Loading...
03/26/1992 MAAS BROTHERS TASK FORCE March 26, 1992 Members present: Ed Mazur, Chairperson Jim Graham, Vice-Chairperson (arrived 4:20) John B. Johnson Hal Ebersole Stephen Saliga Robert Kennedy Bob Bickerstaffe Joshua Magidson Gregory Jewell Debra Weible Jackie Tobin Phoebe Moss (arrived 4:17) Nancy Simmons (arrived 4:05) Members Absent: David Little Wray Register Also Present: Cynthia E. Goudeau, City Clerk The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. at the Clearwater Main Library. ITEM #2 - Approval of Minutes Member Magidson moved to approve the minutes of March 12, 1992. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #3 - Presentations: a) Coalition of Associations of Downtown Clearwater Ken Hamilton, Chairman of the Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce, stated a coalition of organizations including the Old Clearwater Bay Association, the Clearwater Cultural Arts Council, the North Fort Harrison Business Association, the North Greenwood Association, and South Clearwater Citizens for Progressive Action, had endorsed the plan that would be presented to the Task Force. He stated there were a series of meetings by this coalition, and they developed a mission statement as follows: "To encourage the development of a direct revenue generating project or projects designed to bring business and people to our downtown area." He stated this group is not interested only in the downtown area, but in future of Clearwater. He stated their plan encompasses the entire bluff, but proposes development only of the currently developed portion. Steve Fowler, Vice-Chairman of the Chamber, presented a drawing of the coalition's concept emphasizing that it is only a concept; and it is an opportunity to look at what could be in this area. He stated they did encompass the entire bluff area and, in the concept where an all suite hotel is located on the existing Maas Brothers site, this could be anything - the art center, a retail complex, or anything that was felt appropriate. He stated some of the main features would be to close Drew Street at the ferry dock location to Cleveland Street to provide underground parking under the development, and to develop the current library and chamber sites while increasing Coachman Park ten to fifteen percent. He stated a conference center which was business oriented should be located east of Osceola. The ultimate plan would be to have a fixed bridge from the top of the bluff to the beach with parking underneath, and a tram station. It was also indicated they would like to see the Pinellas Trail along the bayfront. He stated art festivals and other activities could be held in the park. Their proposal is that increased residential uses be north of Drew Street on Osceola. Mr. Hamilton emphasized that the concept is to keep development within the existing footprints, and the park does need to be larger. Mr. Hamilton introduced Mr. Pete Woodham, President of the Clearwater Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Woodham indicated part of the Chamber's concerns are financial, in that, the taxes lost from the Maas Brothers site and the Chamber, should it relocate, would be $100,000 per year; if the property is developed, it would generate $200,000 a year in tax revenue. He indicated the current Chamber building is starting to deteriorate, and it would take $250,000 to bring it up to standards. He stated the monies to improve the building would have to be put in within the next year, and that a clause in the deed states the Chamber can only sell their property to the City. Mr. Hamilton again emphasized what they have presented is a concept that includes a blend of activities. In response to a question, it was indicated they had not estimated sales tax revenues. In response to a question, it was indicated the appraised value of the Chamber property is $500,000. It was also stated that a recent appraisal valued it at $3-400,000. In response to a question regarding why the Maas Brothers site must be used and the bluff developed, it was indicated the vista and the waterfront are valuable and would be an attraction for the development. Concern was expressed regarding residents being impacted by noise at the park should it become more highly used. A question was raised regarding how the coalition would propose to determine the best development for the property, and it was indicated an RFQ or RFP should be sent out to seek interest in the development. It was emphasized the request is to remain flexible in what will be done with the property. b) George Kelly Mr. Kelly indicated he had not been aware of the Maas Brothers discussion until attending a Chamber of Commerce meeting. He stated he did not disagree with the Chambers, but he has some reservation that the Chambers' recommendation goes beyond the purview of the Task Force. He felt the best use of the property would be to redo the retail store, and to add a revolving restaurant on the roof. He said it would take $1.75 million to develop it in this manner. He stated he did not feel the City should have bought the property. He had concerns regarding relocating the library. In response to a question, Mr. Kelly indicated he had owned Henry's Newsstand for a year and one half, but he had grown up in St. Petersburg. In response to further questions, Mr. Kelly indicated he believes the Maas site should be developed, the library left alone, and, if possible, the current building should be kept. He stated a convention center would not work in downtown. ITEM #4 - Topic: Open Park Land Use In response to questions, Ream Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director, indicated the City currently has approximately 1,300 acres of park land in Clearwater; and they range from passive parks to active recreation areas. He stated Coachman Park is a passive park. He stated that while the comprehensive plan does not show the need for additional park lands in this area, the City is always interested in gaining property on the waterfront. A question was raised regarding his opinion regarding the proposal to close Drew Street; and he felt that would be very beneficial as it is currently difficult to get across Drew Street to the water. In response to questions regarding the tennis courts on the other side of Cleveland Street, Mr. Wilson indicated these courts are heavily used during the prime time hours. He stated there has been a proposal submitted to the Commission that would remove the five courts closest to Cleveland Street, which are old and in need of repair, and rebuild three new courts on the south side of the existing courts. He stated at that time it was determined by the City Attorney the rebuilding of the courts could not be done without an amendment to the Charter due to the development restrictions on the bayfront. The Charter change was approved by the voters on March 10th, and staff will be bringing forward to the City Commission the proposal regarding the tennis courts. Discussion ensued regarding the cost estimates to develop a park. Mr. Wilson indicated the development of the park would be approximately $189,766, and that annual maintenance