On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   Pledge of Allegiance

   Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence in honor of servicemen and women at home and abroad.

   ▶ Jump to 0:18 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:18] have a quorum. We'll ask everybody to please stand, join me in the Pledge of Allegiance [00:00:21] and remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home [00:00:25] and abroad. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the [00:00:32] republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 3

   Moment of Silence

   Moment of silence observed in honor of servicemen and women at home and abroad, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

   ▶ Jump to 0:21 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:21] and remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home [00:00:25] and abroad. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the [00:00:32] republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

4. 4

   Approval of November 9, 2022 Special Meeting and December 6, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes

   approved

   Council approved the minutes from the November 9, 2022 Special Meeting and the December 6, 2022 Regular Meeting on a motion and second with no discussion.

   • motion:Approve the November 9, 2022 Special Meeting and December 6, 2022 Regular Meeting minutes. (passed)

   ▶ Jump to 0:39 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:39] for all. Thank you. You may be seated. Next item is approval of the minutes from November [00:00:52] 9th and December 6th. Move for approval. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all [00:00:59] those in favor please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed like sign. Motion passes. Vox

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

5. 5.aVox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 1:06
6. 6.a

   Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval

   approvedon consent

   The consent agenda item for purchases/payments was approved by unanimous voice vote with no discussion.

   • motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda. (passed)

   ▶ Jump to 9:48 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:09:48] else? In that case, let's go to the consent agenda. Move for approval. Second. All those [00:09:58] in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. This is

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

7. 6.b

   Budget Amendment

   approvedon consent

   The consent agenda, which included the budget amendment item, was approved unanimously by voice vote.

   • motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda. (passed)

   ▶ Jump to 9:48 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:09:48] else? In that case, let's go to the consent agenda. Move for approval. Second. All those [00:09:58] in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. This is

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

8. 7.a

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Beslow Design” — transcript expanded below

   First Reading, Ordinance No. 2023-2266: Rezoning of +/-27.7 Acres on Sea Forest Drive

   discussed

   First reading of Ordinance No. 2023-2266 to rezone +/-27.7 acres on Sea Forest Drive (north of Marine Parkway) from PDD residential to PDD residential with a revised site plan and 14 development standards, allowing applicant Dominium / New Port Richey Leased House Associates 3 LLLP to build a 388-unit, 5-story senior (62+) affordable apartment community called Anchor at Gulf Harbors. Staff and applicant presented; public comment included a neighbor raising questions about gating and hurricane evacuation concerns.

   Ord. Ordinance No. 2023-2266

   📍401 East Jackson Street, Suite 3300, Tampa, Florida📍5614 Red Snapper Court, Newport Richey📍6327 Grand Boulevard📍Sea Forest Drive (east side, north of Marine Parkway)🏢Beslow Design🏢Bowler Engineering🏢Dominium🏢Pasco County Emergency Management Services🏢Port Richey Leased House Associates 3 LLLP🏢Razor Transportation Consulting🏢U.S. Army Corps of Engineers👤Adam Zions👤Barbara Wilhite👤Dan Holback👤Devin Quist👤Kevin Beslow👤Mike Razor👤Mr. Hall👤Ms. Manns👤Ryan Somerville#4% Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program#Anchor at Gulf Harbors#Hurricane Ian#Ordinance No. 2023-2266#PDD Planned Development District - Residential

