02/17/1983•
Cavity Redevelopment Agency Meeting
February 17, 1983
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met as the Community
Redevelopment Agency at City Hall, Thursday, February 17, 1983. The
meeting was convened at 5:24 p.m. with the following members present:
Charles F. LeCher
Paul A. Hatehett
Rita Garvey
James Calderbank
James L. Berfield
Also present were:
Anthony L. Shoemaker
Thomas A. Bustin
Max Battle
David P. Healey
Lucille Williams
Mayor -Commissioner
Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
City Manager
City Attorney
Public Works Director
Planning Director
City Clerk
The Mayor called the meeting to order.
ITEM - Minutes of January 20, 1983
Commissioner Garvey moved to approve the minutes of January 20, 1983
as recorded and submitted by the City Clerk. Motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
ITEM #2 - Community Redevelopment Agency.
The City Manager requested authorization to make a fair market offer
to Dr. Gilbert Jannelli, owner of the property located at Garden Avenue and
Cleveland Street, in the amount of $650,000 and recommended the City
Commission be notified that a development agreement with J. K. Financial
Corporation will be forthcoming upon completion of additional advertising
requirements of 30 days.
The City has an appraisal on the property located at 601 Cleveland
Street. This area was designated by the Community Redevelopment Agency
as a redevelopment project for an office complex. Commissioner Hatchett
spoke in support of deferring the action to allow the newly elected
commissioners to make the decision.
The City Manager reported that Dr. Jannelli had advised that he has
an option agreement to lease the property and it would probably be a week
before a decision could be reached. He also stated that J. K. Financial
Corporation will start leasing after the development agreement has been
approved.
1. CRA 2/17/83
• •
Commissioner Calderbank moved to authorize the City Manager to make
a fair market offer and that he notify the City Commission that a
development agreement with J. K. Financial Corporation will be forthcoming
upon completion of additional advertising requirements of 30 days and that
the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. Motion was
duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken Commissioners Garvey, Berfield,
Calderbank and the Mayor voted "aye." Commissioner Hatchett voted "nay."
Notice carried.
Commissioner Garvey suggested the city pursue options for a limited
period of time to purchase surrounding land areas. She also suggested
that the City make a committment or be concerned about adjacent areas to
the downtown project, particularly the North Greenwood area. She requested
the City Commission meet with representatives of the NAACP, SEPIA and the
Ministerial Alliance, to discuss their problems and to work with them to
set goals.
Meeting adjourned at 5:44 p. m.
Attest:
Mayo ommissioner
City Clerk
2. CRA 2/17/83
/3
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
COPIES:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
The Community Redevelopment Agency
A. L. Shoemaker, City Manager
Recommendation to Offer to Purchase the Site at
Garden Avenue and Cleveland Street at Fair Market
Value and Status Report on Downtown Redevelopment
Project at that Site
February 8, 1983
The City staff received an appraisal (summary of which is attached) on the property
located at 601 Cleveland Street, which was designated by the Community Redevelopment
Agency as a redevelopment project for an office complex.
You are aware that we have been working with J. K. Financial Corporation to
complete a development agreement which is to be brought back to you for approval.
With the appraisal, it is recommended that the City (bmmission authorize me on your
behalf to proceed and make a far market offer to the owner of the property,
Dr. Gilbert Jannelli, in the amount of $650,000. This will be the first step
in the City taking whatever action is necessary to acquire the property. The
purchase of this property is compatible with the previous direction provided by
the CRA when it specified this site as a redevelopment project. The negotiation
of the development agreement with J. K. Financial Corporation is proceeding well
and is now pending completion of statutory requirements relating to final
advertising of the project. It is anticipated that a special meeting will
be called upon completion of the necessary timeframe of 30 days in order that
the Commission may consider the development agreement. The CRA previously
notified the City Commission that it would have a development agreement before
the Commission on February 17, 1983. Because of advertising requirements, this
cannot be accomplished. It, therefore, would be appropriate for the CRA to
formally notify the City Commission that the development agreement will be forth-
coming upon completion of this additional advertising requirement of 30 days and
that they will be requesting a special meeting be held for consideration of the
agreement by the CRA and the City Commission.
attachment
/77
1111111111111111111111111111111MII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111M1111111111111111111111111111111
—•
—
MEE
EMI
_
EMI
MEMORANDUM TO: 'Meeting
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
Agenda No.
