, overhead or ground lit signs that feel like ovillage. K8[ Griffin reminded the Committee to keep costs in rniDd. and that he felt that there had been improvement in the Riverfront with the previously approved signs. Mr. Dill agreed that if grant monies were being used for the sign, an aesthetically nicer sign should beapproved. River Park Plaza — 480 to 484 US Highway #1 The @taffexplained that the development of the 2004 applicant, site plan had been halted years 8go, and the current ovvn8nS were now in the process of completing the project. They had requested grant monies for landscaping and replacement of the non-conforming pole sign. Mr. Keys stated she would consider the replacement of -the pole sign but felt the landscaping was a requirement of the site plan approval and didn't meet the grant criteria. Mr. Dill Dill agreed. There was o discussion Of the two proposed sign designs, vvhiChthGCDnnrnittee felt did not meet the Fishing Village look. Me. Robinson understood the need for multi-tenant a�Jn but liked the o@rved, multi-tenant sign installed for Washington Plaza 0/io`s Pizza) much better. Alpha Hardware & Marine Supply — 712 Cleveland Street The applicant, Ms. Edith Humphrey, was not present. Staff verified the request was for fagade improvements to a very old building, and new signage. Mr. Dill noted landscaping was lacking from the site as well. Ms. Robinson was happy to discover this building was used as the city's Post Office in the 1950's, and was excited for it to have a facelift. She felt this was the intent of the grant program. The committee had questions to ask the applicant N about the proposed fagade changes. There was a discussion regarding tabling the application. Buried Treasures — 1554 US Highway #1 Ms. Renee Powell explained that she had purchased the property across the street from her existing business location, which she was currently developing. She was requesting grant funds for signage and landscaping. She stated it was hard to get quotes from sign companies and suggested the Committee have a list available of companies that design and construct the signs they were interested in. She stated her proposed building was designed to look like an old cracker house, and the site plan should be completed within a month. Ms. Keys stated she felt the same regarding the landscaping request as with the River Park Plaza application, in that it will be a part of the approval for the site plan, but she like the direction of the proposed sign. Ms. Robinson liked the logo and wanted to possibly add funds for landscaping around the sign. The Committee discussed recommending an award amount tonight, but wanted to work with the applicant in tweaking the sign design. Sebastian Vacation Rentals — 1301 US Highway #1 Mr. John Conway stated he currently had a small business located in town since 2008, but now wanted to start his new business venture at a location that needed much renovation. He had worked with city staff regarding the zoning change of use, site plan, and approval of colors, and had been working with a structural engineer regarding building permit requirements. He was requesting grant funds for fagade, signage, and landscaping, and although the signage costs were a high part of his application, it was not what he wanted to spend the most money on. He would rather use grant monies for fagade and landscaping, if awarded. The Committee discussed with staff how the grant program allowed monies to be divided between the three items. Mr. Conway explained his fagade improvements on the overhead projector, and went over the condition of the building. Mr. Dill stated he thought this application had the potential to be the best project the grant program had ever funded as it was removing blight that was in the center of the city, and should be considered for maximum award. He verified that Mr. Conway had a long -term lease with the owner. Ms. Robinson and Mr. Haynes also agreed with awarding the maximum amount however the applicant wanted to break it down. Ms. Keys asked if the applicant would consider down - sizing the 10'X 10' sign to being more in proportion with the building. Mr. Conway stated he would consider not using an internally lit sign, and would like to incorporate the proposed shell into the design. Ar -Pat's Dry Cleaners — 720 Harrison Street Mr. Sam Desai explained that he had other various businesses between West Palm Beach and Daytona, but loved Sebastian, and actually bought the property and building at this location. In the past few years, he has been continuing site improvements. He felt a monument sign would be appealing to his freestanding building, which the site has never had. He also stated he would be adding landscaping around the sign and to the front area. N Ms. Keys