   ▶ Jump to 10:05 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:10:05] first reading of ordinance 2023-2266, rezoning plus or minus 27.7 acres on Seaforest Drive. [00:10:13] This is ordinance number 2022-2266, an ordinance rezoning 27.7 acres of property located on [00:10:20] the Seaforest Drive and north of Marine Parkway from PDD planned development district planned [00:10:26] district residential subcategory to PDD planned development district residential planned district [00:10:32] subcategory with a site plan and development standards revision. Further described herein [00:10:38] in Exhibit A providing for an effective date. Thank you. Ms. Manns? Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, [00:10:48] members of the City Council, the purpose of this agenda item as indicated by the City [00:10:54] Council, City Attorney, excuse me, is to rezone 27.7 acres of property which is located [00:11:02] on Seaforest Drive just north of Marine Parkway and Mr. Hall has prepared a PowerPoint presentation [00:11:12] to more completely introduce the agenda item. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Thank you, Ms. Mann. [00:11:22] Mayor and Council, we'll bring this up. Here we go. The property owner, New Port Richey Leased [00:11:28] House Associates 3 LLLP requests to revise an existing site plan to allow for a 388 unit [00:11:37] multifamily apartment building for senior citizens subject to development standards. [00:11:44] As previously mentioned, this property is located on the east side of Seaforest Drive [00:11:50] at approximately 27.7 acres. The zoning on the property, which is outlined in blue, is [00:11:58] PDD residential and the existing use right now, it is undeveloped property. The future [00:12:05] land use showed this as a high density residential 24 units per acre. To the north of the property [00:12:11] is multifamily, to the south of the property is multifamily, and to the east of this property [00:12:16] is multifamily residential, and to the west is single family residential. In 2008, this [00:12:24] property was rezoned to PDD residential, which it is currently zoned right now, and this [00:12:31] existing site plan shows a multifamily apartment complex for 388 units over 14 buildings with [00:12:39] associated parking. There are no development standards beyond the standard code requirements [00:12:44] for this existing zoning. The applicant has proposed a revised site plan. They are still [00:12:53] looking to keep it to 388 units. However, they are looking to revise this to be a multifamily [00:13:01] senior housing apartment building that's five stories tall with associated property in addition [00:13:07] to having development standards placed on the development. These development standards [00:13:17] would include additional amenities that were not required in the previous site plan that [00:13:22] has been approved. They would agree to pools, an outdoor kitchen, fire pits, passive player, [00:13:28] a bocce ball area type amenities. They agree to a tree-lined entrance drive with landscape [00:13:34] median. There would be fountains in the sculpted and landscaped retention ponds, boardwalks, [00:13:41] walking trails, gazebos throughout the site, and with the approval of the county and working [00:13:46] along with them, sidewalks along Seaforest Drive. There's also an architectural style that they [00:13:53] submitted within their application. It will be compatible with the neighborhood and it will [00:13:57] look similar to the drawings that you have here. There's a quick chart here of comparison of the [00:14:06] site plans. The biggest issues that you can see on this is there are additional, again, [00:14:13] development standards that they asked us. They're asking for, well, this layout would have reduced [00:14:19] parking from the original site plan. They would have additional sidewalks. The ponds, again, [00:14:25] would be natural free-form and there will be architectural standards placed on their building. [00:14:30] I wanted to show this because this is an important element to be aware of. The existing site plan, [00:14:38] which is on the left, shows about 13.9 acres of impervious surface and their proposed site [00:14:46] plan shows about 9.5 acres of impervious surface. So, they're looking to reduce the impervious [00:14:54] surface coverage, which is asphalt and buildings on the existing or proposed site plan. [00:15:00] proposed site. If you overlay the two, you can see that there's a [00:15:05] difference in there, approximately four and a half acres of less impervious [00:15:10] surface on the new development. In summary, the applicant is requesting to [00:15:17] rezone an existing PDD residential to a PDD residential that is subject to 14 [00:15:25] development standards as written in the attached or in the ordinance that you [00:15:30] had before you this evening. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions and [00:15:34] the applicant and their engineers are here to speak further. Okay, before we get [00:15:39] into questions, this is, the City Attorney reminded me, a quasi-judicial type of [00:15:44] thing, so if any of you have had any ex parte communications, you should disclose [00:15:52] them now. I've had a couple of people that have called up and indicated [00:15:55] concerns about the the project, primarily involving evacuation. That's been it. Any [00:16:05] of the rest of you? None for me, sir. Okay, any questions for Mr. Hall? In that case, [00:16:17] we take any public comment? Well, that's the next thing up. Okay, the next thing is to [00:16:26] ask for public comment. I would ask the applicant to come up and following the [00:16:33] applicant to, anybody that's directly affected by this would come up next. Good [00:16:42] evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Barbara Wilhite. My address is [00:16:47] 6327 Grand Boulevard. I'm a neighbor to you to the west here. I represent the [00:16:53] Dominion project, anchors at Gulf Harbor. My project team is with me, Devon Quest, [00:17:00] Vice President Dominion, Ryan Somerville, also with Dominion. I have Mike Razor [00:17:05] with Razor Transportation Consulting. He did the traffic study. Adam Zions, Bowler [00:17:10] Engineering, our project engineer, and we brought our architect as well, who's [00:17:14] responsible for some of the very nice renderings that you have there, Kevin [00:17:17] Beslow of Beslow Design. The way I would like to present this is I have, Devon [00:17:23] Quest would like to give a brief PowerPoint and introduce the project and [00:17:28] his company. My technical team, if it's okay with you, will just answer questions [00:17:34] and answer anything that the public may ask. So we'll bring them back up if [00:17:38] that's okay after the public speaks, so we can tailor what we say and kind of [00:17:42] don't waste your time. I would just reiterate a couple high-level things. I [00:17:46] thought your staff did a wonderful job with their staff report as well as their [00:17:50] PowerPoint. I've seen a lot of them over my years and very well done. Just to [00:17:55] reiterate a couple things that I find interesting. One is that this land use on [00:17:59] the property is 24 units per acre. That's 644 units. The proposal is 388 units, same [00:18:07] as what is approved today. You saw the difference in the site plans, which [00:18:13] what's approved today is 14 buildings and it's not age-restricted. I think [00:18:17] that's really important when you're looking at this, is that we're going from [00:18:21] a project that's not age-restricted, can be a family project, to a senior [00:18:26] project. And as a result of that, there's a reduction in traffic, there's a [00:18:29] reduction in parking, and my team can go through that in more detail. With that, I [00:18:36] would bring up Devin Quist, who wants to present his project and his company. [00:18:41] Thank you. Thank you. [00:18:58] Good evening. My name is Devin Quist. I am at 401 East Jackson Street, Suite 3300, [00:19:06] Tampa, Florida. Mr. Mayor, City Council members, good evening again and thank [00:19:13] you. As Barbara Wilhite mentioned, I'm with Dominium. I'm a vice president and [00:19:19] project partner there, and I've been with Dominium a little over seven years now, [00:19:24] where I've been doing real estate development and new affordable housing [00:19:29] apartment communities, similar to this one. I'm a resident in Hillsborough County [00:19:33] and very happy to call the Tampa Bay Area home. While Dominium is a Minneapolis- [00:19:38] based company, we have headquarters also in Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, and then I [00:19:44] live here in the Tampa Bay Area and work on our affordable new construction [00:19:48] projects, similar to Anchor at Gulf Harbors. Dominium is a 50-year-old [00:19:55] company. We predate the affordable housing tax credit program that we're [00:20:00] using to finance this project. We've been doing affordable housing for a long [00:20:03] time. It's all we do and it's what we do. We're really proud to say that we're the [00:20:08] second largest owner of affordable housing today. We're producing about 20 [00:20:13] homes per day of affordable housing across the country, and we're long-term [00:20:18] owners of affordable housing. Due to the nature of the financing, a lot of [00:20:22] developers will say that the affordable housing tax credit program requires [00:20:26] developers to be participants in the community for a long period of time, the [00:20:31] compliance period and the tax credit delivery period, but not a lot of those [00:20:35] developers have been in business through the full life cycle of one of those [00:20:38] projects. While I have not necessarily personally done that, one of the great [00:20:45] benefits of being a part of a 50-year-old company is that we have [00:20:50] owned a lot of apartment communities for a long period of time. We have owned an [00:20:57] apartment community. We just celebrated the 50th anniversary of owning one [00:21:00] community back in Minnesota, and we have a number of projects that we've owned [00:21:06] for more than 15 or 30 years. This would be another project just like that. We're [00:21:10] not a build it with cheap materials and flip it and sell it kind of developer. So [00:21:19] for that reason, we use high-quality materials to develop our [00:21:25] apartment communities. The nature of affordable housing is that the rents are [00:21:28] lower, and so using materials that are going to last for a longer period of [00:21:33] time helps keep those operational costs in line with the lower rents. So that's [00:21:41] one of the core philosophies of our design is paying up front to get to a [00:21:45] nicer community that will last for a longer period of time. I will say, you [00:21:51] know, in apartment management, having bigger management companies does tend to [00:21:57] be better. The price of an education in the apartment development and management [00:22:02] industry is fairly expensive. You know, we have made mistakes over the 50 years. [00:22:08] We're not perfect, but the policies, the procedures, and the route that we take to [00:22:14] resolve issues is something that we have in place. And, you know, we can be a [00:22:19] very, very big manager nationwide, but we manage a very small share of affordable [00:22:25] housing or of housing in Florida. So I don't believe we have the slides [00:22:32] available. Is that right? No? Okay. So in Florida specifically, we own 26 [00:22:38] communities, a little over or nearly 6,000 apartment homes. We're one of the [00:22:43] largest affordable housing managers in the state of Florida, and we have about [00:22:49] 1,000 units of affordable housing under construction in Orlando, and we'll break [00:22:53] ground on another 1,300 units of affordable housing in the next 12 to 18 [00:22:57] months or so in Central Florida. What we're proposing for this site is, as [00:23:10] staff mentioned, is 388 units of senior affordable apartment homes. The marketing [00:23:18] for the name is called Anchor at Gulf Harbors. The senior component of it is [00:23:23] that the apartment community will be 62 or older, period. No residents and no [00:23:29] long-term guests under the age of 62 will be allowed to sign a lease or live [00:23:34] at the apartment community. The current zoning allows for multifamily general [00:23:40] occupancy, and because our proposal does mean senior, that tends to mean [00:23:45] reductions in quite a few things, including wastewater, reductions in [00:23:49] traffic, impervious surface, as we saw, and also as we've seen, a lot of [00:23:55] times it also results in reductions in people and crime as well. 100% of the [00:24:02] homes, as mentioned, are going to be affordable as well, so I want to talk [00:24:07] just a little bit about what that affordable element means, because there [00:24:11] are a lot of different programs. Historically, currently, this program is [00:24:16] going to participate in the 4% low-income housing tax credit program, [00:24:21] and so these homes will be set aside for residents earning 60% or less of the [00:24:28] area median income. Now, for a one-bedroom, that apartment home would [00:24:35] cost $924 per month, so this is a very, very specific step in the housing ladder. [00:24:42] This is not supportive housing, this isn't very low-income housing, this also [00:24:47] isn't market-rate housing, but at that $924 per month threshold, there is an [00:24:55] income limit as well, and so for a prospective tenant that shows up to rent [00:25:01] an apartment home, they would have to earn, a single would have to earn $34,500 [00:25:06] per year or less, and so you will qualify on Social Security alone. However, there [00:25:12] also is a test on assets. So, in order to live here, a tenant would have to earn [00:25:20] below $34,500, but then we also will do all of our credit, criminal, background, [00:25:27] and other checks as well, including an income or assets check as well, [00:25:34] and make sure that the tenant has the ability to pay the rent. And so, there is [00:25:38] a band that a household or a tenant must earn above a certain amount and below a [00:25:44] certain amount to qualify for the program. So, the one-bedroom is $924, the [00:25:50] two-bedroom is $1,108, and then there are a small number of three-bedrooms as well, [00:25:55] which are just under $1,300. So, to date, Dominium has invested capital of just [00:26:07] under $3 million in this project. We do own the land. By the time, should a [00:26:13] favorable action be taken, by this time next year, we would have invested [00:26:19] capital of nearly $4 million in the project. The development overall will be [00:26:25] over $100 million of investment in the community and neighborhood [00:26:32] through this Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, as well as the private capital [00:26:35] that Dominium would bear. So, this would equate to roughly 200 to 250 temporary [00:26:42] construction jobs, as well as six full-time jobs in the management group, [00:26:47] as well as the indirect jobs that come along with, you know, the seniors and the [00:26:53] construction and the management and the operations of an apartment community of [00:26:56] this size. There are wetlands on this site, which is one of the big challenges [00:27:02] that we are working on. The total wetlands on the site are about 8.9 [00:27:06] acres, which is about 32% of the total site. These are some fairly high-quality [00:27:12] wetlands. The total wetland impacts proposed in our development are 0.63 [00:27:18] acres, so only 7% of the total wetlands are being impacted. We have gone through [00:27:24] the process with the Watershed District and with the U.S. Army Corps of [00:27:27] Engineers, where they're not fully signed off yet, but we are getting very close. We [00:27:32] have changed the site plan quite drastically to get to a point where that [00:27:38] wetland impact is at 0.63 acres. For a frame of reference, if you're under a [00:27:43] half an acre, you don't even have to permit the wetland impacts, so we are [00:27:46] very, very minimal on those impacts. The only reason we weren't able to get to a [00:27:50] half acre or less was the entrance road. There are wetlands across [00:27:57] that whole side, and the entrance road had to come in somewhere. So, a question I [00:28:04] commonly get is, for a senior apartment community, why would you do three [00:28:08] bedrooms? Again, I want to emphasize we do not allow anyone under 62, other than [00:28:14] short-term guests, to live here. The reason that we design these apartment [00:28:19] communities to include a small number of three bedrooms is for a variety of [00:28:24] different reasons. On this community, it'll be less than 10%, about 7% [00:28:29] of the apartment homes will be three bedrooms. They are, for rental purposes, [00:28:35] called the three-bedroom, but they tend to operate or be lived in more similarly [00:28:40] to a two-bedroom plus den. They're always done on the corner of the [00:28:45] apartment wings, where there's that extra wall of glass, which allows for that [00:28:50] third separated bedroom to have its own window. These homes are a [00:28:57] good option for seniors that might be downsizing from single-family homes and [00:29:01] freeing up other housing stock within the city or elsewhere to downsize, but [00:29:06] maybe aren't quite ready for something as small as a one or two-bedroom. So, we [00:29:10] don't do too many of them, but they are a good option that we've seen and help [00:29:14] provide that diverse housing stock. We looked at the renderings. As Barbara [00:29:22] mentioned, our