Loading...
05/25/1976 .....' .,...." ,.:.~,.., -., . ," ' ':"::;r r",," .. I" . '.f;, """'.. cL '>'.' 1,'."" !, . . . t. ;,., c c' 'cc _.',1 . "".' ":'".,~,'" , j ,~ '. ., ...., ", "'. \ ,., '-'-' ....'.... ",.' :' ";. . i' .I' .....\ . . :;':. :,1 .' ",,' . c. , ,....':' , : 1,'.", '.' . ".. ^ . . .' " .,:.~. ~ . ", . . c,. . ~...;. "1 ' "', " . ,'.; , .h. 'If" -.,.... . . CLEARI'lATER DO\'lNTm.zN DEVELOPHENT l30ARD NINUI'ES - Hav 25,1976 e;.,<~, '.''loot'' , . PRESE1\T: Rose B. Phifer, Chairman Hugh Parker Aaron ailgore Charles Galloway Nsgr. Larkin Joe R. lvolfe Ns. Kottzneier Paul Wade Keith Crawford Tom Brown Dale Narren Leon Hanunock Hayor Gabriel Cazares Conmussioner Darwin Frank Commissioner Karen Hartin Dam Ninotti aill Reed Bob Taylor 1'1s. Lmvry N. E. Palmer Guests & Press The Chairman called the meeting to order and asked Nsgr. Larkin to lead us with an invocation. The Chairman asked for introduction of all guests who are here for the first time and thanked all present for the turnout to this meeting. The Chairman asked for approval of minutes of April 27, 1976. with no changes offered by the board members, the minutes were approved as written and distributed. The Chairman asked the board if they would consider altering the agenda and place item #9 on the agenda in the #3 spot. with no discension she proceded to corrnoont as to the contract with RTKL Associates Inc. on the civic center matter. . The Chairman asked for comments from any members of the board and other people present, Mrs. Martin, the city commissioner responded and made the position of the city commission most clear in regard to the present status of the civic center site matter. There were corrurents by members of the board and the Mayor on the same point and a motion was offered to go on record aSking for a joint meeting of the city Commission and the Do~ntown Development Board to consider the RTKL contract regarding the civic center site. This motion was seconded and passed unanin-ously. It was further decided in regard to this item that a letter would be address- ed to the City Manager, picot Floyd to be hand delivered on May 26th. asking for the joint meeting with the city commission and the Downtown Development Board. . The Chairman introduced Mrs. Kottmeier, who made a brief presentation of the proposed Harbor Commons Condominium type office and apartment structure. Mrs. Kottmeier passed maps along to indicate the location actually between Roger st. and Turner st. along the bayfront in the City of Clearwater. She indicated that at this point in time the response to the proposed develop- ment has been very good and they expect that they will have enough prospect- ive buyers of the condominium within a matter of a few months to proceed with the development of it. ~~s. Kottmeier indicated further that they were simp- 1y not going to bui~d the structure and then attempt to sell it, rather they were aSking for suggestions from prospects which would indicate the type. size, location of space, and many other features prior to actual con ruction and on this basis, actua11y do a tailoring job for each prospect. " .' .. , . " ..... ,'.~I . " ' <." . . ,L_.'. ' -00' ' . ~ c( , :1, .~ cC, ~ , '...;":,.. , '.,' c' ''''~!.'<:~'ln_~>\1 . P 2 ^ W The Chairman then called upon Nrs. Jane Lowry of the Volunteers for the Preservation Organization, who ~ade a short presentation regarding their objectives and purpose. Mrs. Lowry pointed out that the Volunteers for Preservation is an organization of women who have undertaken the job of looking at every plot of land in the downtown area of Clearwater initially for the purpose of determining what structures need to be preserved, and what structures need to be removed for redevelopment. Hrs. lAJwry indicated that at this point the training of the investigators, all women, has been completed and funded to the extent of about $2000 dollars and they are now ready to go to work. She further added that Phase II of their purpose and objective is about to start, and they will need further funding from business organizations, particularly in the downtown area of Clearwater. She pointed out that she is working very closely with the city of Clearwater, Planning Department, being well aware of the RTKL contract, now under way, that hope- fully they ..Iade the right decision in deciding to start their project in the downtown area of Clearwater, and would then proceed to take in the entire city, in fact organizations are being put together in the other communities of the county so that ultimately, and after many years