asked if an irrigation system existed on site. Mr. Desai stated it did on the east and north side of the building. She discussed with Mr. Desai if any existing signage would be removed if a monument sign was installed. He stated if the monument sign was big enough he would consider removing the signage on the canopy. The Committee discussed the amount of existing signage, and if additional signage was necessary. Ms. Robinson stated she would not like to see a lit sign next to the city's park, and would consider a grant if the sign was re- designed, blending more in with the district. Mr. Dill agreed, and would also like to see some of the existing signage removed, and possibly help with costs to re -paint the canopy. The Committee and staff discussed the LDC requirement of having signage reflect the design of the building. The Committee then discussed which existing signage they would like to have Mr. Desai remove, and consideration of approving funds for a non - internally lit sign. The Committee then had a general discussion on which applications should be awarded grant monies and how much. It was agreed by all that Sebastian Vacation Rentals should receive maximum amount based on its blighted condition, and the following applications in following priority: 2) Alpha Hardware, 3) Buried Treasures, 4) Ar- Pat's, and 5) River Park Plaza. Staff and the Committee discussed language in the grant program with regards to how many times the applicants could apply, which was until the maximum amount was awarded to them, and then they were not eligible for another three years. The city attorney would be asked for his opinion of this verbiage. There was also a discussion with staff regarding the LDC and internally lit signs. Ms. King stated the code listed signs that were "encouraged ", such as the wood - carved signs the Committee was interested in, but it was hard to enforce because of the way it was worded. Staff suggested asking the CRA to allow the condition that if you receive grant monies for a sign, it would have to be of a certain design that the Committee was looking for. After discussion, the Committee decided to recommend grant awards to the CRA so that a meeting could be scheduled for final decisions in order not to further delay projects that wished to begin, but that they would like to meet with the applicants at a future meeting date to work on and approve final sign designs. Ar ®Pat's Dry Cleaners: Motion by Robinson/ to award $4,320 [for a sign] contingent upon further design review. Motion died for lack of a second. It was discussed that when the sign design was brought back for further review, the Committee could then decide if or which existing sign might be required to be removed. 4 Motion by Dill /Robinson to recommend to City Council [CRA] to award Ar- f'at's $4,320 subject to further review of the signage by this Committee. A voice vote was taken. All were in favor. Buried Treasures: Motion by Dill /Robinson to recommend to City Council [CRA] to award Buried Treasures $4,320 subject to further review of the signage by this Committee. A voice vote was taken. All were in favor. Sebastian Vacation Rentals: Motion by Dill/ that we recommend to City Council [CRA] to award Sebastian Vacation Rentals $15,000 subject to further review of the signage by this Committee. Lotion died for lack of a second. There was discussion with the applicant if grant money was wanted for the proposed sign, and a review of the grant program verbiage regarding the amounts allowed for each element ensued. fir. Conway stated if money was awarded for his proposed signage, he was agreeable to return with a new design, especially if it may be less expensive. Motion by Dill /Keys to recommend to City Council [CRA] to award Sebastian Vacation Rentals $15,000 subject to further review of the signage, landscaping, and fagade improvements by this Committee. A voice vote was taken. All members were in favor. Alpha Hardware: Motion by Dill /Robinson to recommend to City Council [CRA] to award Alpha Hardware and Marine Supply $7,499 subject to further review of the signage, landscaping and fapade improvements by this Committee. A voice vote was taken. All members were in favor. It was discussed by staff and the Committee that Ms. Humphrey could apply for an additional $7,501 through the next grant cycle. River Park plaza: Motion by Dill /Haynes to recommend to City Council [CRA] the denial of a grant to River Park Plaza, LLC. A voice vote was taken. All members were in favor. The Committee stated the denial was based on that they felt the landscaping was a part of their approval for the site plan, and that grant monies would be spent better on other properties that met the intent of the program. 