architect is here as well and available to answer any questions. [00:29:27] We spend a lot of time going through our internal large group design [00:29:32] meeting process, which we've completed on this project. One of the things we [00:29:38] talk a lot about is the quality of life. This apartment community will have, I'm [00:29:46] going off a little bit here without the slides, so this apartment community will [00:29:50] have a variety of different amenities in it. The large and transportable share [00:30:00] will lead into a grand two-story club room, [00:30:02] which we'll view out right as you walk in, [00:30:05] out through the two-story meeting area into the pool deck. [00:30:11] The common area amenities will also include [00:30:16] all the fitness center, theater room, [00:30:18] there'll be a salon where seniors can get their hair cut, [00:30:22] and other areas as well. [00:30:27] So outdoors, we have the private courtyard space [00:30:32] with a pool, there'll be recreational activities, [00:30:35] which is usually beanbags or a putting green or bocce ball, [00:30:39] as well as grilling, dining areas as well. [00:30:45] We make sure to do a lot of exterior shade areas [00:30:48] for the seniors so that they can enjoy [00:30:49] the nice temperature during the summer. [00:30:53] And on this site, one of the great opportunities we had [00:30:57] was to include walking trails through the wetlands [00:31:01] to not only preserve the wetlands, [00:31:03] but provide amenity or really highlight [00:31:06] some of the really fascinating [00:31:09] and valuable natural vegetation that's in this area. [00:31:15] So the boardwalk will be about 765 feet, [00:31:18] that'll be built on 155 separate 10-foot piers, [00:31:22] which will be constructed in a way that does not impact [00:31:27] or cause harm to that wetland. [00:31:30] So it really should be a one-of-a-kind walking trail, [00:31:32] which will be back there and showcase [00:31:34] some of the beautiful species here in New Port Richey. [00:31:39] So the boardwalk, along with the public [00:31:42] and private sidewalks of this site plan [00:31:45] will create over a mile of total new walking trails [00:31:47] around the development, within the development, [00:31:49] including the sidewalk along Seaforest. [00:31:55] And as far as the in-unit features, [00:31:59] just briefly, we do have the nine-foot ceilings, [00:32:02] the balconies, patios. [00:32:04] We do an in-unit dehumidifier as well, [00:32:08] the electronic key fobs and deadbolts. [00:32:11] I have that at my home and have come to really like it. [00:32:13] So everything that you would come and see [00:32:16] at a market rate apartment community, [00:32:18] you can expect at our apartment communities as well. [00:32:22] I will talk to the dialogue [00:32:28] of hurricane preparedness and evacuation. [00:32:34] So our property management company [00:32:38] has a hurricane preparedness checklist [00:32:41] that they will complete at any time [00:32:44] when a tropical storm is approaching [00:32:47] or a named storm is identified. [00:32:50] As a part of that hurricane preparedness checklist, [00:32:53] there are three different initial points [00:32:59] where they will have communication and provide a notice [00:33:03] to each tenant or household or unit [00:33:06] in our apartment community. [00:33:08] And that's at 76 hours, 36 hours, and 24 hours. [00:33:13] And during that time, we will identify any folks, [00:33:17] any residents that need help with evacuating. [00:33:21] If someone needs help with evacuating, [00:33:24] we will work with the Pasco County [00:33:26] Emergency Management Services to get them the help [00:33:29] that they need to evacuate. [00:33:33] We have confirmed as well that this community [00:33:39] will be serviced by the Pasco County [00:33:41] Emergency Management Services for evacuation. [00:33:46] When a resident moves in, they will have the opportunity [00:33:49] to apply to the county for that program. [00:33:52] They can either apply under the special needs [00:33:54] or the non-special needs programs. [00:33:57] And we, our resident, our property management company, [00:34:00] can help the special needs residents to apply [00:34:04] and complete that paperwork if needed. [00:34:07] Once they've applied, they are in the system, [00:34:10] Pasco County will give the residents a 72-hour message [00:34:14] or notice. [00:34:16] If you applied, then that message will include [00:34:20] information including transportation information [00:34:22] for evacuation. [00:34:24] So this project does have services that are eligible [00:34:30] from Pasco County to assist in that evacuation. [00:34:34] And with the professional management company [00:34:38] that we have as well, our own Dominion Management Company, [00:34:40] we're also ready and able to assist and to help [00:34:43] whether it's completing with the paperwork [00:34:45] or somebody that needs additional help. [00:34:47] I'm happy to answer other questions [00:34:49] about the evacuation process or any other questions [00:34:52] about the affordable housing. [00:34:54] And as Barbara mentioned, we have others on our team [00:34:57] to answer questions as well. [00:34:58] So thank you. [00:34:59] Thank you. [00:35:02] Do we have any substantially affected parties [00:35:04] that wish to address council on this issue? [00:35:10] You come down and give us your name and address [00:35:12] for the record, please. [00:35:19] Dan Holback, 5614 Red Snapper Court, New Port Richey. [00:35:24] My community is immediately to the north, [00:35:27] so I guess it's kind of affected depending on what they do. [00:35:32] I have a couple questions. [00:35:34] Is this community going to be gated? [00:35:36] Do you guys know? [00:35:37] Anybody? [00:35:39] We'll have them address that when they're- [00:35:40] Okay, so that's one question. [00:35:44] I think the evacuation issue is a real concern. [00:35:51] As I said, I live over there, [00:35:53] and when we had this scare with Ian, [00:35:58] the Pasco County folks were on TV saying [00:36:00] there's going to be water up to 19, [00:36:04] and to expect a 14 to 17 foot flood surge. [00:36:09] Now, my place, as I said, I'm directly north, [00:36:13] and it was built in 07. [00:36:16] And my living room is 11 feet above sea level, [00:36:19] so I'd have had water in mine. [00:36:21] I can't imagine how seniors are going to deal with that. [00:36:25] So, and to get out, or if they stay, or if they go, [00:36:31] stuff like that, I think is very concerning. [00:36:34] Because it's a known flood zone. [00:36:35] I mean, unless they're going to pile it super high. [00:36:39] Anyway, so that's a concern. [00:36:43] Also, with respect to the low income, [00:36:49] and restrictions to the community, [00:36:54] just seemed kind of odd that it's 62. [00:36:56] I don't know how it got arbitrary. [00:36:58] Maybe it's not arbitrary. [00:37:01] But 62, especially, I'm 55 now, as of last month. [00:37:05] So I'm kind of like, well, how come it's not 55, [00:37:08] like all the other neighborhoods? [00:37:09] I'm also a realtor, so just kind of odd [00:37:13] that it would be that. [00:37:14] And just on a personal side note, [00:37:19] you know, a lot of the Gulf Harbor communities [00:37:21] have access to the beach. [00:37:23] And that would be one of my other questions is, [00:37:26] are we going to have 380 new folks [00:37:29] that are going to access the private beach? [00:37:32] So that's my questions. [00:37:33] Thanks very much. [00:37:36] Any members? [00:37:37] Yes, sir. [00:37:48] Hi, y'all. [00:37:49] So I was obviously not planning on speaking, [00:37:51] and I apologize that I've not done my homework, [00:37:53] but I also take issue with the, I guess, 62 and up housing, [00:37:58] in that I moved to New Port Richey about a year ago [00:38:01] and was struggling to find affordable housing. [00:38:04] And it seems like there are not a shortage [00:38:07] of affordable senior housing options. [00:38:10] And so I imagine that the development company [00:38:11] has done that research and could tell us roughly [00:38:14] how many affordable senior housing complexes [00:38:17] are still empty, as opposed to just [00:38:20] general affordable housing, [00:38:23] which is my only question and or concern. [00:38:25] So thanks, y'all. [00:38:26] Thank you. [00:38:27] Anyone else? [00:38:28] Okay. [00:38:32] Seeing no one else come forward, [00:38:34] we'll close ask the applicant if they wish [00:38:36] to address any of those questions. [00:38:46] Barbara Wilhite again. [00:38:48] Regarding access to the beach, [00:38:50] I'm actually a member of that beach club [00:38:52] because I live on Gulf Harbors, [00:38:53] and this property does not have ability [00:38:55] to become a member of the beach club. [00:39:01] It is not gated, correct, team? [00:39:04] Hold on a second. [00:39:05] Speak into the mic, please. [00:39:06] Hold on a second. [00:39:07] Team, gated? [00:39:11] It's not gated. [00:39:13] The other two questions, [00:39:15] we've already gone through the evacuation issue. [00:39:16] If you'd like to hear from our engineer, [00:39:18] he could explain how the base floor elevation works [00:39:21] and how the elevation of the building works. [00:39:25] We're happy to go into that. [00:39:27] And the client can also talk to you [00:39:29] about affordable housing supply in general, [00:39:31] if you'd like to hear about that. [00:39:33] It's kind of at your pleasure. [00:39:34] I don't want to pull my team up here to go on [00:39:38] if you don't have a specific question. [00:39:40] Thank you. [00:39:41] We may, so if they'll stand by. [00:39:42] Okay, thank you. [00:39:43] At this point, I'm going to bring it back to council. [00:39:49] Any questions before we ask for a motion? [00:39:51] Yeah, I've got a, [00:39:52] Mayor, I've got a couple questions. [00:39:56] So we gave an income of 34.5 for the one bedroom. [00:40:00] Do we have the income levels for the two and three bedroom? [00:40:03] Just. [00:40:12] Yes, thank you. [00:40:14] So the rents are based on the bedroom. [00:40:17] The income levels are based on the people [00:40:19] that reside in the bedrooms, [00:40:21] or the apartment homes. [00:40:22] So one person, a single tenant, [00:40:26] would need to earn 34.5 or lower. [00:40:29] A couple, two people, would need to earn 39,420 or less. [00:40:36] Irregardless of what unit they select, correct? [00:40:39] Correct. [00:40:39] Okay. [00:40:41] Before you go away. [00:40:46] So you indicated it takes a considerable amount [00:40:51] of time for a project like the low income [00:40:54] to recapture, to capture all the tax credits [00:40:57] and so forth. [00:40:57] About how long was that? [00:40:58] Is that 15 years? [00:40:59] How long was it? [00:41:00] Yes, so the tax credit program, [00:41:03] and there are details and nuances to this, [00:41:05] as I'm sure you're aware, [00:41:07] but so the tax credits are delivered over 10 years. [00:41:11] The initial compliance period is 15 years, [00:41:15] but the federal minimum affordability period is 30 years. [00:41:19] So we will sign what's called [00:41:20] an extended low income housing agreement, [00:41:23] and that will extend the affordability period [00:41:25] from the 15 to the 30. [00:41:27] And I'm assuming there's indexes would apply [00:41:33] to this, right? [00:41:34] So as time goes on, [00:41:37] as far as their income requirements and so forth, right? [00:41:41] Absolutely, yes. [00:41:42] Those figures that I mentioned, [00:41:44] the 34.5 and the 39.4, [00:41:46] as well as the rental rates, [00:41:49] are based on the area median income, [00:41:51] and that area is defined as the Tampa MSA. [00:41:55] And so as the income of the Tampa MSA, [00:41:58] as well as social security goes up, [00:42:00] the rents and then the incomes that would be eligible [00:42:02] would go up as well. [00:42:02] Okay. [00:42:05] How many other, [00:42:07] let's see, you do quite a few building projects [00:42:10] here in Florida. [00:42:12] Can you recall any specifically you could tell us about [00:42:15] that are currently in hazardous flood zones? [00:42:19] While I'm not sure, [00:42:23] well, yes, absolutely I can. [00:42:25] So I worked on a series of different projects, [00:42:29] not projects that we originally developed, [00:42:32] projects that were troubled, [00:42:35] the general partner was either in foreclosure default [00:42:38] or had problems with the investor, [00:42:41] and we would step in, [00:42:43] the investor would call Dominion and say, [00:42:46] we need help, we need to right the ship [00:42:49] and come in and fix this project. [00:42:52] And so there were a series of those projects [00:42:54] where we've come in and tried to, [00:42:57] well, not tried to, [00:42:58] but we come in and we invest the capital that's needed [00:43:01] to help keep the affordable housing in the program [00:43:04] and not through a default. [00:43:05] And there's been a few of those projects I've worked on [00:43:08] that have been in flood zones. [00:43:10] One of the, and I'm preempting a question here, [00:43:13] but one of, I think the question was relating [00:43:15] to my experience doing some projects in flood zones. [00:43:18] One of the things that I will say is that [00:43:20] I've learned two main things about projects in flood zones. [00:43:23] The first is to do a new construction project [00:43:27] and design an apartment community [00:43:28] that will weather a flood is far, far better [00:43:33] than coming and trying to fix [00:43:35] a 15 to 30 year old apartment community [00:43:37] to weather a flood and a hurricane. [00:43:39] And so there are things we can do [00:43:40] and we are doing on this project [00:43:42] to make sure that it will be equipped [00:43:44] to sustain storm surge and hurricanes. [00:43:49] We have our engineer here [00:43:50] who can certainly talk to more of that. [00:43:51] One of the things that I will mention [00:43:53] and one of the things that we are doing [00:43:54] is that the base flood elevation is at 11 feet. [00:43:59] This apartment community, not the whole site, [00:44:01] but the apartment community will be elevated [00:44:04] an additional three feet over the base flood elevation. [00:44:08] And so even the finished floor of the apartment community [00:44:12] will be three feet over what FEMA determines [00:44:15] is that base flood. [00:44:18] Now this requires additional filter [00:44:20] that is fairly cost intensive. [00:44:23] We also have other issues we need to deal with [00:44:25] including ADA and how we can get certain people [00:44:29] up that three feet from the parking [00:44:31] to the apartment community. [00:44:32] But these are things that we sit down [00:44:33] and we take the time, well we have taken the time [00:44:36] to go through and make sure that [00:44:38] we can get the building elevated further. [00:44:40] That's the first thing I learned from those [00:44:42] is you can do that on new construction projects, [00:44:43] but on the act rehab when the developer [00:44:46] didn't originally do that, [00:44:47] they're much harder to make resilient [00:44:51] to floods and hurricanes. [00:44:52] The second thing I will learn, [00:44:54] and we have our architect here as well, [00:44:55] is that new construction projects are subject. [00:45:00] to an entirely different state building code [00:45:03] than 15, 30, or older year old apartment communities. [00:45:07] And the windows, the hurricane anchors, [00:45:10] and the other materials that'll be used [00:45:12] in these apartment communities are, [00:45:14] the technology is very, very different [00:45:16] from those apartment communities. [00:45:18] And so again, when we have the chance [00:45:19] to do these new construction projects, [00:45:21] I would welcome the architect and the engineer [00:45:25] to speak more about this rather than me, [00:45:26] so I don't mess it up too bad. [00:45:28] But my experience in looking at [00:45:31] when we have had the hurricanes over the last few years, [00:45:34] it's been the new construction projects [00:45:36] that have stood out much better [00:45:37] than the older acquisition rehab projects. [00:45:41] Well, you answered all my additional questions on that [00:45:43] because obviously there's costs associated with that. [00:45:46] I'm just trying to figure out how you work the project [00:45:48] and in fact, you're building it up and so forth. [00:45:50] And did I miss it or do we answer the question [00:45:53] about age 62, how that magic number comes around? [00:45:58] Yes, I will raise my hand and say I wish it was 55. [00:46:04] That would be much, much, [00:46:06] I wish there was more we could do there. [00:46:08] So the way this works, and it's not a fun answer, [00:46:12] but the way this works is you have both the federal [00:46:15] and the state age requirements. [00:46:17] So when we go out and we say we are going to be [00:46:19] a senior apartment community, [00:46:21] we are at face value conflicting with housing rights [00:46:27] because that is technically a discrimination [00:46:30] against familial status. [00:46:32] And so the only way that a discrimination [00:46:34] against familial status is legal [00:46:37] is if you meet the federal law [00:46:39] called Housing for Older Persons Act. [00:46:42] And that Housing for Older Persons Act or HOPA [00:46:46] is the federal requirement and it details two ways [00:46:49] that you can have a senior apartment community. [00:46:51] The first is 62 plus period [00:46:54] and the second is this 55 plus [00:46:56] with kind of wiggle room preference [00:46:59] which people don't tend to like [00:47:00] because there's