perhaps, the entire county-wide project will be under way. The Chairman thanked both Mrs. Kottmeier and ~~s. Lowry xor their fine pres- entations and said that in the instance of their request for financial assis- tance that we are this month going into our budget preparation period, and will certainly keep the needs of the Volunteers for Preservation Organization in mind. . Mr. Paul Wade, President of the Clearwater Downtown Association, an assoc- iation of Clearwater merchants gave us a brief progress report as to their activities and accomplishments, then asked ~tr. TOm Brown Jr. to present to the board a plan which hopefully he indicated will be a joint venture between the Downtown Development Board and the Downtown Association. Mr. Brown stated further that he will read a letter to the Board which is addressed to the city.Nanager, Hr. picot Floyd, which requests an opportun- ity to go before the City commission at its next meeting with the joint pro- posal of the two do\'mtown organizations. He indicated that he is very happy that the Downtown Development Board has volunteered three of its members to work with the Traffic and Parking Committee of the Down~own Association. . }tr. Brown then read the letter that he had prepared indicating that there would have to be some date changes in the letter, but asked the board for its consideration. After some discussion, the board unanimously decided to join with Nr. Brown and his committee and hopefully be of further help to them as we go along. The Chairman asked ~~. Keith Crawford, city Traffic Engineer to report if he can on the effectiveness of the new loop road, and its operations to date. }~. Crawford responded with an in depth report commencing with the date that the loop road was opened showing traffic counts, and indicating the changes that still need to be made in order to make the loop road as effective as it is possible to have it at this date in time. He pointed out the problems involved in the education of people to use the loop road, he pointed out that since Cleveland st. is a state property, rather then a city of Clear- water property that unless the ownership of Cleveland st. can be changed to the property of the city of Clearwater, by ~eans of . I; ~ - 'c'c' . . , . ~:.;.~' ;. ~t'.::: ~ ,< , :'1'" . -:{..,:: ;:';1-",. . ,,',. . . , .-...-~-~ -' . .' "" \ , \ ~").::) .. (> ~ \ ' I . I , ~,.' "" '~1vi;~'''~~~;'' =~"1"l:ml\lir.-!~>l'~Yi""tm:l1'VJli'.":r.~1.((.~;r~,i~I!).jt~'Wf~~j\:;j.~\~~m\',' p 3 ~ V a swap with the loop road, that it is impossible to keep truck traffic from utilizing Cleveland st., and until this is done then obviously the street can not be oriented to the pedestrian rather than to the vehicle. The Chairman thanked }tr. Crawford for his fine report and indicated that this is one of our prime objectives to re-orient a part of Cleveland st. to become more of a shopping area, rather than a high speed vehicle moving device. I I t . ' .c (. . ',' ," The Chairman brought up the subject of the referendum on June 8th, on the proposed toll road within the County of Pinellas. After a brief introduction she asked for a motion. The motion was made for the Downtown Development Board to take a firm position in regard to this proposed toll road. Con~ents by the Mayor and others were recorded. The Chairman then asked for a second to the motion, and receiving no second, the motion died. The Chairman then opened the subject of the June 8th county referendum, a "Legacy of Progress," and indicated that she herself has already made up her mind how she was going to vote on these various items, but asked the board, whether or not they preferred to take an official stand in regard to this referendum. A motion was made to take a stand on this matter, but died for lack of a second. The Chairman called on our Treasurer, }~. Leon Hammock for a financial state- ment, the copy of the financial report follows Mr. Han~ock's comments. . Mr. Hammock indicated that within the next month we will be preparing our budget for the year and stated that hopefully it will be possible for him to meet with all of the members of the board in a special meeting, if nec- essary~' to consider only this one i~em, that is the budget for the year 1976- ~977. The Chairman commented that in her opinion this is a most important item and suggested that the procedure of having a special work session on this subject alone is very much in order. At this point a suggestion was offered that the board meet about mid-June to discuss the budget which is in the final stages of preparation, that the