Loading...
07282010CRA AgendaC]IYCF HOME OF PEUCAN ISLAND COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) (CITY COUNCIL) AGENDA WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 2010 4:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN ST, SEBASTIAN, FL 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 9, 2010 Meeting 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Master Plan Capital Improvements Projects Prioritization (City Manager Transmittal) 6. ADJOURN HEARING ASSISTANCE HEADPHONES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR ALL GOVERNMENT MEETINGS. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING 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 THE APPEAL IS TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F. S.) IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR AT 589 -5330 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THIS MEETING. City Council Present: Mayor Richard H. Gillmor Vice -Mayor Jim Hill Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Eugene Wolff Council Member Don Wright CIIYCF HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) (CITY COUNCIL) MINUTES WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 2010 5:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN ST, SEBASTIAN, FL 1. Mayor Gillmor called the CRA Meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. ROLL CALL Staff Present: City Manager, Al Minner City Attorney, Robert Ginsburg City Clerk, Sally Maio Deputy City Clerk, Jeanette Williams MIS Senior Systems Analyst, Barbara Brooke -Reese 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 12, 2010 Meeting MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mr. Wolff to approve the May 12, 2010 minutes passed on a voice vote of 5 -0. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Brandon Schaad, Outlier Planning Facilitation of CRA Master Plan Workshop The City Manager introduced Brandon Schaad. Mr. Schaad said he was going to ask Council and the public to brainstorm some capital improvement projects for the CRA and put dollar figures to the items. Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting June 9 2010 Page Two He briefly outlined the history of the CRA noting Council has recognized the need to update the plan. He said the revenue for capital improvement projects is $250,000- $300,000 per year and some of the projects they might consider are funding for the FSL Grant program, burying the utility lines, CAVCORP improvements, median landscaping, US 1 bump outs, gateway treatments, underground stormwater drainage, and a business analyst position. He said the City is obligated to fund a $150,000 match for Stan Mayfield Working Waterfront Grant. B. Public/Council /Staff Planning Session Mr. Schaad asked for capital improvement ideas without thinking about monetary constraints: Council Ideas Ms. Coy said uniform, canopied landscaping. Mr. Hill said uniform signage, paved roads, landscaping, streetscaping US 1. Mayor Gillmor said improving CAVCORP and the streets adjoining to CAVCORP to facilitate extra parking for events; streetscape Cleveland and Coolidge with on street parking. Mr. Wright said the Working Waterfront Project, and the Archie Smith Fish House. Mr. Wolff said the gateways that would tie into the landscaping to give a sense of entering into the district. Public Ideas Lisanne Robinson said streetscaping US 1, including parking designation, bump outs, landscaping, and uniform signage to define the district. Ms. Robinson noted the Board of Directors of the Sebastian River Fine Arts and Music Foundation has tentatively agreed to put up to $10,000 for sculptural signage for the district. Donna Keys said she would like to combine the concept streetscaping with burying utilities or moving them back to the railway. She asked that the procedure to implement any proposed US 1 improvements with FDOT be outlined at the end of the meeting. The City Manager said depending on what is prioritized, the improvements should be designed by an engineer and submitted to FDOT. Discussion followed on maintenance responsibility of the US 1 amenities. Louise Kautenburg suggested the development of some kind of easily recognizable emblem indicating the CRA district. Mr. Schaad suggested this would fall into a signature fa9ade concept and suggested calling it distinguishing features. Mr. Wright pointed out there are four entryways into the district. Mr. Hill said all of these ideas will help distinguish the district. Mr. Wright said they need a plan as to here's where we are here's where we are going, bringing everything together. 