a path there where somebody might be 18 [00:47:04] or might be school age or might be 30. [00:47:06] It's a little more ambiguous under that second option. [00:47:09] Now the reason that that second option [00:47:11] isn't really eligible for us to begin with [00:47:14] is because we also have to meet [00:47:16] the Florida state requirement for senior. [00:47:19] And Florida has a separate program [00:47:21] which this community will be under the jurisdiction of [00:47:25] which is called Homes for the Aged. [00:47:26] And Homes for the Aged applies to projects like this one, [00:47:29] communities like this one that are affordable and senior. [00:47:33] And that one is 62 plus period. [00:47:37] So that's the one that puts us into that federal box [00:47:40] and we need to be very delicate [00:47:41] to make sure we're meeting the state [00:47:43] and the federal requirements. [00:47:46] And to follow up on that question, [00:47:48] I'm assuming you've done a market study [00:47:50] that indicated there's a huge demand [00:47:52] for this particular product. [00:47:54] Yes, we absolutely have. [00:47:56] We have our own internal metrics that we use [00:47:59] including a capture rate analysis [00:48:01] where we look at zip codes within city of New Port Richey [00:48:05] and we have a tolerance that we will [00:48:08] only make investment decisions to participate [00:48:11] as a corporation in those areas [00:48:13] if there is enough demand for not only the affordable [00:48:16] and within that income bracket that I mentioned [00:48:20] but also that age-restricted bracket [00:48:22] which is another method of the compliance [00:48:24] to actually be able to sign a lease [00:48:26] at this apartment community. [00:48:28] And so that capture rate analysis [00:48:30] was the first thing we look at. [00:48:31] And then as a part of this project as well, [00:48:35] we have a separate market study as well [00:48:37] that we've completed. [00:48:40] And one additional, I don't mean to take this thing [00:48:44] but I was on a roll here. [00:48:47] You indicated the income test [00:48:50] and there was also an asset test [00:48:53] that was associated with that. [00:48:54] Can you talk to us about is it, [00:48:56] can I have too little or too much? [00:48:57] What's the test with that? [00:48:59] Yes, absolutely and good question. [00:49:01] So this one becomes pretty complicated pretty quickly. [00:49:05] So the rule as HUD defines it is 34.5 for a single [00:49:11] and 39.4 for a couple. [00:49:13] Now what income needs to be counted towards those values? [00:49:19] So the first of course is W-2 income and social security. [00:49:24] Now you will qualify on social security [00:49:27] but the rule on how assets are tested [00:49:32] gets pretty complicated. [00:49:33] And it is within our compliance department. [00:49:36] If I start trying to explain this, [00:49:37] this is gonna get a little bit muddied. [00:49:40] What I will say though is they look at income [00:49:43] such as dividends, capital gains. [00:49:46] They look at, I believe it's a certain percentage of, [00:49:50] if you have a million dollars in the bank, [00:49:52] they're gonna look at a certain percentage [00:49:53] on qualifying assets and they count that [00:49:56] under the federal section 42 program [00:49:58] towards that income test. [00:50:00] So there's different components of assets [00:50:02] that will count towards that. [00:50:04] But just because you have a nest egg or some savings [00:50:07] doesn't necessarily preclude you from income qualifying [00:50:12] to live at this apartment community. [00:50:14] I've got a couple more questions but I'll yield for now. [00:50:17] I only have one. [00:50:18] Okay. [00:50:19] I have one question and that is the impact on services, [00:50:23] additional services that would be needed [00:50:26] by people that are 62 plus. [00:50:28] Police, fire, all of those things. [00:50:30] What's the impact on that? [00:50:32] I'm happy to take a stab at it. [00:50:34] I'm not sure if that's directed towards me or the city [00:50:37] or others. [00:50:38] Well, just on that, have you done a study [00:50:41] on apartments with 388 apartments? [00:50:43] How is that gonna impact the services [00:50:45] that are gonna be required for them? [00:50:47] I'm not sure that we as a developer do a study on that. [00:50:51] No. [00:50:54] I had just one question. [00:50:55] Is it safe to assume that this thing's gonna have [00:50:57] elevators in it so these people don't have to go up [00:51:00] and down five flights of stairs? [00:51:01] Absolutely and one of the things that we do [00:51:03] during that large group design meeting process [00:51:05] that I mentioned is we painstakingly measure [00:51:08] the distance from every elevator to every apartment [00:51:11] door entrance in this apartment community [00:51:13] and make sure that it's not too long. [00:51:15] And then we go and we measure every parking stall [00:51:18] to every elevator and make sure that it's not too long. [00:51:21] So those absolutely are components to this. [00:51:23] Mr. Allman, anything? [00:51:28] I think from the beginning of this hearing [00:51:32] when we heard from the city that the preexisting zoning, [00:51:38] the argument made by our staff to us [00:51:41] as to what our duty as a city council is, [00:51:44] which is to look at the rights that we have made available [00:51:48] to anybody who owns land through our land use [00:51:51] and zoning restrictions. [00:51:53] So as it's been described to us that you've agreed [00:51:56] to some increased amenities, that you're aware [00:52:02] of the perils of flood and the threats. [00:52:07] You've explained yourself well in terms of your ability [00:52:10] to let folks know. [00:52:12] We're a lot more fortunate to get advanced notice [00:52:15] of hurricanes than the folks in Northern California [00:52:18] were at 2.30 in the morning this morning from an earthquake. [00:52:23] So we do have threats, but we do have the ability [00:52:26] to figure out how we can hunker down and live in it. [00:52:30] And much of our city is already in the high hazard area. [00:52:32] So the fact that we've got such an austere team [00:52:38] that you have behind that we haven't asked any questions of [00:52:41] doesn't mean that we might not like, [00:52:42] I might not like to, as this process goes, [00:52:45] to have some of you back to explain to us what you're doing. [00:52:51] Our region follows the South Florida closely [00:52:56] in terms of the resiliency and there are proposals, [00:53:02] which we'll be hearing about in the next months, [00:53:05] changes in codes and building codes and that's coming. [00:53:12] And so I'm gonna be very curious how attuned [00:53:14] that you all are. [00:53:15] We had a question about preparedness and how you can build. [00:53:21] And I liked your answer that you can build to it. [00:53:25] The future of our city depends on us being able to build [00:53:28] to survive and sustain in what is considered [00:53:33] to be increased water table levels. [00:53:37] So, and so it's smart if you hold onto a property [00:53:40] for 50 years that it might last that long. [00:53:44] The only other question that I have relates to the economics [00:53:49] it was described as you have $3 million invested [00:53:52] in the land now that you're intending [00:53:54] to have $4 million next year. [00:53:55] So is that one more million? [00:53:57] So you think this is a year to spend a million to get ready? [00:54:01] I'm thinking you're talking about building this thing [00:54:04] a year from now, is that correct? [00:54:06] Yes, correct. [00:54:06] Okay, so during this next year, [00:54:10] maybe our staff can just keep us posted [00:54:12] because I'm sure that the city's building [00:54:15] and planning department are gonna be closely involved [00:54:18] as you're moving forward. [00:54:20] And I think it's a good exercise for us [00:54:22] and it's exciting to have a firm [00:54:25] with the experience of yours. [00:54:26] So I'll see if there's any more questions [00:54:30] otherwise I'm ready to make a motion. [00:54:31] Very good, Mr. Murphy. [00:54:33] Yeah, Councilman Peters kind of took all my questions. [00:54:36] But I will point out. [00:54:40] I've got one more. [00:54:42] I will point out some of the things that I did like [00:54:44] and heard is in a smaller impact on the marshland, [00:54:48] smaller footprint, smaller impervious layer [00:54:53] and building will be above the base flood level [00:54:55] in the apartments. [00:54:57] So all those things are looking ahead for the future [00:54:59] and looking out for the environment. [00:55:01] So I do appreciate that. [00:55:04] So your last answer said it had a word in it [00:55:09] that I wanted to address, that was parking. [00:55:12] So as this layout you have now, [00:55:17] how many parking spaces per unit is planned? [00:55:24] 1.1. [00:55:26] I knew it was over one, [00:55:27] but I knew it wasn't very much over one. [00:55:29] So that's okay. [00:55:30] So the, compare that with, [00:55:34] and then we may not have this number, [00:55:35] but the previous project that had been approved, [00:55:41] site plan and all that, with 388 units, [00:55:46] how many parking spaces do we have, [00:55:49] did that site plan have? [00:55:50] Do we have that Ms. Hale? [00:55:52] Just curious. [00:55:53] I have it. [00:55:53] Okay. [00:55:56] Of course you do. [00:55:57] 727 versus our 450 for this project. [00:56:01] Okay. [00:56:03] So I like the project. [00:56:09] You know, you've answered a lot of my questions [00:56:12] and concerns with the exception of that. [00:56:14] I think, and I appreciate you, [00:56:18] the impervious footprint shrinking that. [00:56:23] I'm concerned about the parking. [00:56:26] I understand there's seniors, [00:56:28] and I deal with a lot of seniors, [00:56:30] and they're driving in cars, [00:56:32] and even though they're low income, [00:56:34] they'll find a way to have cars. [00:56:36] And I've recently, I've had experience with in-laws [00:56:40] and other elderly people who are living [00:56:43] in independent living facilities [00:56:45] that some of them have no business being driving, [00:56:47] but they have cars. [00:56:49] But to any extent, I'm a little concerned [00:56:53] about that we planned enough parking there, [00:56:58] and particularly with how you've done your footprint, [00:57:01] maybe there's some way to find a few more parking spots. [00:57:06] So I would offer, and then I know Devin's [00:57:08] gonna have an answer too, [00:57:09] but the city didn't just let us come in here [00:57:11] and say we want to do 1.1 spaces per unit. [00:57:16] We actually had to do a justification and a parking study, [00:57:19] and that's what we provided with our application. [00:57:21] So that was reviewed, and like I say, [00:57:24] they take that seriously as well. [00:57:26] And I'm sure Devin could go into more detail [00:57:28] because he has experience of how do you have to park these. [00:57:36] Yes, so I can certainly talk everyone's ear off [00:57:40] on parking for a long period of time [00:57:42] because this is something that we do spend a lot of time on. [00:57:46] So there's two components on the parking. [00:57:49] The first, as you mentioned, is the senior component. [00:57:51] And to briefly kind of just peel back [00:57:54] just a couple layers on that is the senior component [00:57:58] is less drivers per apartment home. [00:58:02] And so having one or two residents in each apartment home [00:58:07] versus families, which under the previous site plan [00:58:11] may have had high school aged children [00:58:14] living in the apartment community [00:58:15] could have additional vehicles in those homes. [00:58:19] So the first is the age restriction. [00:58:22] And the second component, [00:58:24] which also is another large component to the parking [00:58:29] when we do our corporate national studies [00:58:33] on how much parking we should be developing [00:58:34] at our new construction communities [00:58:36] is the affordable housing element to it. [00:58:38] Because at a lot of these market rate apartment communities [00:58:43] there is not a restriction on how many vehicles [00:58:46] or there is a restriction because market rate residents [00:58:51] can bring multiple vehicles to surface parked parking lots. [00:58:55] For affordable housing, what we've seen [00:58:58] in our 36,000 unit portfolio, [00:59:02] which includes roughly I think seven to 8,000 [00:59:05] apartment homes of senior, [00:59:07] is that in these 36,000 apartment homes [00:59:11] that affordable housing tends to have [00:59:14] less vehicles per driver. [00:59:19] And so for the senior component, [00:59:21] there's the two different pieces, [00:59:23] the less drivers per home [00:59:25] and then the less vehicles per driver. [00:59:28] And when you layer the two on top of one another, [00:59:30] that's the component that tends [00:59:33] to make the big difference here. [00:59:36] And so we, I will say, are developing [00:59:39] within that 1.1 range elsewhere within the state. [00:59:43] We own an apartment community, not in this market, [00:59:45] but in Florida, that is parked at one to one. [00:59:48] And that is a community that I worked on several years ago [00:59:52] and is senior, independent living. [00:59:58] It's been there now for 15 years. [01:00:00] And that one at one-to-one does, every time I went there I had a spot to park. [01:00:06] Now that's one anecdotal component to this, but we also have, as Blair mentioned, [01:00:11] the traffic studies as well as our own internal national traffic studies as well. [01:00:17] So the, to follow up on that a little bit, and I agree with it, so it was 1.1 [01:00:24] and you're basically saying there's going to be one vehicle per unit, [01:00:27] with the exception maybe 10% would have, only 10% would have two vehicles. [01:00:35] The property is located in the city limits, right? [01:00:39] Yes. And we are a golf cart friendly city, which would lead its, you know, [01:00:46] some of those folks who might not have two Lincolns or two Chevys, [01:00:52] they may have a Hyundai and a golf cart. [01:01:00] So the point being is I just, you know, that's, I think that's my concern. [01:01:10] Okay. Mr. Allman, you had a motion? [01:01:15] Yeah, motion to approve on first reading ordinance 2023-2266. [01:01:21] Do we have a second? [01:01:24] Second. [01:01:25] The maker? [01:01:28] Only the, on the parking thing, there's one other element, which is everybody isn't always home [01:01:34] and everyone isn't always staying at the apartment there. [01:01:38] There's a percentage that works that way, and having lived in the Main Street Landing project, [01:01:44] which I still like to call Main Street Landing, even though it's not called that anymore, [01:01:49] there was a lot of concern about whether there would be enough parking. [01:01:53] And as it turns out, with even with retail and residential, a few vacancies, [01:02:01] a few people out of town, folks working different times a day, [01:02:06] some of these seniors will also still be working. [01:02:08] The real issue will become whether or not everyone gets their dedicated space and there's a fight [01:02:14] over the fact that there's no extra parking or whether, but you all are, that's going to be your, [01:02:21] that's going to be your problem if it is one to fix. [01:02:24] And hopefully we'll have a way for the golf carts to get across and back into town. [01:02:29] Otherwise, with 300 and some people, it would be really helpful and probably a relief [01:02:36] for folks needing vehicles if you, if you had a transportation project, [01:02:41] especially one that would bring them into town every night to go to our restaurants. [01:02:46] To the second. [01:02:51] Yeah, I've talked enough. [01:02:52] Thank you. [01:02:54] I don't have anything to add. [01:02:57] Councilman? [01:02:58] Nothing further. [01:02:59] Yeah, I think we've pretty well covered everything. [01:03:05] I do agree with my colleagues mentioning the golf cart issue. [01:03:11] We have got to get together with FDOT and make it legal and more importantly, [01:03:20] safe for people to go across Useless 19 to get to the rest of the city. [01:03:27] It, and that's, that is really in FDOT's lap. [01:03:33] They're the ones that have got to approve it. [01:03:34] They're the ones that have got to recommend timing changes [01:03:38] for the lights to make sure that it's safe. [01:03:41] And yeah, we had another 388 apartments over there. [01:03:46] Given how many people showed up in golf carts Sunday night for a golf cart parade, [01:03:50] which I understand was north of 250, we're going to have another 100 golf carts [01:03:57] if we have one when this thing opens. [01:04:00] They're all going to want to be able to go across U.S. 19 right there at Marine Parkway. [01:04:05] So I, we're on notice. [01:04:10] I do appreciate the fact that you guys are looking for helping out some folks [01:04:15] that have got financial constraints. [01:04:21] Certainly not the only reason to do the project. [01:04:25] And I would like my colleagues to keep in mind that we have some other things that have been sitting [01:04:35] on the to-be-discussed agenda that ultimately will help with affordable housing for people [01:04:42] of all ages and we need to get those back on the front burner. [01:04:50] Anybody, last comments? [01:04:52] Hearing none, all those in favor, [01:04:54] please signify by saying aye. [01:04:56] Aye. Opposed, like sign. [01:04:59] Motion passes. [01:05:01] Next is second reading of Ordinance 2022-2265.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

9. 7.b

   Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2265: Authorizing the Issuance of a Taxable Non-Ad Valorem Revenue Note, Series 2022 RE: 6128 US Highway 19

   approved

   Council approved on second reading Ordinance 2022-2265, authorizing issuance of a taxable non-ad valorem revenue note up to $3 million to finance acquisition of the former SunTrust Building at 6128 US Highway 19 ($2.8M purchase price) and related CRA capital improvements. Staff indicated an RFP will be issued in January 2023 to solicit development proposals combining this property with the adjacent River Road Church property.

   Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2265

   • motion:Motion to approve Ordinance 2022-2265 on second reading authorizing the taxable non-ad valorem revenue note for acquisition of 6128 US Highway 19. (passed)

   📍6128 U.S. Highway 19🏢Bryant, Miller and Olive🏢First Baptist Church🏢Hacienda🏢River Road Church🏢SunTrust Building (former)👤Mr. Allman👤Ms. Metherhead👤Ms. Vance#Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)#Ordinance No. 2022-2265#Redevelopment Work Plan#Series 2022 Taxable Non-Ad Valorem Revenue Note

   ▶ Jump to 1:05:05 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [01:05:05] This is Ordinance Number 2022-2265, an Ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, [01:05:10] Florida authorizing the issuance of a taxable non-ad valorem revenue note, [01:05:14] Series 2022 in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $3 million to finance the cost [01:05:20] of acquisition, construction, and or equipping of various capital improvements [01:05:24] within the redevelopment area of the City of New Port Richey, Florida Community Redevelopment Agency [01:05:30] as described in the Redevelopment Work Plan as amended from time to time, [01:05:34] including without limitation the acquisition of an office building and paying costs related thereto, [01:05:40] providing that the note shall be a limited obligation of the City payable [01:05:43] from non-ad valorem revenues budgeted, appropriated, and deposited as provided herein, [01:05:48] providing for the rights, securities, and remedies for the owner of the note, [01:05:53] providing for severability, and providing an effective date. [01:05:57] Thank you. Ms. Vance. [01:05:58] As indicated by the City Attorney, the purpose of this taxable non-ad valorem revenue note [01:06:04] is to purchase the property located at 6128 U.S. Highway 19, [01:06:10] which is commonly referred to as the former SunTrust Building. [01:06:17] The purchase price was in the amount of $2.8 million. [01:06:22] It was effectuated by a purchase agreement, which was authorized by you on October 19th of 2022. [01:06:33] The aggregate principal amount of the revenue note is in the amount of $3 million. [01:06:41] And Bryant, Miller, and Olive, who serves as the City's Bond Counsel, [01:06:47] has drafted the ordinance that's before you and authorizes the issuance of the bond. [01:06:55] If you approve this agenda item, a request for a proposal will be let in January of 2023, [01:07:05] the purpose of which will be to solicit development proposals [01:07:10] for the property which shall include the property located just east of the subject property, [01:07:17] and which is commonly referred to as the River Road Church property. [01:07:22] And if you have any questions related to this agenda item, please let me know. [01:07:26] Thank you. Open it up for public comment. [01:07:29] Seeing no one coming forward, bring it back to Council. [01:07:33] I move we approve. [01:07:34] Second. [01:07:35] To the maker. [01:07:36] Yeah, we talked about this quite a bit last meeting, [01:07:39] I don't think anything's changed on these. [01:07:42] We've got an item on the CRA coming up, so I'm in favor for it. [01:07:48] Second. [01:07:49] Yeah, we've talked about this before, obviously, [01:07:52] and it's a key piece of the puzzle for that area is redevelopment. [01:07:57] Mr. Allman. [01:07:58] I'll wait for the CRA meeting. [01:08:01] Very good. [01:08:01] Ms. Metherhead. [01:08:02] I have nothing else to add. [01:08:05] I'm glad to see us being able to get this so we can combine it with that church property on South River. [01:08:13] Of all of the parcels that City Council almost 20 years ago went out and bought, [01:08:24] I thought the Hacienda was a great idea. [01:08:26] I could at least justify the First Baptist Church. [01:08:28] But for the life of me, 20 years later, I still can't figure out what possessed them to buy that parcel. [01:08:34] But combining it with the SunTrust parcel will let us get some development ideas out there [01:08:41] that hopefully will make that whole area a lot nicer. [01:08:44] So I'm in favor of it as well. [01:08:48] We have a motion and a second. [01:08:52] Any further discussion? [01:08:55] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:08:58] Aye. [01:08:59] Opposed, like sign. [01:09:00] Motion passes. [01:09:02] Next is a request to waive fees for a proposed Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day event. [01:09:09] The request is to conduct an event in Sims Park on Sunday, January 15, 2022,

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

10. 8.a

    Request to Waive Fees for Proposed Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Event

    approved

    Council approved a request to waive fees for a Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day event to be held in Sims Park on Sunday, January 15, 2023, from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. The event will be co-sponsored by the city along with WGHR Hits 106 FM, the African-American Club of Pasco County, and Friendly Kia, and will include guest speakers and musical performances.