budget will be Officially presented to the board at its meeting of June 29th. The final decision on the budget must be made at the July meeting which is July 27th, at that point letters addressed to the County Commission, the property Appraisor's Office, the City Clerk, etc., will be prepared with copies of the approved budget. The approval of the budget must be accomplish- ed by July 27th. Cash on hand Nay 1, 1976 $39,018.18 Cash receipts in Nay 1,238.41. Total Cash 40,256.59 . Less checks paid in Nay 1,971.61. Balance 38,284.98 , Less accounts payable in Nay 714.63 I i Cash on hand Nay 31, 1976 (Est) $37,570.35 In order to accomplish this, the board approved a special budget meeting date, to be held at 3:00 P.M., in the Chamber of CommGrce Room on June 15th. Arrangements for this meeting are now completed. FINANCIAL STATENENT Nay 25,1976 ..:., ":'\~::..;~:; ,- ~:~.:- ,'.~ . ,', . 1'. .. , '..... " , I , '1',1';::.';;;;:_:::::' ~\I ;';' ',i ",,', I;.' 1:; ~ " :t'!>';~';-"'" "'t:<(i,~~~:-.l{, "\'!~"i'.J.1\ :I"'" '{: " ".'t',;,: ';', ':~ t ';. '\: ',.' " ':"~: '" f.':~;{,(:;,,:.... .:.. ,: ,,', '\'r'~ "'::*'1';1' . \>,:,,!t.~" ',. ...... .~!:( ".'" ~. ,:"1' . -; , . ;~,I ~- \ c WHEREAS , WHEREAS I WHEREAS I WHEREAS , i',',' RES 0 L UTI 0 N It is the stated Development BOard suitable and which have downtown area of the in general, and of the Clearwater Downtown recommend actions deemed most a beneficial effect on the City of Clearwater and the city purpose to ~he redesignation of to some alternative route the creation of a more pleasant shopping a safer pedestrian and vehicular Road 60 from Cleveland been cited state has street as a step towards environment and circulation, and The city's downtown Associates. Inc. as an element redevelopment consultant. has endorsed the redesignation in its Immediate Action Program, RTKL of SR 60 and The study of the alignment of view of the efforts which are revitalize downtown to better water. SR 60 is very timely in currently being made to serve the people of Clear- NOW, THEREFORE, ;--0'" '1~"" ,~ , '~";, " . BE IT RESOLVED, That the Clearwater DOwntown Development Board supports and endorses the action of the city commission to form a commdttee on redesignation of state Road 60 through downtown clearwater. to work with the city commission. the City staff. and the state Department of Transportation to accomplish the above objective. CLEARWATER DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT BOARD Chairman Dated June 22. 1976 ~:-., .' .1. .~.~\ ;:'.:' ;g':.;.\~:. y.~,i.. . ,'~ ',!, , ,,' , I;~!" ,'" ?~ryl,",":;" ~. ; .,: .\ ': " : ,'1 'c' : , I f>~ l' ~ I \. . ',.' ., i , ~ :..... ":'!, <, ',."" ,.' . Lt '\, . WHEREAS . WHEREAS I " " ~lHEREAS I WHEREAS I WHEREAS I F~ ,',101 \'lHEREAS I WHEREAS I -,:)," ~.;:) , (1 rC 1 T I I I I I "', ,.; ,,..~W~'.~~""'~C~w.:~ . ..' ... . ::.j(:'.:.t("{~~..t!,~(,, .,'l{-fi"*l1~~t;H",<".~,,;~~rn~~~v~~~U~~f?;:C",1.t.~~ f\t ~.,. 7 ~\ '..,.~ .., . ~' ,{ " '1' " RES 0 L UTI 0 N It. is the stated Development BOard to suitable and which have downt.own area of the in general, and purpose of the reconunend a city Clearwater Downtown actions deemed most beneficial effect on the of Clearwater and the city The cit.y of Clearwater has t.o the Urban Hass Transit vit.ed t.o submit a proposal for a is doing so in conjunction with the Transit. Authority and the Florida tat.ion, and submitted a "Letter Administration and has Downtown People Mover 'I'arnpa Bay Area Rapid Department of Transpor- of Interest" been in- and A Downtown People Mover critical t~ansportation model for other cities, in Clearwat.er would address needs. of Downtown and and the provide a Thenowntown contribution to downtown ing a one hundred Development. Board is committed to making a planning and is jointly sponsor- thousand dollar downtown plan, and The Downtown Development. Boar.cl recognizes lat.ionship between the DOwnt.own and .the downt.olm plan currently the timely re- People Mover proposal being developte'iI, and Mover would address parking. on Clearwater .Beach and t.o Clearwater Beach, and the projected the need for short- bet.ter A Downt.own people Mover would address the problem of emerg- ency evacuatio~ from Clearwat.er Beach NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED I Tha~ ~he Clearwater and endorses the be made to ~he DOwntown Development. BOard proposal for a Downtown People Mover Urban Mass Transit Administration supports t.o CLEARWATER DOWNTOWN DEVELOPHENT BOARD Chairman Da~ed June 22, 1976 ., ;;;~';,'::i~:t~ ~;:.:: :iRi::-:(; ';'; ,:,::,'.;;., , -,', I: