Loading...
12/10/1990 (2) (~~'f;~."~~':;:;_:"-< '.."..:" ',' l~ ~', ... 't. ' I>'. <~' ..~:~~\,:..: ":" ",,~ ~! ' c,' c "'... '. . II ,. ',. ' " , '~:);.:,~... ' /;~ ,,~ 1 , ~..~ ~11;~("':" (: .. . . ~. .. . I\..~'". , ( \ r: c' , .: ' ~, .' ~ .' ;'c \1 '. ,:" ~ ~ L' ".: . c } i ~, f ~ . , ' :' ~.~ l',' I ' . , ~ t ' l " " " . , ,- , ~"/ ' ,. , , " , , ,,' I ", . " ,. '. ~ , , '> ' I ',j, :" ~, " .' :" , ' (t ' . ' ' ,." l ~ it:.~;":;;/:j~;:/('i:.i;; ::>:\i. ':. .:.. .... .. : l I '(.', " . , . , I;, , . '. .J .' ',I, ~ ' ,,' '"i<' t ';, , ". , . ., AGENDA Community ~edevelopment Agency December 10, 1990 1:0Q'P.M. , . ~ \i..-~ '..~.< .1. Call to order I. 1:03 p.m. of , II. Approval of Minutes II. Approved as submitted. 10/29/90 , ' ,- III. C.O.#2 to the.Cleveland street III. Approved. Sidewalk Replacement Contract , i ncreas ; ng the a'moulJt by '$24,976.00, for a new ,total $375,123.25, increasing the ' . contract time by 150 days and a~end the eRA budget to include the addition~l funding' for the project IV. Amendment of contract with IV. ' Approved. Hunter Interests,Inc., to. include conceptual planning '. ' . work and fisc~l/financial ( '~ analyses for a not to exceed ? amount of $74,000., increasing -the contract .from $33,800. to $107,800. and amend eRA budget to' include the additional "I ahPr,opriation of funding to t. e project~ V. Contract for the CleVeland V. Approved ~s amended with a not Street Minipark Construction ' to exceed amount of , to Opus South Corp., for $204,880.00. $204,880.00 . VI. '. Adj6urnment , , VI. 2:36 p.m. ,. , (> 1 :"':. ' , " r, , ~ ,.,.'. . . i;' . " " : ',~. \ r\ COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY December 10, 1990 The City Commi s sian, meet ing as the Commu n i ty Redeve 1 opment Agency, met in' regular session at City Hall, Monday, December 10, 1990 at 1:00 P.M., with the following members present": Rita Garvey .Sue Berfield William Nunamaker Richard Fitzgerald Mary Vaughn Members absent:' Lee Regulski A 1 so Present were: ' Chairperson Member Member 'Member Ex Officio Member Member Ron H. Rabun Michael Wright Jerry D. Sternstein Cynthia E. Goudeau Executive Director Assistant City Manager Economic Development Director Secretary . ITEM I 1. Minutes: ,( ," - ,'! Member Berfieldmoved to approve the minutes of the October 29, 1990,. meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. . . ITEM III. - C.O.#2 to the Cleveland Street Sidewalk Replacement Contract with L.G. Couch Construction. Inc.. increasinQ the contract amount bv $24,976.00. to a new total of $375,123.25. increasinQ the contract time bv 150 days and amend the . eRA budQet to include the additional fundinQ for the pro~ect The Cleveland Street Sidewalk Replacement project is nearing completion. Authorization is required for minor changes for existing items and for one new item. l_, An increase in Item No.3, Facing Brick, is to adjust this ,item to the quantity actually used in construction. An increase in Item No.4, Curb Replacement, is needed to replace curb along the work area. The existing curb in the downtown area is extremely fragile and it is difficult to work adjacent to the curb without de~troying it. The initial anticipated contract quantity of , this pay item is' now insufficient to account for the quantity actually required. Due to anticipation of an overestimation of Brick Pavers (Pay Item No. I), this .quantity is being reduced by this Change Order. New Item No. 19 is for the construction of wheelchair ramps on the northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of Cleveland Street and Ft. Harrison Avenue. This intersection is unique in that there is an 'excessive grade separation between the street and the sidewalk. This requires an unusual stepped CRA 12/10/90 1 ; ;) '" : : In response to a question, Mr. Baker indicated the project should be completed by the end of February 1~91. Member Berfield moved to approve Change Order #2 to the Cleveland Street Sidewalk Replacement Contract 87-36, increasing the contract amount by $24,976 to a new total of $375,123.25, increasing the contract time by 150 days and amend the eRA budget to include the additional funding for the project and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.' - arrangement to accommodate the drop. Wheelchair ramp specifications call for a maximum slope of 12 to 1, which in this c~se requires 14 foot ramps directly in front of existing stores and their doorways. While the Florida Administrative Code requires that wheelchair ramps be installed at intersections whenever sidewalks are constructed or reconstructed, in this case wheelchair ramps could not reasonably be incorporated in the original plans because of the building entrances that then existed on these two corners. The business interest on the southwest corner has since relocated its entrance from Cleveland Street to Ft. Harrison. This reconfiguration will now allow the construction of the wheelchair ramps. The business on the northwest corner has closed and a fresh approach to the design for this wheelchair ramp has yielded a workable plan. In any case, the construction of wheelchair ramps at this intersection requires extensive rework of the two corners involved due to the large elevation difference between the street and the existing sidewalk. Additional contract time is needed to adjust and ,compensate for unanticipated delays to the contractor due to installation of ir~igation lines,. electrical conduit, and water facilities that were not within the contractor1s control. There is also a time extension to allow the construction of the wheelchair ramps added to the contract by this change order. No time will be charged to the contractor for days when he is uryable to work because of a City requirement. Concerns were expressed regarding' the amount of time it has taken to do this project and it was questioned why we are recommending extending the time rather than enacting the penalty clause for not meeting the timeframe specified E"~ in the contract. Bill Baker, Public Works Director explained the delays which ~~. have not been the contractors fault. He indicated the contractor has done good work and has diligently pursued the contract. (~' c. The first product from the Downtown Market Assessment being done for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) by Hunter Interests, Inc., has been completed. This document, a Technical Memorandum, specifically deals with an analysis of the downtown retail market. It is a specialized report designed to send to prospective retail developers ~nd tenants who might want to learn more about Clearwater's downtown market potential. In tone and content, this report CRA 12/10/90 2 tlf~\ ~ (.' (~ " closely resembles a study that a developer or retailer might themselves commission. The analysis focuses upon net new demand rather than transfer rates to define market capture. This is a rather conservative approach made even more conservative by the consultant's decision to not incorporate in the demand equation the sizeable tourist and seasonal Inarket. Even with this approach, the Technical Memorandum concludes that downtown Clearwater can support an upscale retail project ranging from 200,000 to 250,000 square feet, which is comparable in size to Old Hyde Park in Tampa. . The Technical Memorandum deals with what would be phase one of a multi- phased development which could eventually include public-private office towers, a conference center hotel and condo-residential units. The first phase shopping complex is envisioned as entertainment thenled and could include a 5-9 screen cinema complex, 2-4 theme restaurants with some entertainment aspects like a sports bar, night club or comedy cafe. Given the very favorable numbers found in the Technical Memorandum, staff felt that it would be advantageous to proceed to the next stages of the development program as quickly as possible. With a positive retail market analysis in hand, the next two steps are to commission a conceptual design and a financial and fiscal impact analysis. This work will prepare staff to deal with all normal feasibility questions relevant to site requirements, development plans, phasing, developer's debt and equity investment, public sector financial participation requirements, employment and tax benefits and the net cost/benefit to the city at any point in time during the first ten years of project life. The conceptual planning work encompasses the following elements; presentation graphics, which include rendered site plans and prospective drawings and site plan analysis, including access, parking utilities and other functional questions. The financial analysis and fiscal impact includes; financial analysis showing capital and operating cost estimates for the project, overall project proforma, ten year cash flow, supportable private investment levels for debt and equity and definition of any capital funding gaps. Fiscal impact analysis will show revenue production to the City from tax flows of all types, fees, licenses, land acquisition or lease payments and other revenue flows. The estimated cost ,for this work is $74,000 including a $10,000 contingency. Jerry Sternstein" Economic Development Director indicated the technical memorandum shows the retail potential for the downtown area and is not the final product. He stated the memorandum is more optimistic than staff had assumed however, it is still conservative. Mr. Hunter reported the purpose of this technical memorandum is to isolate the retail market portion of the project. He stated he was pleasantly surprised in that the market was stronger than initially thought. He stated new retail can be justified based .on growth potential and pass through traffic from the beach. He stated he wants potential developers and retail tenants to view the report as being conservative. He recommends the City of Clearwater pursue the upscale . specialty re~ail center with the center being themed and including entertainment CRA 12/10/90 3 , , (~ " 1 . (~ and food facilities. His final report will include other recommendations other than retail. He also recommends the City pursue the process to determine financial feasibility and solicit developers to come in and develop the center. In response to a question, Mr. Hunter indicated it is common for public entities to take the initiative in downtown development. It was also indicated the Downtown Development Board will review the proposals. Mr. Hunter indicated that mixed use will help with the development. He also indicated that the work the City has done in the past is a positive aspect. He stated the public sector would lead with soft cost and that developer commitments would provide the hard costs for the center. In response to a question regarding office development, Mr. Hunter responded that office will follow the first component of the development. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not a new city hall facility was essential to the program and it was indicated that while it is not essential, it would be most advantageous to include the city hall facility in the development of this mixed use center. . A concern was expressed regarding developers being able to get financing for such a project and Mr. Hunter indicated people in business are continuing.to gain financing however, it may be in a different form than traditionally done. Concerns ,were expressed regarding some of the recommendations including a five to nine, screen cinema with theatres in Sunshine Mall being close by to the ,~. south. Mr. Hunter indicated this was looked at and he is convinced that the type \~ of development he is proposing would be beneficial, not only to downtown, but also the Sunshine Mall. He also indicated that the trend in development is to have specialty centers with two looks, one for daytime use and one for nighttime use. Lawrence Lindner, President of the Downtown Clearwater Association, indicated they were' somewhat skeptical of the report. He stated they're looking for direction. (, Carol Warren, member of the Downtown Development Board, indicated the DDB is committed to downtown development and they're excited by the report a'nd feel a commitment needs to be made. Discussion ensued regarding the need to spend the additional $75,000 and it was indicated the City is at a point where it must to something or no development will take place in downtown. In response to a questionl Mr. Hunter indicated this development would benefit all of the downtown area. He stated the City has done well in creating an environment that is trouble free but at the present time there is no reason to go downtown to shop.. He stated if it were feasible, he would recommend imposing the center on top of the existing downtown however, this 'is not feasible. Member Nunamaker moved to authorize the amendment to the contract with Hunter Interests, Inc. to include conceptual planning work and fiscal financial analysis in an amount not to exceed $74,000.00, increasing the contract from eRA 12/10/90 4 ,', " . I "~ :' . j r' " \ . ,>>~ $33,800.00 to $107,800.00 and amend the eRA budget to include the additional ~. ' appropriation of funding to the project and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. . . . . ITEM V. - Contract for the Cleveland Street Mini ark Construction to 0 us South Cor. for 204 880.00 A budget of $300,000.00 funded by the Community Redevelopment Agency (eRA) was established for the design and construction of the Cleveland Street Minipark. On July 30, 1990, the CRA approved the expenditure of $9,850.00 far the preparation of design, development and construction documents leaving a balance of $290,150.00. This first phase of the work has been completed by Opus South ' Corporation through Mas One, Ltd. Further, on September 4, 1990, the CRA approved the conceptual site plan for the minipark. ,Opus South Corporation is recommended as a sole SQurce for the construction phase of, the minipark for several reasons. First, the firm is performing similar work for two other adjacent properties, First Florida Bank and the new Clearwater Tower Building. Second, work on the City park crosses different property lines and efforts need to be coordinated to assure minimal or no conflicts. Third, the firm is .well qualified and, as mentioned previously, it is also the firm that prepared the design, development and construction documents. Opus South Corporation advertised the project for bids, but because of the small size of saine of the elements within the project, fewer than expected A. bidders responded. The total cost of $204,880.00 includes a fee to Opus South, . ~~' estimated to be $18,625.00, which,will be payable at 10 percent of all project costs. In return, Opus South will provide contract management and will supervise the work of all subcontractors. The firm will also satisfy all City insurance requirements. All money spent by the City in accord with this contract will be for work performed only on the City owned property. Note ;s made that the furniture (tables and. bench seats) included in these bids are constructed of steel with plastic coating. However. other optional .materials, wood and concrete, could be considered. Ream Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director reviewed the plans for the park stating xeri~cape plantings will be used for landscaping. In response to a question regarding what is being done on adjacent properties, George Smith of Opus South, indicated the same materials are being used so that the whole block comes together as one. . A question was raised regarding groups being able to schedule the park and Mr. Wilson indicated that at least initially, i~ will be on a first come first serve basis, but it may get to a point where more definitive scheduling needs to be done. l,. eRA 12/10/90 5 :<':~~ .~'~. \ ., ~.- J \,\ t~ ~ < ::~ I I c , . . ." C'~: c.." .t'}-'_, ., . " c. :'" " '. " , , ~,,' : .", " '" i Mr. Wilson reviewed amendments being suggested to the contract: on page 4, under article 5 adding the language "any additional design cost must be approved in advance by the owner"; On page 5, article 9 adding the "owner shall make payments within 30 days of contractor's submittal of application for payment"; On page 10, article 20, section 20.3 and, On page II, article 23, section 23.1 deleting the reference to architect and substitute the word owner; and in exhibit A, number F5, delete the first sentence. Discussion ensued regarding the need to include a not to exceed amount. Concerns were expressed regarding changing the concept from a cost plus contract. It was indicated this change would simply indicate that authorization would'be needed if additional monies were needed. Mr. Wilson indicated the tables being recommended are plastic coated with steel. A question was raised regarding using recycled materials and Mr. Wilson indicated that would double the cost but that this is being considered for other locations. He indicated the tables are being recommended based on their flexibility for direction of seating and it also discourages sleeping over night,' Consensus of the agency was to go with the recommended pla~tic coated steel tables. . Discussion returned to the need for a cost plus contract and what control the. City has over the construction of the park. It was indicated the eRA had . approved the plan for the park and they have final authority. Member Berfield moved to approve the agreement as amended with a not to exceed budget of $204, 880.00 unless approved by the Community Redevelopment Agency and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried.unanimously. In response to a question, it was indicated that the park should be completed by March~ ITEM VI, w Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 2:36 p.m. ATTEST: 2:. ~ f-. /~- '. . eRA 12/10/90 6