12/12/1967 - Joint Meeting
;-..:
. .
( ..
~'.,~.
..'
:~ :::.
......:;
.' :\
. /
.:~:.
..'
, I
, .
~ ~~.
~. .,
I. +:
'.
. '-',-
..~;
',.
. "
.....'
, .'
't' '.:
:~ 1 f
,-;
,. ,
',;.'"
, 1
.r "
'; "l~
J..
~'.... .'
.1,,:
.T;';-:
:. ;.
,,;/,',',1
~';'~:M':
.,'
~:.: ~. .
;.. 4
:~ :,P< ~
~.' j ...
",:'j'<.
~ I ~ .
:/:{
'.~';;::i
.~.~ ,.~ Z'
::.':i
J
/
THE PLANNING AND ~0~rT.NC nOARO
t
Mi~utes of ,the Meeting. Tuesday, Dcc(-!mber 1~, 1967.
Thel Boa-rd met at 2 ;00 P. M. :U~ t1'lC City Hall Auditorium in joint
session with the City of Clearwater Be~oltification Committee, Chairman
Kruse pr~siding. Present were Board Members Mylander, Harries, Butler,
Morris, ~eade and Galloway and Mr. ~ettig of the Engineering Department.
Present wer.e the following members of the City Beautification Committee:
Mrs. Fred Culler, Mrs. H. Herrschaft, Mr. Eddie C. Moore, Parks and
Recreation Director, Mr. Al Smith, Parks Superintendent. Also present
were Mr.l Bolton, a Director of the Edgewater Drive Association, and
former M~yor Joe Turner, ,Jr., residents of the Edgewater Drive area
and surrounding area respectively. The City Planner was present for
a portiOII of the meeting. .
In ptroductory remarks, Chairman Kruse explained that this meeting
was call d upon request of Mayor Hougen after the delayed activation
of the C~ty Beautification Committee to assist in certain projects,
one of t~em the Edg~water Drive improvement project. He recounted
as recent events the "Open Letter" in the Nov. 26-67 Clearwater Sun
by Col. ~learwater calling the attention of Mayor Rehm of Dunedin and
Mayor Hougen of Clearwater to problems of the Edgewater Drive water-
front and the published letter of reply from the Clearwater Planning
Board sent at the request of May,or Hougen. Mr. Kruse gave a brief
hi~tory of the Boardts study of the Edgewater Drive area over two
years ago and made reference to the joint meeting of the Board and the
City Beautification Committee held in Jan. 1966, at which time he
stated that nearly all the Beautification Committee members were pre-
sent, alsq Mr. Elmer Shafer, Chairman of the "Community Development and
Activity Committee of the Clearwater-Largo Board of Realtors, and
Mr. Vi~tor Brodeur, Jr., Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Beautifi-
cation Committee. He noted that at such meeting different projects
tha~ were of. current interest were discussed. As information, he
read excerpt from Board' minutes of this January 11/66 meeting covering
discussion of the Edgewater Drive waterfront. He reported that later
the Board had a meeting with Dunedin authorities and reviewed with them
preliminary sketches that had been drawn up showing possible develop-
mentplans. Mr. Kruse read letter of Feb. 23, 1966; from Mr. Sexton,
Dunedin City Manager, addressed to the Planning ~oard. This letter
wa~ sent to inform the Board of the Dunedin City Commission's genera~
feeling in the matter.
Mr. Kruse stated that the situation now was that the City Commission
would like a recommendation from this joint group as to the procedure
to be followed. Mr. Kruse expressed as preliminary conclusions of the
Board in its prior study that:
It was felt that the type of shoreline preservation (stabilization
or seawall) was a matter for future determination to be based on
engineering studies and long-ranEe City Commission pOlicy.
It was felt that the area between the road ~nd the ~ater should be
widened (existin~ bulkhead line being apDroximately 85 ft. fro~
the center of Edeewater Drive) but that movinp; the bulkhead line
out should be based unon the Citv's accuisition of all uDland and
submerged property involved. ~. .
. "
.. ,.
,'.
,':.
:,',:;
.":'..
I',."
::.: ;1
", ' ,
..,.. .'