    • motion:Approve the MLK Jr. Day event in Sims Park on January 15, 2023 from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. and waive associated special event fees. (passed)

    📍Pine Hill Road📍Sims Park🏢African-American Club of Pasco County🏢Friendly Kia🏢WGHR Hits 106 FM👤John Gillis👤Mr. Murphy👤Steve Sherdell👤Tim#Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Event

    ▶ Jump to 1:09:13 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:09:17] to honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. [01:09:22] and to waive the fees associated with the event. [01:09:26] Each year on the third Monday of January, America honors the life and dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. [01:09:35] And each year, the important date is celebrated as a federal holiday. [01:09:43] And most federal, state, and local, and many private employers celebrate the holiday by closing their offices for the day. [01:09:52] The city recognizes the holiday by closing its facilities by the day, [01:09:58] which really doesn't seem like enough of an acknowledgement of that important day in history. [01:10:08] So this year, we want to expand the focus by hosting an event in Sims Park devoted to remembering Dr. King's fight for freedom, [01:10:19] equality, and dignity of all races and people through nonviolence. [01:10:25] In that respect, there's been interest expressed, particularly by Steve Sherdell of WGHR Hits 106 FM, in co-sponsoring the event. [01:10:43] And I'm hoping he's not too many steps ahead of me, because sometimes he does get a few steps ahead of me. [01:10:51] And he has indicated that he has made connections with the African-American Club of Pasco County and Friendly Kia, [01:11:03] who are also interested in working along with the city and developing a program platform, [01:11:14] which is due to include some guest speakers and musical performances at this point. [01:11:21] And in order to go further with the event, I need to get your approval to conduct the event between the hours of 11 o'clock a.m. [01:11:31] and 4 o'clock p.m. on Sunday, January 15th, 2022. [01:11:38] Oh, thank you, 2023. [01:11:43] And thank you, Tim. [01:11:44] And for fees normally associated with a special event to be waived. [01:11:49] And if this item is approved, as more details develop related to the event, I will pass them on to you. [01:12:00] Very good. We'll open it up for public comment. [01:12:02] I see members of the African-American Club back in the back. [01:12:09] Seeing nobody coming forward, bring it back to council. [01:12:13] Move for approval. [01:12:14] Second. [01:12:15] To the maker. [01:12:16] No, we've held those events back in the 90s, and it's time to hold them again. [01:12:23] And I'm happy to see us talk in terms of partnership and also to get sponsorship already lining up. [01:12:30] So thank you, Mr. Sherdell. [01:12:32] And thank you, African-American Club. [01:12:34] Last year I was at the event there, and they've already got some good musical vibes that were there, including some of the youth. [01:12:45] And so I look forward to it. [01:12:51] Thank you. [01:12:51] To the second. [01:12:52] Same, looking forward to it. [01:12:53] I'm glad we have a few groups going to partner together to make this happen. [01:12:57] Deputy Mayor? [01:12:59] Yeah, I think years past, there's been some smaller programs there, and there might have been another program within the city. [01:13:06] Maybe the fact that we're helping sponsor this, we can get it combined and have a larger celebration. [01:13:14] Mr. Murphy? [01:13:15] Looking forward to it. [01:13:19] It has historically been a great event with the march down Pine Hill Road and the programs afterwards. [01:13:26] I'm very excited to see the African-American Club be able to take this to the next level. [01:13:31] And certainly thank Mr. Sherdell and Greatest Hits 106, as well as John Gillis and Friendly Kia for stepping up to the plate to help make it even nicer. [01:13:42] Any further discussion? [01:13:44] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:13:47] Aye. [01:13:48] Opposed, like sign. [01:13:50] Motion passes.

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

11. 8.b

    Resolution No. 2023-05: Authorizing Resolution and Interlocal Agreement

    approved

    Council adopted Resolution 2023-05 authorizing issuance of a $3 million taxable non-ad valorem revenue note (Series 2022) from Truist Bank at 5.16% fixed interest, maturing October 1, 2024, to finance acquisition of property within the CRA redevelopment area, and approved an amended and restated debt service reimbursement interlocal agreement between the city and the CRA.

    Ord. Resolution No. 2023-05

    • motion:Move approval of Resolution 2023-05 authorizing the $3M revenue note and the amended and restated interlocal agreement with the CRA. (passed)

    🏢Bryant Miller Olive🏢Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of New Port Richey🏢Ford and Associates🏢Truist Bank👤Chris Rowe👤John Ford👤Murphy#Amended and Restated Debt Service Reimbursement Interlocal Agreement#CRA Redevelopment Work Plan#Resolution 2023-05#Taxable Non-Ad Valorem Revenue Note, Series 2022

    ▶ Jump to 1:13:51 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:13:51] Next, resolution 2023-05. [01:13:54] This is resolution number 2023-05, a resolution of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, [01:13:59] authorizing the emissions of a not to exceed $3 million taxable non-ad valorem revenue note, [01:14:05] series 2022 of the city to finance the cost of acquisition, construction, and or equipping of various capital improvements [01:14:12] within the redevelopment area of the city of New Port Richey, Florida. [01:14:15] The community redevelopment agency as described in the redevelopment work plan, as amended from time to time, [01:14:21] including without limitation the acquisition of an office building and paying costs related thereto, [01:14:25] providing that the note shall be a limited obligation of the city payable for non-ad valorem revenues budgeted, [01:14:31] appropriated, and deposited as provided herein, providing for the right securities and remedies for the owner of the note, [01:14:36] approving the form of and authorizing the execution of an amended and restated interlocal agreement [01:14:42] between the city and the community redevelopment agency of the city, [01:14:46] making certain covenants and agreements in connection therewith, and providing for an effective date. [01:14:51] Yes, ma'am. [01:14:52] As indicated by the city attorney, the purpose of the agenda item is to request that the city [01:15:00] Council authorize the resolution with which authorizes the issuance of the [01:15:07] taxable non-ad valorem revenue note series 2022 in the amount of three [01:15:15] million dollars to finance the cost of the acquisition within the redevelopment [01:15:23] area and secondly to approve the form and the execution of the amended and [01:15:30] restated debt service reimbursement interlocal agreement between the city of [01:15:36] New Port Richey and the Community Redevelopment Agency of the city of New [01:15:42] New Port Richey and in that regard we have John Ford of Ford and Associates present [01:15:50] this evening who will review for you the terms and conditions related to the [01:15:58] taxable non-ad valorem revenue note and we have Chris Rowe of Bryant Miller and [01:16:04] Olive present this evening who will present to you the details of the [01:16:11] amended and restated debt service reimbursement interlocal agreement at [01:16:16] the conclusion of that we will collectively respond to any questions [01:16:22] that you may have of us. Thank you. Mr. Ford. Thank you very much. Thank you for [01:16:29] having me. Again my name is John Ford. I'm with Ford and Associates. We serve [01:16:32] advisor as advisor to the city of New Port Richey. The transaction in front [01:16:37] of you is pretty straightforward. This is a fixed-rate three million dollar loan [01:16:41] from Truist Bank to the city of New Port Richey. It is scheduled to mature on [01:16:46] October 1st 2024. This is a taxable transaction. The interest rate on this [01:16:52] transaction is 5.16 percent. The loan is being issued for the purposes that the [01:16:57] city manager already outlined to help purchase a property to advance the city's [01:17:01] goals. Cost of issuance associated with this transaction are estimated at about [01:17:07] $66,000. I am available to answer any financial questions that you have. As [01:17:13] she mentioned, Mr. Chris Rowe from Brian Miller Olive, your bond counsel, is also [01:17:17] with us here for any legal questions. Thank you. Open up for public comment. [01:17:23] Seeing no one come forward, bring back to counsel. May I have a quick one question? [01:17:29] Just one quick question. There's no early payment penalty associated with this, right? [01:17:34] I should have said that. Thank you. There is no early prepayment penalty at any [01:17:38] time without penalty. We have a motion. I'll move approval of the resolution 2023-05. [01:17:48] Second. To the maker? No, I think it's been well explained. It's going to be up to our [01:17:55] other job with our other hat on it to make this happen and make it work out, [01:18:01] but it's an exciting opportunity for the city and I'm happy to see that it has [01:18:06] happened so quickly. To the second? Yeah, I'll echo those comments as well and I [01:18:13] guess we've kind of got a deadline on here, October 2024, to get a deal [01:18:20] together. Counselman? Glad to see it moving forward. Mr. Murphy? No, nothing. In that case, all those in [01:18:27] favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is a

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

12. 8.c

    Public Hearing, Special Waste Hauling Applications for the 2023 Calendar Year

    approved

    Council held a public hearing and approved special waste hauling permit applications for six (listed as seven entities) haulers for the 2023 calendar year. The permits will only run for 11 months, expiring December 2, 2023, when the city becomes eligible to transition to a single hauler system.

    • motion:Motion to approve the Waste Hauler Special Permit Applications for the 2023 calendar year for the six listed haulers. (passed)

    📍5619 Virginia Avenue🏢County Recycling Incorporated🏢Peterson's Service Corporation🏢Republic Services of Florida, LP🏢Waste Connections Incorporated🏢Waste Management Incorporated of Florida🏢Waste Pro of Florida Incorporated👤Barrett Doe👤Denise Houston👤Ms. Manns#$500 special permit application fee#10% franchise fee#Single hauler system transition (Dec 2, 2023)

    ▶ Jump to 1:18:33 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:18:33] public hearing regarding the special waste hauling applications for the 2023 [01:18:38] calendar year. [01:18:45] This year, as we have in previous years, we are asking you to consider applications [01:18:54] for special waste haulers to conduct their business in the city by approving [01:19:02] their permit applications for 2023. There are six applications before you. There's [01:19:12] one point I'd like to make before I turn it over to Mr. Doe for a bit of [01:19:19] discussion and presentation. This application will not span through the [01:19:27] full calendar year. It will be an 11-month year. As you'll recall, I'm sure, [01:19:34] the city issued notice almost, or just over two years ago, that we would be [01:19:47] likely going to a single hauler system. And that notice was issued in December, [01:19:56] meaning that in December of 2023, on December 2nd of 2023, we are eligible to [01:20:07] go to a single hauler system. So therefore, the contracts and the permit [01:20:16] applications that you are approving tonight will only span through basically [01:20:24] the end of November or up until December 2nd of 2023. And I wanted to make that [01:20:33] point clear. And Barrett, if you want to go ahead and introduce the remainder of [01:20:38] the agenda item, I'd appreciate it. Yes, thank you, Ms. Manns, Mayor and Council. Again, [01:20:43] the request of staff for Council is to consider for approval the Waste Hauler [01:20:47] Special Permit Applications for the calendar year 2023, submitted by County [01:20:53] Recycling Incorporated, DBA County Sanitation, Waste Pro of Florida [01:20:57] Incorporated, DBA J.D. Parker & Sons, Republic Services of Florida, LP DBA [01:21:02] Seaside Sanitation, Waste Connections Incorporated, Waste Management [01:21:07] Incorporated of Florida, and Peterson's Service Corporation. All the Waste [01:21:12] Haulers are currently conducting business in the city, are collecting the [01:21:15] 10% franchise fee, and have paid their $500 special permit application fee. This [01:21:21] past year, there were only two complaints that we received. One for violating the [01:21:25] permitted operational time frame for hours, and one for not securing their [01:21:30] load while traveling. Once we found out about those, the contractors were [01:21:35] notified and the issues were corrected immediately. No further problems. Funding [01:21:41] received by the city is identified as a revenue source to the city's general [01:21:44] fund, and approval of these submitted Waste Hauler Special Permit [01:21:50] Applications is recommended. Thank you. This is a public hearing, so it's open [01:21:57] for public comment. Denise Houston, 5619 Virginia Avenue, and I just want to add [01:22:15] that I'm really looking forward to next year when we have a single service on [01:22:20] the Trash Haulers, because some of them go down our street twice. So with all [01:22:27] those haulers, you know, I'm one of these forward-thinking people on our [01:22:32] infrastructure, and I look at the road and it's starting to crack. Or sometimes [01:22:36] they go down the street, I didn't know you could complain, but when they go down [01:22:40] the street in reverse, and they pick up, and then you see them come around again [01:22:44] and go down the street. I've had the same hauler go down my street three times [01:22:49] maybe, and that doesn't include recycle. So thank you for looking. I'm looking [01:22:54] forward to the single hauler. I think putting it on our, I'm looking [01:22:59] forward to the prices being cheaper. Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no one else [01:23:06] coming forward, bring it back to Council. Move for approval. Second. No, I think [01:23:11] this issue has been well described. The bigger issue is one that deserves a lot [01:23:17] of conversation, but this is not the time for it, so I'll look forward to it. [01:23:21] Second. No, nothing on this. I mean, we'll be addressing the bigger picture next year. [01:23:26] So, Deputy Mayor? Yeah, I echo the comments of Denise there. I look forward to it as [01:23:33] well, and so we'll get it, we'll get on through to, through November. I agree. In [01:23:41] that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. [01:23:45] Motion passes. Next, HID fingerprint machine. The action being requested is to

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

13. 8.d

    HID Fingerprint Machine Hardware and Software Upgrade

    approved

    Council approved a $6,792.20 purchase from HID Global for a fingerprint machine hardware and software upgrade for the police department, funded through the equitable sharing account. The existing fingerprint machine is end-of-life and no longer supported.