2 Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting June 9 2010 Page Three Ms. Keys said homes are being built on the east side of Indian River Drive which was never supposed to happen and they block the expansive view. Ms. Coy said she had never heard of a decision to not building on the east side. The Growth Management Director said when there is a (property) lot that is on both sides of Indian River Drive, in most cases building is prohibited on the east side of the road but there was an analysis completed of the lots that can be built on. She said most of the them do not have enough buildable land but they can be filled. The Growth Management Director added that Council did take steps to reduce the height along the riverfront, and about a year ago, the code was revised to identify a uniform measuring point. Mr. Wolff said government should respect private property rights and it would be hypocritical for the City to develop the Dabrowski property and then turn around to tell someone they can't build as they wish. Mayor Gillmor said they had two or three assessments of the Dabrowski and two of the assessments indicated the highest value was residential. Ms. Coy said tax abatements could be offered for not building on the east side. Mayor Gillmor asked if that fell under the purview of redevelopment. Theresa Tolle, Baystreet Pharmacy, said they should look to see if all of the priorities have been accomplished from the original master plan to include the unfinished items as well. Mayor Gillmor said they are on board with a lot of the things in the master plan /charrette and some of the things they can't do because the land doesn't exist anymore. Mr. Hill said the whole idea is to find a direction, noting the capital improvement program was prioritized and then they shifted gears. He said the City Manager needs clear plan so he isn't engineering projects that they don't have money to do. He said the whole process is to adjust the master plan, prioritize the projects, achieve a method of accomplishing the plan while looking at the whole picture. Mr. Wright said a lot of their discussion ties into the previous workshop where areas were recognized as unrealistic such as commercial development, and they need to provide a better environment for the business community to be more successful. Mr. Wolff suggested they start with their shopping list, noting a lot of businesses can't wait a couple of years for a large monetary project. Ms. Kautenburg said they should not try to make people want what Council wants, but listen to the people who have a vested interest in the district. She briefly outlined the demise of the Community Redevelopment Advisory Community as the CRA and noted the gateway was a priority about seven years ago which haven't been done yet. Mr. Wolff agreed that maybe they should contact the top 20 business people to find out the District needs. 3 Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting June 9 2010 Page Four Mr. Hill said the City Council shouldn't be the CRA but rather it should be business owners in the community. The City Manager called for a point of clarification that the City Council has always been the CRA board. Mr. Wright said the FSL has been successful and they probably need to move in towards appointing business people to the Board. Ms. Coy agreed with an advisory board, but limit the board to seven members that are not political appointees The City Manager pointed out F.S.163 allows Council to be the board plus two more business members. Mr. Wright said that might be a good interim step. The City Manager gave them the following three options as provided by Statutes: A. Council be the CRA board B. Council and two citizens C. Divest yourselves completely Mayor Gillmor asked if they can set up a board that has spending authority. The City Attorney said he rather not put restrictions on them and what ever Council comes up with he will tell them how to get there and if it wasn't possible, make changes for next year. Mr. Wolff said a board of district members will have different agendas and asked who would speak for the whole CRA noting only representatives from Capt. Hiram's attend meetings. Mr. Wright suggested sending out a district survey. Ms. Coy suggested holding a workshop but Council stay home. Mr. Wolff said that would be a good idea for 30 -40 people but only five will show. Mr. Hill said he is not opposed to surveying but noted everyone is agreeing on the same things and they just need to package the priorities. Tom Collins, Capt Hiram's, said