,:,:.:<"
.~: ~:~ ,.:
, ..: ~ ~~: r/ ':, ::',,' '.. ....,: ': I("~':"~ ...... .' :',j ....",'., '. ,':' '!':: ::.,.: ,',:' . :: ~::;', :'. ,': : : ~,~ ' .: '..:" : :'.";:,' .: ',) ,:.: :'l.~ ;,4".... ',,'" ~,(~~ (~'I ~'. .: ,~, "t..;:. '.:',. r: :...'. ::,:" /. .~~:. ~.~ >. :. .~.:: "./.:" :.~ " :,...: ~: i" :'.~.. ~;. < ..t"; : ~..- ,,:::; "'L .1- ,;. ... '<'H :.~. ~' .:: ''',", ::;: \~. ,:' ,~, :" :~"'t.~ ,:'
I
P6Z Pri :~inutes 12/12/67 Page #2
,..-.-.... rt1was felt tllat the natttr?1. beiJuty of the waterfront view
sh6uld be retained.
Itlwas felt that at some future time the city might need to
,ac, uir'e the Dicus (hotel) nrooertv at the w~st end of Sunset
Point Rd if it were decided to extend a beach causeway from
-that point.
prints of a preliminary sk~tch (study plan) for,possible improve-
ment, drawn up. by a Board committee, and u 1965 City Engineering ~e-
partmen1 survey map indicating property owne~ship in the strip (green
color c de for city owned proper'ty) were passed out and di~ cussed.
Th re was a general group discussion covering the following sub-
j e cts :
Ex~ent of existing erosion, particularly at street ends where
storm drainage pipes extend into the Bay and where overflow
Oflcatch basins occurs.
Th~ pros and cons of shore stabilization by riprap covered with
fill or by seawall and fill.
~ ., :
The outlook for possible city acquisition of nrivatelv owned
waterfront ~rooerties in view of anticioated iack of coopera-
tion from some-ot~ers based on exoerience with contacts made
during past years. .
Lack of information concerning any future plans 'of ~he St. Road
Department for Alternate 19 as a 2-1ane or 4-lane highway in
this sector and as to the possible designation of Douglas-Myrtle
Ave. as a by-pass.
Mr, Turner spoke in favor of a seawall with possibly a balustrade
on top low enough not to obstruct the seaview from the Drive.
" '
Mr. Butler stated that he hoped that some day the city wo~ld ac-
quire all the land west of the Drive, as he thought it was "ery impor-
tant as a main gateway to the city and as a logical site fov a park,
He pointed out that if city officials were receptive to a park develop-
rnent funding of the costs might be justified. His recommendation was
to submi t an ultimate plan and an interim plan for deposit of rubble,
covering with soil fill, and plantings.
'J Mr. Kruse reported that he had discussed this matt€:r' previously
with Mayo,r Hougen and Ci ty Manag~r' Stierheim and that one suS?gF.!stion
made was that a lp.tter be addressed to these owners along the Drive
,:';:'':~'''.:':...,:.:~:,~~:,:''''~..'..,::=..': ....., ,":.. ::':"~ .1::';':...: .:' r..:..:'<= ;<:'.'/)':;:,~'.:><'''(I,...'~'>~''~':,;: :....\~:.:.:.'.:~....:;..:.L:~:<,: :';:: ::.:;~: ~: .;:.::; '.:::>:-+:-:':..::.:_.~,~.:~'~::::<...::..' ~ '<,;~,::'I ~ ""~':::;'+:;:,: ....;, ~."..,:,. :::.' . '.'j; '.':~:"'\
PEZ Bd M:i.'lUtN.
12/12/67
Page fJ 3
r-. in 'Ji ti T1C!; their cooper-il ticn. He said he didn f t think the city was
going ,to IHai ntain any maj or operation involving a seawall unless the
property was acquired, but he thought if it was a matter of deposit
of rubble and fill that it ~ould involve the formality of getting pe~-
mission to put in the rubble.
Upon observation by Mr. Bolton that Dunedin has two-thirds of
this waterfront area, Mr. Kruse noted that while efforts were being
made to coordinate long-range planning with Dunedin, Clearwate~'s,
planning for its s,egment would be perfectly in order' with the program
presen~ly being carried out by Dunedin.
qpon inquiry by the Chairman, Mr. Moore and Mr. Smith declined
,to comment ~n any approach to be recommended, stating that they were
not sufficiently familiar with ~he situation.
-\
I
Mr. Turner suggested that a letter be. sent to property owners
asking several alternative questions, (ie) if they would deed their
riparian rights west of the highway provided that the city would
seawall and. beautify the area and if they would give their permission
for riprapping and filling.
Mr. Butler moved that it be recommended that the City Manager
write a letter relative to whether or not the orODertv owners will
,\
coonerate in nermitting the city to stabilize the waterfront, fill
and~lant on nrouerLies owned by the narties involved. His motion was
seconded bv Mrs. ,Culler and nassed.
After some further discussion, it was decided that a preliminary
~ong-range proposal involving a plan of development based on city
" I
........
acquisition of privately owned properties should be submitted to the
Commissioners for their consideration and their wishes in the matter
discussed prior to issuance of these recow~ended letters. It was felt
.,
.......'
,r.,
. '". ' ; ~ " :':,....:':-..~::.... ~\ . . I r~: ~ .,~'\ _ :.:. . . . ~_: ".: ~ ' '. . '. . ;. . ': ..:.",.,~ ; ,'.,. -:. ..' ~/", ,," " ':: ':" :: ';'., :,.1 . , . ~. ... .~ ' ~ I ::': '. ~',' ~ . . . ~ ' " .'; ...':' :. I" " 'l' ~.: ': \', 1.1,." : '.',' '.' ,: ......l.'.,., ~ ':: ..' : '. "_ ~ ' ",: : I...',' ;',.,', .'1 '.: . '.: !.:, . :. ,,: .' '; .'
~ ." .
P&Z Bd Minutes
12/12/67 P&~e #u
. ' r-..
,
that such letters would be more effective if residel~-l:R could be made
aware of definite future plans the city might have for deve~o~ment of
r ·
I
this waterfront area.
10
Chairman Kruse appointed a committee comprised of Mr. Butler and
i
Mr. ,Harries, with Mr. 'Rettig as an advisor, to draw up a preliminary
. .
.
. .
report ita the City Commission.
r:
',Mr. Kruse said that he thought Col. Clearwater would want to keep
in touch with the situation and it was agreed that he should be kept
advised with some general synopsis of information as to progress that'
,was being made.
',It was requ~sted that Mr. Moore be sent a copy of the minutes of
this meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 P. M.
Respectfully'submitted~ '
'~a.c_i:- J) ~U t}e{!fL
, ck I~ Wolle~ Sec'y
, ity'Planner '
'. .
. ,
','\,'
, "
',I ,
, '
;.'.'1, '
"...\ :
',::: .--.....
.,-:.,. "
...' "
" . " ~
.i .. ~
, ,
~~~-:: ::
( ,
,
.. '
l' ~.,
. ~. . :
., .'
"
"l
, '
.," .'
..'
":',
.,
, "
"
.~i-
,I'
. ,
"
,,'
,~~ . 0<.
:,~' \ . '
~, . ....,./ ,
" '
(~ ,.
'f,:,., .,'
; '. ~
. ; ~:
...' h
, ',:!. '; ";: "'1,::,1 ',' : '.~' ",.( ,',II :,:, ':': . '::'.: 'i ,; ~:,'."':'..', '.~:" ::',: .,r~ (, ::::~ ',: ..':~ ~',~ : .,j:,:. :',':;~ " : ~ ::-'" ' ,<' ", :: ,:.:' J :;. : ,", ~... :'.' ", ,1.~; ~.,: ~ .. . : ,':. ~ " '.' '. '. ,: . .-:::., :,.":, . .'. :~: ~', ',".' ; ',>. : (. '.. ,..:: ...' .,:...,.I~,""-:' '. :.::, ~< :~.1 .: .,~ /: ~', ,'" ("'~
,,\'.
,.-...
J ~
~,: ...-....,
---......
(..'
",
--
'.
..
In a joint meeting of the Clearwater Planning and Zoning BOc1!'I.~
and the Beautification Committee held in the City Hall Auditorium
on Decc~be~ 12, 1967, it wa~ agreed that the Edgewater Drive water-
front and b~J vista is an asset of incalculable value to the City
of Clearwater; an asset that must be preserved for future genera-
tions. Further discussions of the Planning Board have been based
on' this premise.
~.
The City of Clearwater, by virtue of dedication, owns a sub-
stantial portion of upland and submerged land west of the Edgewater
Drive right-of-way. The remainder is in private ownership, and in
some locations riparian rights are a part of upland property title.
So long as some of these properties remain in private ownership
the waterfront as we now know it is in jeopardy. It is conceivable
that a certain combination of political and economic circumstances
"might well result in an extension of the bulkhead line with re-
sultant development not to the best interests of the community. Ac-
cordingly, one of the principal assets of our city is vulnerable un-
less action is taken to safeguard it for all time.
, .
'The'Planning Board deems it advisable for the city to appTloach
this problem on a permanent basis, rather than one of a temporary
expediency, and suggests that the city acquire title to all privately
owned property west of Edgewater Drive from Stevenson Creek north to
the boundary at Union Street, exercising the right of eminent domain
where necessary.
It is further considered that this waterfront asset is of suf-
ficient consequence to warrant acquisition and development by means"
of long-term funding. There -is reasonable expectation that the city
can recoup 50% of the cost of this program from the Federal Govern-
ment through proper application for funds from the Open Space Pro-
gram. The preparation of this application has already been sub-
stantially accomplished by the City Planner, although it will re-
quire up-dating.
Accompanying this recor.unendation and attached"hereto is' a pre-
liminary park development, plan of the waterfront. This plan will re-
quire that the bulkhead line be extended, but only on the basis that
the additional filled land be developed as a public park and dedi-
.cated as such.
The plan submitted provides that the bulkhead line wi 11 s<.oJing
back to the present linvJ at Union S"treet so that the development can
be coordinated with any future plan ,of Dunedin. The City of Dunedin
has more than twice the water frontage of Clearwater, so that per-
manent improvement would be vastly more expensive for that city.
. This Board submits that the plans of the Citv of C],earwater should
not await those of Dunedin. -That city has aiready greatly im-
proved its frontage during the past few years.
- 1 -
.... d' ;-: : '.~". :'.: ,:",'.' :.;:, ?~'~"~:"',':': .:'.1.,::... ..,.~.,. :~:', ':~:: ...'.:. ,... .<. '. ~.;~."':'I':';: l\'~ "; '.,'; ::, . :'.: ::'.. ;,:~':'. ,.j:.:I' ': :~..,.,:..'..::r..'I:.,':':,:~::: .:,,~,:,:,,:r:..'.. t. ',' :, 'l::. .~' ...:..,.., ~,'.:~. ,J," '. '\':.:
,I,: ...
~ F \ '
,
.'
.,1 I
;,.
I
,I
I Su~gestions have been made that the city secure tht cooperation
of private owners and do what i~ can' to arrcst'erosion aJld to,~eauti-
fYI a' narrow strip between the. Ori ve H and the, !'later. ,This appl'cach
was attempted a few years ago by a group of ,residents of the area.
The, attemot was not successful. Saveral owners refused to consider
'such cooperation without recompense. They felt that such improve-
mentwould weaken their title to riparian rights andlor submerged
lands. ' 'Furthermore, it should be recognized that such a program
would in' no way safeguaro the -future of this valuable asset.
r::.' r-;
:. '
" .
".
~.J.., I
RECOMftENDATION:
. . ",
e. , , .
"
.+.,
',.J.
f
:. ~. .
The'Planning and Zoning Board recommends that the City of
. ,Clearwater acquire title to all of the privately-owned upland,
, submerged lands and riparian rights from Stevenson Creek to Union
'Street; improve this waterfront as a park and dedicate the land
as, a public park in perpetuity.
~.... l~.." " ,
. ."'1
\.' '
~ ,I .'.
.' ,.
:. , ~
~ ,'. . . - .
, . ,
. ~::: 1'..' . '; ;
"
"
t,'~H, I. .
:~"..' ,~..
~j,:':,I). .
";1}>>~ ., "',
r/' ..'" .
\i;:. .
>. ';,' T'
~~ r '
'\, ' . . J
. J
I '
\
, '.
",'
. "
.;'" "
, .,
. ",
\"
.l;I-..
::,I';!t'.
~ '..~ .
"
+ . "
~ ~ : ~ .
i: 'j ~.:;~,
,. ',.
,.', ;,',
,.::(.' ;
\~~ :,.
':. u..L . >
!.". ..'.,
.q
.:J
'?, .
~:~ .
'. . .
,i...., .
" ,
"
, ,
:f:'
" '
P.
".
,.
" I
'. J.
'11 ' '11 ~ '
\' )'w-) .
',.' .. ,.
~, , '
,:;",.,<f ".
+'t. . e
"
r~~~ .>.' ":'.' r,
t' " " '
\';" ' ,
rr.. + ,
l"t: I .
- 2 -
I'J