Loading...
05/26/1989 (2) tl*":J.:'S~~t'~~";J'J;I.'(t..~~:'.:'..:;i~'. ,,',," : ~"i~));',,, ~'.:i"F.,:.. " '\'. ".' ." <. ~~:!/~l~','<"~:>.';:', '.':> , ," : . . . ~ I . ) .1~L , , " , , I, " ~,,;.<;, '" ~\<::>;','>'.' . .', , , , ' ,'. I > '. . ~ :r::<i;':;" , '". '. ~~ I'X . ~ . . ' ~ ~ , 4 c} ,,1 . . ...> " " ~ i. . '. . ; .~.~.: . ',., l;. , !. , ~. . ~ . . "':.' I ' f~if;";,\ ?.;>~;i;.:!/>!:\/'~g;?v;,\;;,:::,. .. ' ' I ' , . ..: J , . ~ . I, , , " **REVISED** " , AGENDA ,COMMUNITY REDEVElOPMENT'AGE~CY MEETING FRIDAY, MAY 26, 1989 @ 10:30 A.M. , MAYOR1S CONFERENCE ROOM CITY HALL, CLEARWATER, FL " 1. Call to Order. 2.', Approval of Minute~ for March 10, 1989. 1. 2. Approyed 'as submitted. 10:31 A.M. , ' 3: ,dl~ Busine~s: Approval of contract with H & ", G Structures (DHgore Property), 4. New Bu~iri~ss: I, A.' Conceptual' discussion "regarding sale of ,Laura/Cleveland Street parking lot ~o MAS ONE. B., Discussion' regar.ding status of Downtown Developmen~ Board. 5. 'Adjournment , 3. Option'to purchase real estate with H & G'Structures approved as amended. ' 4. A ~, ,Contract to be drawn up,' ,discussion to continue. (' . , ,~ t.~", . ',' ~. S. Joint meeting between eRA and DDS set ,for 9:30 A.M. June 13 I 1989.' 5. 12:41 P.M. , I . I' ':';tfj ,.~ 5/26/89 1, ;, , , , c . . ;'.' l, I , ~, ~ c . j' .' . " . , Ii , ,:'->, : ,I L \ ,': . . '.~ ~ ' ,":, :. ' 1 .. I " . . " I , ',~ .'C" ". COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING May 26, 1989 , ' The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) of' the City of Clearwater met at City Hall, May ,26. 1989 at 10:31 A.M., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Lee Regulski Don Winner William Nunamaker Richard Fitzgerald Tyler Grady Chairperson Member Member Member Member Member ex officio Also present were: Ron H. Rabun Michael J. Wright leo'Schrader Cynthia E. Goudeau Executive Director Assistant City Manager Assistant City Attorney Secretary The Cha; rman of the Commun i ty Redevelopment Agency (eRA) ca 11 ed the meet i n9 (;:1\ to order and the fol'lowing items were discussed. Item #2 Minutes Member Winner moved to approve the minutes of the March 10,'1989 meeting. Motion was duly secondp.d and carried unanimously. Item #3 Approval of Contract with H & G Structures (BilQore Propertv) City Staff has been negotiating with H & G Structures over the' past few months for the sale of the tract known as the Bilgore Property. Leo Schrader, Assistant City Attorney, reviewed the proposal stating ~hat it has been set up as an option and provides the developer two (2) years to put the package together. He stated that they will pay $25,000 for the first year option and $25,000 for the second year opt ion. As s i gnment may be a 11 owed by :the CRA. There is also a provision regarding the developer not being liable for 'increases in impact fees. In response to a question, it was reported that the purchasers have two years to exercise their options and three years to complete the project. Discussion ensued regarding the provisions of the agreement with concerns being expressed regarding the purchaser's ability to assign the agreement to another party, the fact that the City is accepting a' $290;000 loss on it's investment, how to assure the City receives it's funds and that the project is completed. Discussion als~ ensued regarding the provision that ,the City would deduct any 5/26/89 L. 1 . . . . , . " I . . " ". c: ...~~.:...~\!.\ fi".~';I,"", ~.t~~':';J"'~~1'~1',~~~~J:\L\.)