Date: 2/17/83
_
—
MEI
ME
MIN
ME
THE CITY OF CLEARWATER
ENE
EMI
__
_
rz
MIN NM
ME
01111 IMO
OM
NM
—
El=
NEED
_
SUBJECT : Community Redevelopment Agency
IMM
1
IMONMIEMI
1.101—
=
RECOMMENDATION : Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the City
Manager to make a fair market offer to Dr. Gilbert Jannelli, owner of the property
located at Garden Avenue and Cleveland Street, in the amount of $650,000.00, and
notify the City Commission that a development agreement with J.K. Financial Corp.
will be forthcoming upon completion of additional advertising requirements of 30 days.
® And that the appropriate officials be authorized to •xecute same.
MO
_
MO
M.
ME
11.10
fa=
MN
MEM
—
ME
-
.110
1E1M
ME
NM
EOM
EMI
ME1
EMU
E
=
MEI
EMI
NEM MEE
EMI
E
MEI
-
--
—
EINE
—
—
—
MINNEM
MEI
_
MIED
0111.
—
-—
—
AM
—
EMS—
101.
OM
EINE
—4101
MED—
—EWE
—
—
-
ME
ME
MEI
OEM
NEE
IMEE
BACKGROUND:
Authorization to proceed in making an offer on the property001
will be the first step in the City taking whatever action is necessary to acquireUM
the property.-
It is anticipated that a special meeting will be called upon completion of the
necessary timeframe of 30 days in order that the Commission may consider the
development agreement with J. K. Financial Corporation. The CRA previously
notified the City Commission that it would have a development agreement before
the Commission on February 17, 1983. Because of advertising requirements this
cannot be accomplished. It, therefore, would be appropriate for the CRA to
formally notify the City Commission that the development agreement will be
forthcoming upon completion of this additional advertising requirement of 30 days
and that they will be requesting a special meeting be held for consideration of theMN
agreement by the CRA as the City Commission.
'
—
IMO
ME001ENE
NEE
MN
.NM
M,
EN=
WM
�
MEDEINE
EMI
ME
111110
MN
—
MSSEE OM
—
—
—
MEM
_
—
—
ME
EME
-
—
MEI
...
110•1
ME
M.
—
—
-
—
EMIE
EEO
01.011110
ME
ME
EEO
dam
11111D
ME
EMI
0E11
R•derelopm•nt Agency Disposition:'
Follow-up Accton:WM
MEE
NEM_
WM
ENE
01.11
ME
1110.
ENE
MED
=
Submitted by:
Executive Director
Advertised:
Date:
Paper:
Q Not Required
O Affected
Parties
Notified-
of M•etln9
Not Required
Costs:
Funding
D
Q
N/A
Source:
ment Budget
Operating Budget
Other
® Attachments:
Memo 2/8/83
Appraisals
0
MEN
010
=
-.
MN
WM
E10 i01111 _
=1
—
='
OM
IIME
NEM
=
—Non•
p
111111111111Ii1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Date & Ssqu•nllal
Reference
Originating Department:
Administration
Appropriation Cods
1la
/78
HOMAS CASHION AND ASSOCIATES, -INC. • PO1T OF 1 ICI; BOX 67SS
RECONCILATION AND FINAL VALUE CONCLUSION
The subject property was appraised as is, and three approaches
to value were developed. The value indications developed by
the three approaches to value are as follows:
Cost Approach
Direct Sales Comparison
Income Approach
•
I.
A
5650,600 .f-
Co5S,0,•i
:3655,000
All three approaches indicated a narrow range in value for'e_
subject property. Each was given equal weight in the fina
value conclusion, due to the strengths and limitations inhere -.t
in the individual approaches. In the Cost Approach, the 1:n
value estimate is reasonably supported, however certain
assumptions regarding the improvements, the remaining economic
life of the improvements, and the amount of accrued depreciati-
were necessary.
The Direct Sales Comparison Approach produced only three
reasonably comparative sales and none were considered d i rec t i;
comparable. Certain assumptions were necessary regarding, the
degree of comparability, land and building contribution _= t:;
sales price, etc.
The Income Approach required use of the Building Residual
Technique, due to the 'economic factors present in the dc:•::;t .; fl
-properties at this time, and income and expense forecasts 11:i;
to be estimated, since the property is not being operated to
full potential with existing tenants and operating results.
Giving equal weight to the three approaches to value theref.);
results in a final value conclusion as of February 2, 1953,
(appropriately- rounded) of
SIX HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND (5650,0001 DOLLARS.
A �.s,7 r
•0.1'. I% liPA.Ms.�� s
a
f3