would be $41,619. A concern was raised the maintenance cost was too low; and Mr. Wilson explained that while the size of the park would more than double, it would not be necessary to double the labor. The cost provided is the amount that would be needed to maintain only the additional park land, not the entire park. Further discussion ensued regarding whether or not these figures were accurate, and whether or not they should include the loss of tax dollars as well. Mr. Wilson indicated that should Drew Street be vacated, it would cost an additional $48,000 to make that part of the park, but there would be no additional cost in operating costs. The Public Works Department provided information regarding the cost to demolish the existing building. A question was raised regarding the asbestos removal not being as costly as originally thought. Mr. Baker indicated if the building is demolished, only the friable asbestos would have to be removed. As long as the hard asbestos (tile) is kept wet, it can be disposed of with other building debris. If the building is used, the cost for removal of the asbestos would increase as the hard asbestos removal would have to be monitored as well. Mr. Saliga stated that in order to develop this parcel as a park it would cost $2.5 million, which includes purchase price of the property, and $100,000 a year to maintain. Mr. Little, who was unable to attend the meeting, has submitted questions to be answered. The City Clerk will ask the Parks and Recreation Department to provide answers in writing. It was stated the cost was not as relevant as the vista, which is very important. In response to a question, Mr. Wilson indicated this is the only park land the City owns on the gulf side of the City. It was stated removing the entire park was not being considered, but co-existence with business was. It was stated everybody on the Task Force is opposed to closing the park, but some feel there should be development on the upper bluff. It was requested that business opportunities not be taken away, and that the Task Force members keep an open mind. A concern was expressed that by developing on the bluff, a line would be drawn that would kill development east of Osceola in the remainder of downtown. It was stated a park would be the jewel of Clearwater and, if it were left as a park now, development could always occur later. It was stated the cost of the park needed to be weighed against the benefit. A concern was expressed the park would not be good for the taxpayers, and the Maas Brothers site can not wait five to ten years for implementation of the Chamber of Commerce's coalition plan. Concern was expressed that too many people were considering what is decided about the Task Force to be the answer to the downtown problem. It was stated development on this site could generate additional activity in downtown; and that, while the vista is important, taking up Drew Street and increasing the park would provide that vista. It was stated the Chambers' concept is to do something to bring more people downtown, and a park would not do so. It was stated there would be a need to look at some compromises, and it would be difficult to reach consensus on the Task Force. It was stated that it was felt it would be better to show the Commission the diversity on the group and let the Commission come up with consensus. A statement was made that, by going over all the information that had been provided thus far, it would cost the taxpayer the same if the building was to be demolished or kept and used. It was stated the Task Force should consider a way to develop the property without the extreme costs which have been presented so far. It should be developed without coming from the taxpayers completely. It was stated if the downtown development starts to develop, the property could be left as a park, but it is too early to make that determination at this time. The Chairman reviewed the schedule stating that today the open park land use was to be discussed. At the next meeting the Task Force would discuss the uses of the existing building; the April 23rd meeting would be private redevelopment of the property; the May 14th discussion will be public redevelopment of the property; and the Task Force is to discuss all the options and come up with a final recommendation at its meeting of May 28th. Discussion ensued regarding what information the Task Force needed for the next meeting to discuss using the existing building. Written information was requested from the Budget Department regarding how they are budgeting the Maas Brothers property in the coming year. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not there was a discrepancy in the cost provided by staff; and it was indicated if all figures were added, it came up to approximately what had been provided before. Members Tobin and Moss left the meeting at 5:30 p.m. It was stated it was hoped that the Pinellas Trail could be brought to the Coachman Park area. It was questioned whether or not the Task Force wished to make a statement in that regard at this time. It was stated Pinellas County is currently selecting a consultant to design a trail through Clearwater, and it does not include the park. Member Graham moved to consider as part of the next meeting the feasibility to access the trail from the current location to the park. The motion was duly seconded. Discussion ensued regarding the need to determine the start and end of the current trail configuration in Clearwater, and that it is five blocks east of the park. It was stated if the trail went through the park, people could access it more easily. It would also bring people to the downtown and park areas. Discussion ensued regarding the need to have a special discussion regarding the trail. Upon the vote being taken on the motion, Members Magidson, Graham, Ebersole, Kennedy, Simmons and Weible voted "aye." Members Bickerstaffe, Mazur, Saliga, Jewell and Johnson voted "nay." The motion carried. Concerns were expressed that this may be more than the Task Force needs to do. Member Magidson moved to reconsider the previous motion. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Member Graham withdrew his previous motion. The seconder withdrew their second. Member Graham moved to recommend to the City Commission that they consider including Coachman Park in the Pinellas Trail. The motion was duly seconded. It was stated this was an appropriate action for the Task Force to take as its objective is to get more people to the downtown area. It was requested that the Commission be told the reason for this action is the Task Force feels this would generate additional activity in the park which is a vital part of bringing more people to the downtown area. Upon the vote being taken, Members Mazur, Graham, Johnson, Magidson, Kennedy, Simmons, Bickerstaffe, Jewell and Weible voted "aye." Members Ebersole and Saliga voted "nay." Motion carried. It was requested that, if possible, the presentations at the next meeting be limited to one as the discussion on use of the existing building will be extensive. The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.