5 Ms. Keys and Ms. Robinson offered to meet with the applicants to help design and discuss revisions to their sign details. The next FSL Grant Committee meeting to review final designs was tentatively scheduled for the first week of March. 7. ADJOURNMENT 0 rAIL FaSade Sign and Landscaping Grant Information &Application Sebastoan Comrnunoty Redevebpment Agency FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT The Sebastian CRA Facade, Signage and Landscaping Improvement Grant Program (FSL Grant Program) is a program designed to encourage visible, exterior improvements that meet the intent and mission of the CRA District to any existing building (residential or commercial) aP4 to encourage private investment within the Sebastian Community Redevelopment Area. The program provides up to $15,000 of CRA funds per building to match private funds to pay for improvements within the Sebastian CRA. Funds are appropriated annually in the CRA budget, and funding is available on a first come first serve basis. However, the program may be subject to the availability of funds. Facade signage and landscaping (FSL) grants must support the goals of the Overlay District for the CRA area. Applicants are required to use the design guidelines specified in the overlay district to achieve the "Old Florida Fishing Village" theme. Applicants are reminded that grant awards made are discretionary in nature and should not be considered an entitlement by the applicant. All grant criteria contained herein are guidelines for awards and successful applicants may receive any amount gp to the maximum award. Should an application meet all grant criteria, a grant may or may not be awarded at the CRA Board's discretion due to funding limitations, competing applications, and /or competing priorities. SECTION 1: ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS The FSL program is available to businesses and /or building owners that are located within the CRA district of the City of Sebastian. Businesses must be properly licensed through the City's Occupational Licensing Division and applicants must be a permitted /conforming use within the CRA district. Applications will not be accepted from property owners (and tenants of property owners) who are delinquent on their property taxes. Applicants must not have any outstanding code liens or code violations that cannot be remedied with the grant assistance. SECTION 2e ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS The FSL Grant Program shall provide matching funds for the exterior (street side) improvements that are consistent with and further the implementation of the Land Development Code, CRA Redevelopment Plan and City Comprehensive Plan. Funds may be used for the following illustrative improvements: • Replacement of windows and doors; • Exterior painting or siding as part of an overall facade renovation program. For example, painting is an eligible expenses when done in conjunction with changes Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 1 FACADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT in a flat roof to a pitched roof, dormers, gables. Painting otherwise is not an eligible expense. FeplaGe with mon ntstyle sig New signs as part of an overall improvement program for an existing improved property, and removal of existing non- conforming and blighted signs; • Landscaping ;when associated with a Facade Renovation Program, replacement of a non-conforming sign or an overall improvement program for an existing improved property; • Exterior architectural amenities (e.g., addition or improvement of balconies, porches, or arcades); • Awnings and shutters; • Other exterior (street -side) fagade improvements (considered by the CRA on a case -by -case basis); • Architectural, engineering or landscape architectural services to design improvements to be funded through this program (maximum of 10% of total improvements). *NOTE: All architectural designs, materials and colors must be consistent with the historic and architectural heritage of the Sebastian Community Redevelopment Area. SECTION 3: NON - ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS The FSL grant cannot be used to fund interior renovations or roof repair, other maintenance items and cannot be used to renovate a non - conforming sign unless the sign is being brought into conformity. Any improvements constructed or installed prior to City Council approval are not eligible. SECTION 4: AVAILABLE FUNDING AND MATCHING REQUIREMENT The City has fURded $30, shall fund this program from the City's CRA funds. -fer -this program. It is anticipated that 2 -3 projects per year will receive funding, however, if additional funding is available, additional funding cycles may be considered. For landscaping improvements, up to $5,000 shall be available for an individual property. The City will reimburse up to 80% of the costs up to the dollar amount approved by the CRA Board. For signage and landscaping improvements, and /or just signage improvements, up to $7,500 shall be available for an individual property. The City will reimburse up to 80% of the costs, up to the dollar amount approved by the CRA Board. Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 2 EAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT For exterior facade improvements, up to $10,000 shall be available for an individual property. The City will reimburse up to 80% of the costs up to the dollar amount approved by the CRA Board. For exterior fagade improvements (including signage and/or landscaping), up to $15,000 shall be available for an individual property. The City will reimburse up to 80% of the costs, up to the dollar amount approved by the CRA Board. Applications will be accepted on a first come, first served basis. As long as the FSL Grant Program is funded, the annual grant cycle will commence on October 1St of each year. All applications for funding shall be due on November 15th, or the next immediate workday if November 15th is a holiday or weekend. Application deadlines may change if funding levels permit additional grant cycles. In that case, the City will announce modifications to the above stated schedule. The following chronology outlines the application process: (1) The applicant receives a FSL Grant Program Application. Application forms are available at City Hall, the City's website (www.cityofsebastian.org) or the office of the Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce, 700 Main St., Sebastian, Florida. City Staff is available to meet for an optional pre - application meeting to answer any questions. (2) The applicant completes the application (pgs. 6, 7 & 8) and submits it to the City for review and consistency with the CRA Redevelopment Plan, the Land Development Code, and any other applicable plans. The application package includes the following: a. completed application; b. proof of ownership of the property; c. proof of paid property taxes (current and prior years); d. copy of occupational license(s) (current); c. copies of three (3) cost estimates for the work to be completed; and, d. photos of areas to be improved. The applicant is responsible for all building and other permits and fees which are associated with the proposed project. ® Applicants are advised to submit a complete application and all supporting materials per the instructions in this packet. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed. Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 3 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT (3) The FSL Committee reviews the application according to the program selection criteria and scores the grant application based upon FSL grant criteria established herein. The FSL Committee shall forward a recommendation to the CRA Board for final grant consideration. The CRA Board shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny the funding application. The FSL Committee will be appointed by the CRA Board. The FSL Committee shall consist of three (3) persons operating business in the CRA and two (2) citizens at large. (4) The CRA Board shall have sole authority to award grants. If a grant application is denied, the applicant may reapply in the next funding cycle. • Please note that applications must be reviewed and approved BEFORE facade, sign or landscaping construction work begins. Grants will not be awarded to improvement projects (fagade, sign or landscaping) that are under construction or completed prior to grant application. (5) For approved grant projects, prior to construction of improvements, the applicant must submit and receive applicable building and other regulatory permits. The City of Sebastian is required to file informational returns (Form 1099 -G) for individuals and entities receiving grants from the City. This information is confidential and will only be used for informational return reporting purposes. Grant recipients must sign and return a W9 form to the City before funds can be distributed. (6) Upon completion of the improvements, final inspection and approval by the City, and issuance of a certificate of occupancy (if applicable), the applicant submits a "reimbursement package" to the City which includes the following: a. completed reimbursement form (provided by the City); b. copies of applicable invoices or receipts; c. proof of payment for improvements (which must be at least as much as the amount indicated in the application); and d. photos of improvements (before and after). Applicants will receive grant funding after the project is completed and all associated costs have been paid. Upon completion of approved work, in order to receive grant payment, the applicant must submit documentation of work completed and proof of payment. It is the responsibility of the award recipient to maintain proper documentation of funds expended in the course of completing the improvement project. Release of funds is subject to submission of this documentation. All improvements must be completed essentially as presented to the FSL Committee and CRA Board in order to receive payment. Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 4 FAPA ®E SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT • Acceptable documentation is defined as PAID invoices /statements and /or schedule of values from vendors clearly detailing the work done, accompanied by copies of the cancelled check(s) showing payment accompanied by a vendor invoice. (7) If the project is not completed, is not approved in its final inspection, or does not receive its certificate of occupancy (if applicable) within one year of award, the grant award shall expire. The applicant may request a 6 month extension. Extensions shall only be granted by the CRA Board. FSL grant applications will not be considered if the single building /property under the same ownership has received maximum grant funds ($15,000) within twothree previous fiscal years. Additionally, points will be awarded to first time applicants and /or applicants that have not previously received a grant in the past two##ree years. The following selection criteria may bewW used to review and rate applications for the FSL Improvement Grant Program. Criteria are derived from the goals and objectives of the City's adopted Redevelopment Plan as well as the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. Criteria are weighted with a maximum score of 100 points. (1) Streetscape Aesthetics and Functionality and Quality of Design (Up to 30 points): Degree to which the proposed project enhances the streetscape of Sebastian CRA district, including the addition or enhancement of display windows, awnings, landscaping, handicapped accessibility and architectural amenities such as arcades, balconies and porches. Points are awarded for achieving the goals of the Riverfront Overlay District and for remedying non - conformities. (2) Conformity to City Regulations and Overlay District Goals (Up to 25 points): Degree to which the proposed project promotes the unique character of Sebastian and promotes the historic fishing village overlay goals through the implementation of the Land Development Regulations and the use of urban design principles, site design, architecture, materials, color, landscaping, and other visual physical amenities. (3) Removal of Slum and Blight and Positive Impact to Neighborhood (Up to 25 points): Degree to which the proposed project upgrades or eliminates substandard structures, code violations and /or eliminates non - conforming uses, as well as achieving the goals of the CRA district. (4) Historic Preservation and Materials (Up to 15 points): Degree to which the proposed project promotes the historic character of Sebastian through historic preservation, adaptive re -use of historic structures, site design, architecture, materials, landscaping, and other visual and physical amenities. Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 5 (5) Previous Grant Assistance (Up to 5 points): Applicants who have not been awarded the grant in the previous two + "�a-r& are eligible for five (5) points. Disclaimer: The City of Sebastian, nor its affiliates, shall be responsible for the planning, design, or construction of improvements to property that is owned by the applicant. No warranties or guarantees are expressed or implied by the description of, application for or participation in the Facade, Signage and Landscaping Improvement Grant Program. The applicant is advised to consult with licensed architects, engineers, or building contractors before proceeding with final plans or construction. Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 6 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT 1. Project Location Address of Property to be improved: Assessor Parcel Number(s): Name of Business(es) in Project: Building Frontage Measurement of Project: 2. Applicant Information Name: Mailing Address: City: Phone: Email: State: Zip: ®o you Own, Rent or Lease the subject property? *If you are not the owner, the owner will need to co -sign this application. 