--;~~'~,II-'" . .;; :,>, ','; -:. ! , " i, " " ", ':, , , j' ! ." (~" increase in impact fees from the purchase price. Concerns were expressed that this would 'increase the payback period to the City and that the City could not' control other agencies' imposition of impact fees. The purchasers stated they would agree to a time limit'or cap regarding the deduction of impact fees. Based on the discussion and concerns expressed, Leo Schrader, Assistant City Attorney, presented the following amendments to the agreement: 1) , On page one (1), paragraph B, add "prov i ded, however, the optionee shall have no power to exercise this option until 25 condominium units are pre-sold and 10% of the purchase price of each condominium . unit is placed in escrow.II;, 2) On page one (1), paragraph C. strike IIwithout the prior written consent of the optionor" wherever it appears in the paragraphj 3) On page five (5), paragraph 5 add "and closing shall mean the delivery and transfer of legal title" i ' 4) On page six (6), add Sec. 3.05 liThe obligation of Seller hereunder to consummate the Closing contemplated hereby is subject to the satisfaction, at the Closing, of each of the,following conditions (any of which may be waived in whole or in part in writing by Seller at or prior to the Closing):' , (a) Presales. Purchaser shall have entered into agreements with consumers for the purchase of a minimum of fifty (50%) percent of the Condominum Units to be constructed on the Property, with each consumer having pa id ail earnest money deposit, in escrow, of at least ten (10%) percent of the ,purchase price for the respective unit. (b) Approvals of Governmental Authorities. Purchaser shall have secured the approva 1 s of a 11 federal, state, county and municipal 'governmental authorities necessary for the development ,of the Property contemplated hereby. ' (c) Escrow Aoreements. Purchaser shall have entered into such Escrow Agreements as may be required hereby for the escrow of Purchaser I s Earnest Money Depos it, Cert ; f i cate of Deposit or Irrevocable Letter of Credit and the escrow of the Earnest Money Deposits of condominium purc~asers; , which Escrow Agreements shall be upon terms mutually acceptable to the parties hereto. (d) Comp 1 i ance b v Purchaser. Purcha ser sh a 11 have performed, observed and camp 1 i ed wi th a 11 the covenants, agreements and conditions required by this Agreement to be performed, observed and compl ied with by Purchaser prior to or as of C10~ing.~ . 5) on page eight (8) , paragraph 4.13 insert "one year after the execution of the optionlt after the words "becoming effectivelt and add at the end of the paragraph, uprovid i ng however the total deduction from the purchase price shall not exceed $20,OOOIt'; , 6) On page nine (9) paragraph 5.01, Subparagraph 3 add, Itand any construction 'undertaken on said property, shall be covered by a performance bond with a copy thereof to be delivered to the sellerj 7) On page ten (10), paragraph 6.01, delete "without the prior writt~n consent of the se11er" wherever it appears in the paragraph. if. . ,'. 4.. ( " 5/26/89 2 r,~:;:,I~~::,'.,'.. , ':. " " t': \ ," Commi ss ioner Regu lsk i moved to approve the opt ion to purchase rea 1 estate with H & G Structures as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Item #4 New Business ~ Conceptual discussion regardino sale of Laura/Cleveland Street parkino lot to MAS ONE. t41\S ONE Limited Partnership ;s proposing to construct the Clearwater Towers next to the First Florida Bank Building. MAS ONE Limited Partnership has been negotiating to buy a portion of Clearwater1s' Parking Lot #8 in order to faci litate t.he deve lopment of the Clearwater Tower Project. The current proposa 1 , includes the price, to be set at $102,275 which ;s less than the appraised price of $139,000. They are requesting that the eRA construct a public park on the south half of the parking lot with construction costs estimated at $300,000. Once the park is constructed,. MAS ONE will maintain it. They are also requesting additional security at the Garden Avenue parking garage. Michael Wright, Assistant City Manager, provided information that the proposed building is to be completed in 2 years, and will ,be at least equal in value to the existing First Florida building. The current building is assessed at $9.45 million, which generates almost $90,000 a year in eRA funds and $1,900 a year in general revenue funds. That equates to $450,000 over a 5 year period, .: making the proposed eRA.contribution of $336,000 from the park construction and t3':~4 reduced price, equal to less than a 4 year payback. The new building will 'f.t".. require the elimination of 68 publ,ic parking spaces that will be off-set by the proposed 374 spaces to be built on site. The Garden Avenue parking garage currently has 104 available spaces. Bill Kravis, the owner of the adjacent parking lot to the east is aware of the City plans, and voiced no objection at a recent meeting. Michael Wright indicated the CRA would' need to buy the property from the City, and there would be a loss of $10,000 a year to the parking fund. Concerns were expressed regarding converting a portion of the parking lot to a park costing the City $300,000 ,for construction. It was indicated that MAS ONE is concerned as this is "their front yard" and they would 1 ike some input as to its development. They would like it to remain as a passive park. Concerns were also expressed regarding the CRA providing additional security at the parking garage. The Assistant eity Manager indicated they would draw up a contract and would continue to discuss the police protection issue. He stated they would include that the price for development of the park would not exceed $300,000 and that there would be language regarding it being a passive use and a joint venture regarding the de~ign. In response to a question he indicated it was hoped closing could be before the 15th of October, '1989. 5/26/89 c, 3 , " "',t._C"I~'.~ . >. :_'~; .j~~\l . i' . " '.~ "', .. j" ':~' '.~': :,,~ '" " , , t' ~. , ~ i. < ': ... . :' ~ > I \ , . '. j. r": , (" " , \:..:.., C., I' l .: '." ~, . ' " '.', .' , . .' ,. , ' . ': I ". " ,'..' !h Discussion reriardinQ status of Downtown Development Board. ,In the absence of further action by the City Commission, the Downtown Deve~opment Board will cease to exist as of September 30, 1989. If there is a desire to continue the Board's existence and taxing authority, decisions need to be made within the next few weeks regarding an operating millage for the 1989- ,90 fiscal year. One mill of DDB taxing authority will generate between $135,000 to $145,000 in tax revenue. The CRA will receive about $800,000 of which $460,000 must be spent on fixed cost including debt service. That leaves about $340,000 available for other various projects including land acquisition, advertising,' promotion and construction projects. This fund should increase incrementally, as new buildings enter the tax rolls, but it will be at least 2 years before the impact of the two proposed projects are realized. In light of the renewed revital ization effort reconsideration of the "sunset" of the Downtown . Development Board is needed. Staff is suggesting a partnership between DDB and the CRA whereby the eRA concentrates on matters leading to construction/and land acquisition and,the DDB concentrate on promotion and public relations. It was stated that the deadl ine for submi ss ion of millage rates to the Property Appraiser is July 19, 1989. ' o i scus sian ,ensued regarding whether or not the DDB shou 1 d cont i nue in existence and it was suggested that'a joint meeting with the Downtown Development Board be established. Further discussion ensued regarding the 'need for the Downtown Development Board and whether or not the taxing authority was an undue burden,on the downtown property owners. It was the consensus of the eRA to set a joint meeting with the Downtown Development Board for 9:30 A.M. on June 13, 1989. In response to a question regarding the status of the Downtown Streetscape Program, it was indicated that the project is slightly behind schedule, however, part of this was due to the Department of Transportation prohibiting closure of lanes earlier than 9:00 A.M. and later than 3:00 P.M. This time frame has been expanded and the work should be going more quickly. Item #5 - Adjournment. , The meeting adjourned at 12:41 P.M. Attest: ' ~z. ~~._ Secretary 5/26/89 4 ,. '