    • motion:Approve purchase from HID Global for fingerprint machine hardware and software upgrade in the amount of $6,792.20 using equitable sharing funds. (passed)

    🏢HID Global👤Mr. Green👤Ms. Manns#Equitable sharing funds

    ▶ Jump to 1:23:51 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:23:54] purchase from a vendor, HID Global, some support hardware and software upgrade. [01:24:03] The reason that a purchase in the amount of $6,792.20 [01:24:12] before you is because we are requesting the use of equitable sharing funds, and [01:24:18] Mr. Green is going to present the agenda item. Yeah, thank you. So, as Ms. Manns [01:24:27] mentioned, we want to use funds from the equitable sharing account, and this is [01:24:33] the fingerprint machine used by the police department. It is end-of-life. [01:24:41] It's a no longer supported device. There's a new one. We're up for renewal to [01:24:48] replace it, so this is to get a new improved one device, both the scanner and [01:24:56] the reader, as well as included in that price is for licensing and hardware [01:25:06] support. So, I'm just looking for the board's approval. Thank you. We'll open up [01:25:12] for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. Move [01:25:18] approval. Second. Maker? No, sir. Second? Deputy Mayor? Useful life for this [01:25:25] equipment? I'm sorry? What is the projected useful life? Well, I mean, they use this [01:25:34] to fingerprint and send those prints to the county and everything [01:25:41] like that for, you know, just to get feedback about... Maybe a better [01:25:49] question would be, how old is the one we have now? It's end-of-life. They don't [01:25:54] support that particular hardware. So, hopefully new ones, you know, more [01:25:57] software upgradeable and last longer. I'm thinking my iPhone reads fingerprints [01:26:01] pretty good, but, you know, but yeah. Okay, that's good. Yeah, I get it. Gotta have it. [01:26:08] This is a pretty MacDaddy system though, right? Yes, it is. It's newer model and [01:26:16] like you said, it'll go with the future. [01:26:22] Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying [01:26:27] aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is a request for approval to... for [01:26:34] the reserve fire engine emergency repair. You missed one. [01:26:39] Professional service? Oh, I'm sorry, I missed one. Professional services. Yes, the [01:26:44] request is to enter into a contract with Ayers & Associates to provide [01:26:49] professional engineering services for the city in amount not to exceed [01:26:56] $40,000. The land development code provides for the office of a city [01:27:02] engineer, the appointment is for a one-year term. The city has had a good [01:27:09] experience with Ayers & Associates as they have served as the city engineer

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

14. 8.e

    Professional Service Agreement RE: City Engineering Services for 2023

    approved

    Council approved a $40,000 professional services agreement with the city's contracted engineering firm (Avers/Ayers) for 2023 city engineering services, with no fee increase from prior years. Councilmembers Altman and another councilman expressed a desire for the contracted engineer to be more involved in council-level discussions on major projects, stormwater, and resiliency planning.

    • motion:Authorize the City Manager to enter into a professional service agreement with the contracted engineering firm for 2023 city engineering services at $40,000. (passed)

    🏢Ayers👤Altman#City Engineering Services 2023#Regional Planning Council resiliency action plan#Trouble Creek stormwater#comprehensive plan

    ▶ Jump to 1:27:10 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:27:16] for a number of years. They provided a diverse team of skilled professionals. [01:27:23] They are requesting a fee in the amount of $40,000 to continue serving in the [01:27:32] capacity of city engineer. That does not represent a fee increase over last year's [01:27:39] budgeted amount. In fact, they have not increased the amount of their fee in the [01:27:45] last three years. As indicated, they provide a wide range of architectural [01:27:55] and engineering services and we are recommending that you consider [01:28:00] authorizing myself to enter into an agreement with them to continue services. [01:28:07] Thank you. We'll open up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back [01:28:12] to council. Move we approve. Second. To the maker. Yeah, I know some of my fellow [01:28:24] council members have talked time to time that we ought to put on staff a city [01:28:28] engineer. I'm not sure that's in the budget at this point and I think they've [01:28:37] served as well. You know, you look at some of these things as far as [01:28:43] what engineers fees are and so forth and I know there's demands but you know we [01:28:53] have a lot of corporations are in various types of businesses and they [01:29:00] elect to farm out or contract with exterior services of specialized [01:29:08] abilities in education and I think and that you know those for-profit [01:29:17] people find that to be the best most efficient way to do certain things like [01:29:21] that so I'm I'm in agreement to contract with the engineer. To the second. [01:29:27] Nothing further. Yeah, I think I've made my comments before, not exactly as described. [01:29:38] My wish is that the city engineer, much like the city attorney, serves both the [01:29:45] city's administrative position roles and requirements but also the city councils [01:29:52] and so I'm just old-school remembering engineer at some of our meetings at [01:29:59] least when we [01:30:00] had discussions about capital improvements and decisions [01:30:04] to be made, whether they were drainage [01:30:06] or discussing those things. [01:30:09] It seems to me that we have stepped away [01:30:13] from being as involved in that. [01:30:15] We had some really involved questions tonight [01:30:17] about this new project that was coming into town, [01:30:20] questions about parking, questions about layout [01:30:24] and stormwater and other things. [01:30:27] It's helpful to have that expert handy sometimes [01:30:30] when we're having discussions just [01:30:34] to bring some of the scientific mind to play. [01:30:39] And if you look up the definition of a city engineer [01:30:42] or the old city engineer's oath of offices [01:30:46] when they serve in those capacities, [01:30:50] they serve the board as well. [01:30:52] And I'm certainly happy to proceed with the firm that [01:30:56] serves the city staff well, but I'll [01:31:00] continue to believe that I enjoy understanding those details. [01:31:06] Seems like we have curiosity up here. [01:31:08] We've even done some pretty good work as a board [01:31:11] when we identified at a workshop the parking lots [01:31:16] and gave some input being involved in those decisions. [01:31:19] So it's been a comment that I've raised, [01:31:23] and maybe Ayers is a good person for you [01:31:27] to bring around once in a while if you [01:31:29] think that there's a discussion that relates to that. [01:31:33] Being told that we're following a five-year plan [01:31:36] is a very good thing for our departments to do, [01:31:44] but for us to be able to be a little more nimble up here [01:31:48] in terms of looking at reasons, for example, [01:31:52] why we haven't moved to master plan, storm our sewer [01:31:58] into the Trouble Creek area, where we've had known pollution [01:32:03] for many years because it's not in our plan, [01:32:06] or not being able to have that discussion with somebody [01:32:10] to say, why wouldn't we go into our service area? [01:32:13] Why wouldn't we lay those pipes out there? [01:32:15] Why wouldn't we claim that new land to become part of ours? [01:32:19] If we're concerned about it being in the high hazard area, [01:32:22] and we just don't want to be there, that's one thing. [01:32:26] But the more of that kind of land we have, [01:32:29] the better our insurance rates get. [01:32:30] And so I like to be involved in those discussions, [01:32:33] and I'm not really favorable of hiring consultants and paying [01:32:38] them $20,000 and $30,000 to come back and tell me the results [01:32:42] of that without participating. [01:32:44] So Councilman, that's really my thing, [01:32:48] is just for us to continue to be in the loop [01:32:51] of these kind of decisions, and particularly [01:32:54] in light of what I said at the last meeting, which [01:32:57] is comprehensive plan. [01:32:59] In the next few weeks, I think we'll [01:33:01] get a request from the Regional Planning Council [01:33:04] to come and talk to us about resiliency. [01:33:06] And with that, there's an action plan [01:33:09] that has a whole lot of potential changes [01:33:13] that we could make anywhere from just our whole philosophy [01:33:19] on how we're going to work ourself into the future, [01:33:24] and I guess the one most common element of psychology, [01:33:30] which is fight or flight. [01:33:32] So I mean, there's folks saying we [01:33:33] need to just evacuate the high hazard areas, [01:33:36] and there's others that are saying, [01:33:37] let's do better construction. [01:33:40] And there are examples of communities [01:33:42] that did well in the midst of that hurricane that [01:33:47] didn't have damage because of the designs [01:33:49] and the way in which they built into the future. [01:33:52] So I'm naturally curious, and I appreciate all the good advice [01:33:56] they give. [01:33:58] I'd like for us to get a little bit of it in real time. [01:34:04] Thank you. [01:34:04] Councilman? [01:34:07] I would echo Mr. Altman's comment. [01:34:10] It really would have been helpful tonight [01:34:13] if we'd had an outside engineer who [01:34:18] could have talked to us directly from an unbiased perspective [01:34:25] on what exactly was going to be involved [01:34:29] with the proposed project. [01:34:32] And as that project gets a little further along, [01:34:34] I think there may be some opportunities for that. [01:34:36] So I would love to see some input from a city [01:34:42] engineer on, does this affect us? [01:34:45] And there's nothing stopping us if we particularly [01:34:48] see a major project like that come along [01:34:50] that we ask our contracted engineer to participate, right? [01:34:57] Our contract engineer is qualified [01:35:01] to provide the type of response you're looking for. [01:35:06] The firm offers a wide range of skills. [01:35:12] I'll just need to ensure that we send the right staff person. [01:35:15] If you would make that happen, I would feel more comfortable. [01:35:20] And we've got some things that are [01:35:23] going to be coming up probably sooner rather than later, [01:35:29] not the least of which is hopefully [01:35:31] a proposal to redevelop the parcel that we're [01:35:34] in the process of buying. [01:35:37] And knowing how that ties in with the issues of stormwater [01:35:45] drainage with housing that isn't going [01:35:49] to blow over the first time we get a storm. [01:35:54] All of that, having some input, professional input [01:35:57] from somebody that actually understands that stuff [01:36:00] would be very helpful, I think. [01:36:02] Environmental person, absolutely. [01:36:03] For the council. [01:36:06] Any further discussion? [01:36:08] Hearing none, all those in favor, [01:36:10] please signify by saying aye. [01:36:12] Aye. [01:36:13] Opposed, like sign. [01:36:14] Motion passes. [01:36:15] Now we'll go to the request for approval

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

15. 8.f

    Request Approval for Reserve Fire Engine Emergency Repair

    approved

    Council approved $27,503.08 in emergency repairs to a 2009 Pierce Impel reserve fire engine pumper truck following a mechanical failure. The repair includes a three-year/1,800-hour warranty on parts and labor. Funding comes from $15,000 in auction proceeds from the recently sold 2004 American LaFrance pumper and $12,510 from budgeted savings on unfilled fire department positions.