3. Businesses or Services Offered on Site: Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 7 - • TIM Ili • :�� i" 1. r 6. Submittals Applications must include the following materials, if applicable, for consideration by the City: Current Photo(s) of project site Assessor parcel number and proof of paid property taxes Applicant Information Listing of businesses or services offered on site Description of proposed improvements Identification of project's support of the Overlay District Current Occupational License Rendering or sketch of proposed improvements Architectural plans - elevation drawing, dimensions, measurements, etc Color and material samples Sign /Awning design drawings and /or plans Documentation Of cost estimates -- copies of vendor bids, estimates, etc Signature of Property Owner and Applicant Applications lacking sufficient materials to describe the project will NOT be • Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 8 7. Estimated Costs and Timing Please provide copies of three vendor bids /estimates or other documentation of cost estimates for all proposed fagade work. a. Window or Door Replacement b. Exterior paint or siding c. Signage d. Exterior Lighting e. Fagade /Exterior Architectural Improv. f. Architectural /Design Fees g. Landscape / Handscape Improvements h. Awnings or Shutters i. Building Permit/Planning Fees j. Other Proposed Improvements (specify) TOTAL ESTIMATED COST Estimated Days /Months for Completion 8. Signatures Property Owner(s) Signature(s) This Section for City Use Amount Received: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Applicant(s) Signature(s) 0 Date Reviewed: Recommendation to CRA: Action by CRA: Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 9 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRAN KJAP OF CRA BOUNDARY a aan fl Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 10 CIR Of SE -- � HOW OF PELICAN ISLAND CITY OF SEBASTIAN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FaVade, Sign, & Landscape Gant Program Summary To Date FiscalYear /Awarded too Funds Available Funds Awarded and Disbursed Funds Awarded but not yet Disbursed 2005/06 $30,000 Buena Vista Eyeland $6,050 2006/07 $30,000 Wendy's $3,251 H.A.L.O. $15,000 Professional Title (expired) $0 2007/08 $30,000 Keg Shack $5,005 Sebastian Executive Plaza $4,000 Anchor Plaza $7,500 Captain Hiram's $15,000 VFW $6,775 2008/09 $30,000 2009/10 $30,000 Jerry Smith Tile $6,581 Sebastian Antiques $6,389 Island Tropical Smoothie $4,744 (tree removal) $350 Southern Sisters — Phase I $7,500 Southern Sisters — Phase II $2,463 Maxwell Plumbing $14,569 FiscalYear /Awarded to: Funds Available Funds Awarded and Disbursed Funds Awarded but not yet Disbursed 2010/11 $30,000 Earl's Hideaway $7,500 Riverfront Chill & Grill $7,000 Philipson/920 Plaza $7,500 River Grille $3,398 Kim Ellis Insurance $4,400 Fountain Plaza $7,436 Squidly Books $5,500 Washington Plaza $7,500 Professional Title $6,859 H.A.L.O. $3,717 2011/12 $20,000 Clark Water $5,500 Tire Kingdom $3,750 Riverfront Auto $6,541 Tiki Bar & Grill $13,083 2012/13 $26,000 Sebastian Vacation Rental $15,000 Alpha Hardware $7,499 2013/14 $30,000 TOTALS TO DATE $256,000 $209,861 $7,499 1 -8 -2014 Total funds in program $ 256,000 Less funds awarded and disbursed 209,861 Less funds awarded, but not yet disbursed 7,499 Available Funds to be Awarded $38,640 2 D R� UJ > z o° W c � Q c.� W N LU O iY E C1 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT FACADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM Project Location /, q/ Address of Property to be improved: 40 U-5 PKWY I- Se 71 an Assessor Parcel Numbers ): J 1 ®39, 0 (0" 0W2.0 ®0q0 ®0t6k Name of Business(es) in Project: 1� I-OPY rt< p/ -4�� /— ' Building Frontage Measurement of Project: 2. Applicant Information Do you Own, Rent or Lease the subject property? *If you are not the owner, the owner will need to co -sign this application. 3. Businesses or Services Offered on Site: 4. Description of Proposed Improvements: Approved by CRA 6192106, rev. 06/20107 and 09123109 Page 6 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT 5. Please identify ways in which this project supports the Overlay District 6. Submittals Applications must include the following materials, if applicable, for consideration by the City: Current Photo(s) of project site Assessor parcel number and proof of paid property taxes Applicant Information Listing of businesses or-services offered on site Description of proposed improvements Identification of project's support of the Overlay District Current Occupational License Rendering or sketch of proposed improvements Architectural plans - elevation drawing, dimensions, measurements, etc Color and material samples Sign /Awning design drawings and /or plans Documentation of cost estimates -- copies of vendor bids, estimates, etc Signature of Property Owner and Applicant Applications lacking sufficient materials to describe the project will NOT be reviewed. Approved by CRA 6192106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 7 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING GRANT 7. Estimated Costs and Timing Please provide copies of three vendor bids /estimates or other documentation of cost estimates for all proposed facade work. a. Window or Door Replacement b. Exterior paint or siding c. Signage d. Exterior Lighting e. Fagade /Exterior Architectural Improv. f. Architectural /Design Fees g. Landscape /Hardscape Improvements h. Awnings or Shutters i. Building Permit/Planning Fees j. Other Proposed Improvements (specify) TOTAL ESTIMATED COST Estimated Days /Months for Completion 8. S gn ures Signe / Property wner(s) Signature(s) i nis section for City Use Amount Received: Date Reviewed. .! 