he agreed with Mr. Hill, that Council needed to get the agreed on items done and people aren't attending because they don't know about the meetings. He suggested roadway signage to let people know a scenic highway is approaching or shopping district. Ms. Robinson said mailers are great with a return, stamped envelope. Ms. Keys cited the streetscape enhancements in the current master plan. Richard Martin said Council needed to prioritize, apply a cost, and set up performance measurement system as the business owners in attendance are looking for a start and finish to the items discussed. Mr. Schaad handed out stickers labeled 1 -5 and asked people in attendance to put the #5 sticker on their first prioritized project, #4 sticker on their second project and so forth during a five minute break. Ms. Coy said her priorities might change once she knows about cost. 4 Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting June 9 2010 Page Five Richard H. Gillmor, Mayor ATTEST: Sally A. Maio, MMC City Clerk The City Manager said financial blocks could be shifted around, but tonight money is not the issue, he would like to see projects and goals. Mayor Gilimor called for a recess at 6:10 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. All members were present. Mr. Schaad went over the results. (see tally sheet attached) Ms. Coy said some of the Indian River County Commissioners have indicated there is left over monies in the Land Acquisition Committee to improve the Archie Smith house and she urged the City to go after it. Mr. Wright suggested making that a non -CRA project. 6. Being no further business, Mayor Gilimor adjourned the meeting at 6:33 p.m. Approved at the CRA meeting. 5 SLD HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND CRA AGENDA TRANSMITTAL Agenda No. Subject: A CRA Master Plan Second Workshop for Submittal by: n r, City Manager Department ntOri in: Ci Manager Finance: City Attorney: City Clerk: Date Submitted: 23 JUL 10 SUMMARY Based on the ranking of CRA projects /objectives at the June 9, 2010 workshop, the following is a formal summary of how the votes were counted: RANKING PROJECT POINTS 1 Streetscaping US 1 35 2 Working Waterfront 34 3 Gateways 28 4 Uniform Signage /Branding 20 District 5 C.A.V. Corp 16 6 Preserve Archie Smith Fish 15 House 7 Incentives /Conservation 12 Easements to keep east side of Indian River Dr. unbuilt 8 Pave roads "president" roads) 7 9 Underground Utilities 4 10 Add on street parking to 3 Calvin /Coolidge It is difficult to provide project cost estimates for these projects because scope can vary. This report makes assumptions and projections to provide the CRA Board with information to help prioritize future projects and update the CRA Master Plan. US 1 STREETSCAPING RANK #1 35 POINTS $15,000 $20,000 This project could have many components and assumptions are made to provide a project cost estimate of $15,000 $20,000. The cost estimate is based on not constructing new "bump- outs but, improving the existing bump -outs with new landscaping materials such as mulch, trees and shrubs. Because the "bump- outs" are in the FDOT ROW, permitting and engineering will be required. Below is an estimated budget: WORKING WATERFRONT ITEM Tree (Palm or Other Based on FDOT Specs) Shrubs/Ground Cover Mulch TOTAL PER EXISTING BUMP -OUT Number of Existing Bump -Outs Subtotal Engineering/Permitting ESTIMATED TOTAL Some other US 1 Streetscaping projects may include; new landscaping in the center medians, new bump -outs, landscaping materials along the east/west US 1 ROW and re- painting street/parking lines. These items range from very reasonably priced, to very expensive, based on ROW and FDOT regulatory requirements. In any case, conformity with FDOT regulations will be required. With the City recently accepting the dedication of the Dabrowski and Hurricane Harbor parcels, later at your July 28 meeting Council will be considering the working waterfront business plan and the Fishermen's Landing Sebastian (FLS) Lease. In approving the FLS Lease, the City will commit to making certain renovations. However, these improvements are critical in marketing Hurricane Harbor and moving forward with the waterfront redevelopment plan. These costs are: ITEM Roof Pest Remediation A/C Repair Kitchen Clean -Up Interior /Exterior Painting Signage Engineering Landscaping Exterior Bathroom Modification TOTAL ESTIMATE COST ESTIMATE COST ESTIMATE $300 250 100 $650 15 9,750 5,000 $14,750 RANK #2 34 POINTS $150,000 $200,000 60,000 10,000 40,000 5,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 $165,000 A special note of consideration While this project was voted #2, it will need to be a funding priority if the FLS lease is approved. However, based on the scope of the US 1 Landscaping, FY 10 reallocations and FY 11 allocations can complete these projects in the short run. GATEWAYS RANK #3 28 POINTS $250,000 $275,000 This project's estimated cost is high and a budget detail is not currently available. The estimate is provided by Frank Watanabe of Neel- Schaffer who is completing gateway concepts. Again, based on the level of project specifications, a more accurate project budget can be developed. On Tuesday, July 13 Frank Watanabe and I met to review his initial concept. Based on my review, not enough options were presented. As a result, Mr. Watanabe is returning to his design team to develop another concept. A gateway concept workshop is scheduled for Wednesday, August 11 Mr. Watanabe will be providing his concepts to me sometime during the week of July 26 As soon as I receive them, they will be disseminated to Council. At this time, Mr. Watanabe has developed a gateway concept that will enhance four entrance ways into Sebastian along US 1 (North /South) and Indian River Drive (North/South). His concept also calls for additional landscaping and signage along the western edge of Riverview Park. UNIFORM RANK #4 20 POINTS COST UNKNOWN SIGNAGE /BRANDING Scope will obviously dictate cost. Attempts were made to contact other City officials, but at the time of writing we had not received confirmation on costs. For planning purpose a reoccurring cost of $20,000 has been assumed. CAVCORP PARKING RANK #5 16 POINTS $750,000 LOT Based on the estimate from Schulke, Bittle and Stoddard, CavCorp Parking Lot improvements are estimated at $750,000. These improvements include resurfacing and landscaping. Project scope can be increased or decreased based on the concept plan already prepared. Council authorized a CavCorp Project in the amount of $750,000 in FY 10. The cost was spread over recreation impact fees and CRA. Should this project be down rated, its funds can be shifted to other priorities. Staff will recommend that some of the CavCorp funds be shifted to cover the costs associated with the Working Waterfront Program if the FLS Lease is approved by Council. ARCHIE SMITH FISH RANK #6 15 POINTS $750,000 HOUSE This estimate is based on information provided by Indian River County. In your Council packet is an update on this project. CONSERVATION RANK #7 12 POINTS NO ESTIMATE EASEMENTS This project aims to restrict development on the east side of Indian River Drive by granting incentives or purchasing development entitlements. A budget for this project as not been prepared. PAVE ROADS RANK #8 7 POINTS $300,000 A budget for paving CRA roads can vary based on priority and /quantity. Staff has estimated that there is approximately 3.5 miles of between Indian River Drive /US 1 and Jackson /Harrison. In order to pave,` strip and fix curb and gutter a total project budget is approximately $300,000. This amount can be spread out over a number of years or shifted to Local Option Gas Taxes based on policies that Council may consider going into the new fiscal year. In the CIP budget presented later in this report, staff shifts "Pave Roads" project cost into the Local Option Gas Tax Fund. This action however, would require an increase in the General Fund millage rate to $3.594. This process will be discussed in more detail at your meeting on July 28 in the Budget Committee report and DR -420 recommendation. UNDERGROUND RANK #9 4 POINTS $5,000,000 UTILITIES In an effort to update a "ballpark" estimate for underground electric utilities along US 1 and Indian River Drive, FPL was contacted. For the purpose of a rough estimate, FPL increased their per mile cost from $1,000,000 to $1,500,000. FPL indicated materials have substantially increased in the past two years. In addition, FPL noted that Sebastian's US 1 and Indian River Drive electric grid will provide certain engineering challenges which could increase costs. Assuming 3.5 miles of circuitry, the estimate is $5,250,000. Please note, that other engineering and preliminary costs would be needed to get a better estimate. CALVIN /COOLIDGE RANK #10 3 POINTS $150,000 PROJECT Based on the concept prepared by Schulke, Bittle and Stoddard, the cost for making landscaping, drainage and asphalt improvements have been extracted from the "CavCorp" Concept. This concept also included a cost for construction of additional on street parking. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS BILLBOARDS As noted in a recent "Current Topics" Update, the Billboard contract will be expiring shortly. These funds can be reused to fund the contract for an additional year or terminated, allowing the funds to be shifted towards other projects. Of course, a hybrid approach my also be considered keeping some billboards and unencumbering some revenue. PARKING Since the June 9 workshop, riverfront parking has become another consideration. Although parking has always been discussed and is a primary issue identified in the CRA Master Plan, Council did not specifically identify parking as a concept in the project rankings. Further, since June 9 Council has requested immediate attention to a Land Development Regulation modification to address parking. If a modification to the LDR is made that would lower the parking requirements, the City may need to address parking construction in its CRA Master plan update. This change may require shifting the priorities of the aforementioned projects. A parking study may be an expenditure which will better address how to make specific parking capital improvements. PLANNING ACTION No action is required on this item. Staff seeks direction from Council in order to formulate a plan, which can than be included in the revised CRA Master Plan. Attached to this report is a preliminary CIP CRA budget. This proposal highlights available funds and addresses the aforementioned goals in the following manners: D FY 10 (Current Year) Working Waterfront Land Acquisition ($535,119) Facility Renovations ($235,119) US 1 Landscaping Improvements ($25,000) Billboards or Uniform Signage ($20,000) D FY 11 US 1 Improvement ($25,000) Billboards or Uniform Signage ($20,000) Parking Study ($30,000) Gateways (currently under concept design) ($250,000) D FY12 Billboards or Uniform Signage ($20,000) Archie Smith or Parking Improvements ($400,000) Special Note There is currently a CavCorp allocation in Recreation Impact Fees of $100,000 and DST Fund of $250,000. This amount of $350,000 is represented in a note on the CIP chart. These monies are either (1) eligible for the projects; or (2) should be unallocated and returned to their respective funds. D FY13 Billboards or Uniform Signage D FY14 Archie Smith or Parking Improvements D FY15 o No Major Project FY 09 Tax Increment from City $273,888 Tax Increment from County 251,236 Retum from Main Street Project 668,590 Investment Income 1,990 $1,195,704 Operating Expenditures 44,098 Facade /Sign /Landscape Program 22,988 Billboard Advertising 46,200 Special Events 34,184 Video Production (Feather Wars) 20,000 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 TOTAL FY 09 227,470 Operating Expenditures 38,834 Facade/Sign /Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 Billboards or Uniform Signage 20,000 US Improvements 25,000 FCT Match Waterfront Program 535,119 Waterfront Renovations 200,000 TOTAL FY 10 945,421 Operating Expenditures 39,259 Facade /Sign /Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 Billboards or Uniform Signage 20,000 Parking Study 30,000 US 1 Landscaping Improvements 25,000 Gateways 250,000 TOTAL FY 11 490,727 Operating Expenditures 39,259 Facade /Sign /Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 Billboards or Uniform Signage 20,000 Parking Improvement Project ($350,000 other Funds) or Archie Smith 400,000 TOTAL FY 12 585,727 Operating Expenditures 39,259 Facade /Sign/Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 Archie Smith Fish House or Parking Improvements 275,000 TOTAL FY 14 440,727 Exisitng Operational Cost or Completed Capital Project New Project Per June 9 and July 14 Discussion FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 $223,426 $155,427 $155,427 $160,867 $166,497 $172,325 206,304 143,515 143,515 148,538 153,737 159,118 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,767 1,439 2,776 3,142 3,536 3,959 $432,497 $300,381 $301,718 $312,547 $323,770 $335,402 Operating Expenditures 39,259 Facade/Sign /Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 Billboards or Uniform Signage 20,000 TOTAL FY 13 185,727 Operating Expenditures 39,259 Facade /Sign /Landscape Program 30,000 Special Events 36,468 TRF to GF For Maintenance 60,000 TOTAL FY 15 165,727 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE $16,404 $984,638 $471,714 $281,368 ($2,641) $124,179 $7,222 ANNUAL REVENUES $1,195,704 $432,497 $300,381 $301,718 $312,547 $323,770 $335,402 ANNUAL EXPENDITURES $227,470 $945,421 $490,727 $585,727 $185,727 $440,727 $165,727 ENDING FUND BALANCE $984,638 $471,714 $281,368 ($2,641) $124,179 $7,222 $176,897