42 � t deiy - . Signe Applicants) Sig ature(s) RECEIVED jAN,03 2013 city of Seba � Rnpapt, Recommendation to CRA: c;ornmunity Oevel )P Action by CRA: Approved by CRA 6192106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 RECEIVED NOV 13 2012 AA City Of i0 inn community V,gy&R m pek 1. Page 8 a ►UJ _� U) U W Jx &A ='_ �` i, 1— - p 7. a O �n N o C7 m � O � E 0 U 1. Project Location Address of Property to be improved: 6�� ➢' �_ Assessor Parcel Number(s)- Name of Business(es) in Project: i I — , i re.,,-,,_ Building Frontage Measurement of Project: 2. Appllucant Worrnation a Name. Mailing Address: ` �S RW City: ���,�Gd state: Zip: Phone: --I �] 2_ Cr G3 l – Email: 9 Do you Own, Rent or Lease the subject property? C)LJII *If you are not the owner, the owner will need to co -sign this application. 3. Businesses or Services Offered on Site: f 4. Description of Proposed i nprovernents: All'- i1' Wl t' a_ i { Approved by CRA 6112106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 6 FAPADE SIGNAGE AND LAN®SCAPING GRANT 6. Please identity ways in which this project supports the Overlay District 14 LL 6. Su"birnittals Applications must include the following materials, if applicable, for consideration by the City: Current Photo(s) of project site Assessor parcel number and proof of paid property taxes Appiicant intormation Listing of businesses or services offered on site Description of proposed improvements Identification of project's support of the Overlay District Current Occupational License Rendering or sketch of proposed improvements Architectural plans - elevation drawing, dimensions, measurements, etc Color and material samples k Tj(- Sign /Awning design drawings and /or plans Documentation of cost estimates -- copies of vendor bids, estimates, etc Signature of Property Owner and Applicant Appl°ocatlons lacking sufficient materials to descHbe the project wHI NOT be reviewed. Approved by CRA 6192106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 7 FACADE S§GNAGC AND LANDSCAP§NG GRANT 7. EsUrnated Costs and lTimMg Please provide copies of three vendor bids /estimates or other documentation of cost estimates for all proposed fagade work. a. Window or Door Replacement b. Exterior paint or siding c. Signage d. Exterior Lighting e. Fagade /Exterior Architectural Improv. f. Architectural /Design Fees g. Landscape /Hardscape Improvements h. Awnings or Shutters i. Building Permit/Planning Fees j. Other Proposed Improvements (specify) TOTAL ESTWATED COST EsUmated Days /Months for Comp�etlion 8. Sognatures Signed: Property Owner(s) Signature(s) This Section for City use Amount Received: Date Reviewed Recommendation to CRA: Action by CRA. $ $ f �/ $ ,3 -7 62. (�V r Signed: 1 Applicants) Signature(s) Jr Approved by CRA 6192106, rev. 06120107 and 09123109 Page 8 1545 US Highway I S. Sebastian, FIL 32955 Buried Treasures Antiques and Collectibles, LLC Executive Summary of Buried Treasures Antiques & Collectibles, LLC "Buried Treasures.... Enjoyed Yesterday, Reclaim Today!" Buried Treasures has a uniqueness that distinguishes it as a specialty, store above the rest. Buried Treasures is an outlet for various types of vendors and consignors who sell their antiques and collectibles. Customers have a fun time getting lost looking for Buried Treasures to reclaim. The nostalgic atmosphere brings them back to the "good olde days" evoking pleasant memories from the past. The merchandise is of high quality and is carefully selected from Primitive, Victorian, Deco, and Mid-Century Modern to Retro, all while being very reasonable prices. Within the store, is the "Treasure Hut" is a gift shop which features tropical, nautical, and shell items. The array of items consists of Sebastian Florida memorabilia, T-shirts, accessories, Jewelry, Tiki and decorative items, This specially gift shop was designed to appeal to visitors who want unique souvenirs to bring home. Also, steady regular customers frequently stop by the store to check for new items to add to their collection. The company has built up a large customer base from locals, antique dealers, professional photographers and interior designers, seasonal and returning vacationers.