    • motion:Approve emergency repair of the 2009 Pierce Impel reserve fire engine pumper for $27,503.08, funded by $15,000 from auction proceeds of the 2004 American LaFrance and $12,510 from unfilled fire department position savings. (passed)

    🏢American LaFrance🏢Pierce👤Deputy Mayor👤Fire Chief#2004 American LaFrance fire engine pumper#2009 Pierce Impel pumper truck

    ▶ Jump to 1:36:17 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:36:17] for reserve fire engine emergency repair. [01:36:24] So the purpose of the agenda item [01:36:29] is to request permission from you [01:36:32] to tend to some necessary repairs to a 2009 Pierce Impel [01:36:38] pumper truck, which serves as our reserve [01:36:41] engine within the fleet apparatus in the amount [01:36:47] of $27,503.08. [01:36:53] And the reason we are required to tend to this repair [01:37:01] is the result of a mechanical failure that occurred. [01:37:07] And if we go forward with the repair, which [01:37:12] is our recommended course of action [01:37:15] after the fire chief has investigated [01:37:18] a good number of alternatives, we [01:37:24] would receive a three year or 1,800 hour [01:37:29] warranty on the labor and part associated with the work. [01:37:38] We are recommending that $15,000 of the repair costs [01:37:48] be funded through the auction proceeds from the 2004 American [01:37:54] LaFrance fire engine pumper truck that recently [01:37:59] went to sale. [01:38:01] And $12,510 of the budgeted savings [01:38:07] come from unfilled positions in the fire department. [01:38:11] Is there something about this item [01:38:15] that you'd like to present, chief? [01:38:17] Should I just say a couple things? [01:38:21] This engine is currently in a reserve status. [01:38:23] So the industry standard is a front line apparatus, [01:38:27] a pumper truck of this sort stays [01:38:30] in a front line position for 10 years [01:38:33] and it rotates to reserve for five years. [01:38:35] Obviously, this fluctuates in time [01:38:38] with the amount of use, mileage, and hour [01:38:42] ratings on the vehicle. [01:38:44] But we need this vehicle to fall back on in the event [01:38:47] that our front line engine goes down [01:38:50] for preventative maintenance or any needed repairs [01:38:54] of that sort. [01:38:57] Thank you. [01:38:58] I'll open it up for public comment. [01:39:00] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [01:39:03] Move approval. [01:39:03] Second. [01:39:05] Maker? [01:39:06] Sounds good. [01:39:07] Second. [01:39:08] I guess it'd be pretty important if one engine went down, [01:39:11] we had a reserve to put out the fire, right? [01:39:17] Deputy Mayor? [01:39:18] Chief, if this vehicle is currently [01:39:21] in good operational order without need for the pumps [01:39:23] and we decided to take the option, [01:39:25] what could we sell it for? [01:39:28] It's tough to say. [01:39:29] I did a lot of research on that. [01:39:35] I would say if we sold it after the pump was fixed, [01:39:42] it would probably be worth anywhere [01:39:43] between $60,000 and $100,000. [01:39:48] Between, did you say $60,000 and $100,000? [01:39:50] $60,000 and $100,000. [01:39:51] Because it's fixed. [01:39:53] It's pretty hard to find a definitive value [01:39:56] on used fire trucks. [01:40:00] And the guidelines of up to 10 years and in five years, [01:40:03] those are guidelines. [01:40:04] It could be extended longer than that, right? [01:40:07] That's correct. [01:40:08] Thank you. [01:40:09] To wit the 18-year-old pumper we just sold. [01:40:14] Any further discussion? [01:40:17] Hearing none, all those in favor, [01:40:18] please signify by saying aye. [01:40:20] Aye. [01:40:21] Opposed, like sign.

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

16. 8.g

    Request for CIP Purchase for Two Wilo Submersible Pumps

    approved

    Council approved a CIP purchase of two Wilo brand submersible pumps (15 and 1.1 horsepower) for $20,679 to be used at the wastewater treatment plant's lift station number three. Funds were reallocated from a previously budgeted blower system for the Schreiber tank, which is on hold pending evaluation. Pasco County will contribute 49.3% of the cost via interlocal agreement.

    • motion:Approve the CIP purchase of two Wilo submersible pumps for $20,679 for wastewater treatment plant lift station number three. (passed)

    🏢Pasco County🏢Wilo👤Mr. Allman👤Mr. Dahl👤Mr. Murphy👤Ms. Manns#CIP (Capital Improvement Plan)#Interlocal agreement with Pasco County#Lift station number three#Schreiber tank

    ▶ Jump to 1:40:22 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:40:22] Motion passes. [01:40:23] Next, request for CIP purchase of two Willow submersible [01:40:27] pumps. [01:40:28] Mr. Dahl, will you present the agenda item? [01:40:30] Yes, thank you, Ms. Manns, again, and Mayor and Council. [01:40:33] For your consideration is the approval [01:40:36] of the purchase of two Willow brand submersible 15 and 1 [01:40:40] 1 horsepower pumps at a cost of $20,679. [01:40:46] So the funding for these two Willow pumps [01:40:49] was originally budgeted in the CIP [01:40:51] for a blower system for the Schreiber [01:40:54] tank, which is located at the wastewater treatment [01:40:56] plant at a cost of $35,000. [01:41:00] And the blower system for the Schreiber tank, [01:41:04] long story short, is basically aeration for treatment process [01:41:08] out there within that Schreiber tank. [01:41:11] Recently, several issues aside from the need for a new blower [01:41:15] have come up with this Schreiber tank. [01:41:18] And we are currently in the evaluation process [01:41:20] of how to proceed with what is needed [01:41:22] and what we need to do in the future for this Schreiber tank. [01:41:28] So subsequent to that, to the blower being put on hold, [01:41:32] staff is recommending that the budgeted CIP funds [01:41:36] be used for the purchase of these two 15 and 1 1 [01:41:39] horsepower pumps and that they be [01:41:41] used for the wastewater treatment plant's lift [01:41:44] station number three. [01:41:47] Main reason, recently, one of the two pumps for lift station [01:41:51] number three went down. [01:41:52] So this purchase would put that station back to full power. [01:41:56] And then we would also have a spare pump [01:41:58] as redundancy if needed. [01:42:00] So one of the lift stations out at the wastewater plant [01:42:04] is still operational. [01:42:05] Everything's fine. [01:42:07] It just is operating on one pump. [01:42:09] So this purchase would get another pump [01:42:11] in that lift station as well as provide for another [01:42:14] as backup if needed. [01:42:16] Funding for the purchase is identified in the city's [01:42:19] current CIP, as I stated. [01:42:21] And also of note, by interlocal agreement, [01:42:24] Pasco County will contribute 49.3% [01:42:28] of the cost for the purchase of the pumps. [01:42:31] And approval of the purchase of the two pumps is recommended. [01:42:35] Thank you. [01:42:36] Open up for public comment. [01:42:38] Seeing none, I'll bring it back to council. [01:42:41] I move we approve. [01:42:44] I second. [01:42:44] To the maker? [01:42:47] Yeah, just a quick question. [01:42:49] So right now, if that, as we were positioned now, [01:42:54] that pump goes down, what do we do? [01:42:56] We'd be able to isolate that station and divert flows. [01:43:00] It's all connected to our SCADA system. [01:43:01] We have staff there 24-7. [01:43:03] Oh, we're not in the middle of a big storm. [01:43:05] No, no. [01:43:06] We would be fine. [01:43:07] It's just we need our lift stations [01:43:09] operating at full capacity. [01:43:13] I understand. [01:43:13] So yeah, I think there's some big discussion still [01:43:21] we need to have regarding the big picture here. [01:43:24] But I'll approve that. [01:43:25] It's just not, you know, it's like tires. [01:43:28] They ain't pretty, but you got to have them. [01:43:30] Give it a second. [01:43:31] That's what I was going to say, too, [01:43:33] some things you got to have. [01:43:37] Mr. Allman? [01:43:38] Only, I guess, if our department has a backup, [01:43:41] we need a backup, so we don't have a backup. [01:43:49] Mr. Murphy? [01:43:51] Yeah, if you think tires ain't pretty, let me tell you. [01:43:57] One of these lift station goes down, [01:43:59] it'll bring a whole not pretty to another level. [01:44:04] There's no further discussion. [01:44:05] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:44:08] Aye. [01:44:09] Opposed, like sign. [01:44:10] Motion passes. [01:44:11] Next, amendment to the personnel rules and regs

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

17. 8.h

    Amendment to the Personnel Rules and Regulations Human Resources Policy Manual RE: Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve Holidays

    approved

    Council approved an amendment to the Personnel Rules and Regulations to provide a half-day holiday for Christmas Eve and a half-day for New Year's Eve, while subtracting one floating holiday from full-time staff accrual beginning December 21, 2022. The total recognized holidays remains at 15 per year. Councilman Allman also requested a future budget discussion about restoring city Christmas/family events.

    • motion:Approve amendment to Personnel Rules and Regulations to provide half-day holidays for Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve and subtract one floating holiday from full-time staff accrual beginning December 21, 2022. (passed)

    👤Allman#Personnel Rules and Regulations Human Resources Policy Manual

    ▶ Jump to 1:44:13 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [01:44:15] regarding Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve holidays. [01:44:18] Some time ago, I had discussion with each of you [01:44:24] related to changing the holidays that city employees, [01:44:33] that were recognized for city employees. [01:44:36] Specifically, I talked about an amendment to the personnel [01:44:39] rules and regulations to afford an acknowledgment of a half [01:44:46] day for Christmas Eve and a half day for New Year's Eve. [01:44:50] I didn't, though, follow through with an official amendment [01:44:54] to the personnel rules. [01:44:56] So at this time, I'm asking for an amendment. [01:45:00] Amendment to the Personnel Rules and Regulations, which would afford a half-day holiday for [01:45:10] Christmas Eve and recognizing a half-day holiday for New Year's Eve, and would also subtract [01:45:19] a one-floating holiday from each full-time staff member's accrual beginning on December [01:45:27] 21, 2022. The City recognizes 15 holidays per year currently. We would continue to [01:45:38] recognize then 15 holidays. I have done or conducted recent studies with COMP communities [01:45:50] to determine where we rate in terms of the recognition of holidays. I like to fall about [01:45:58] in the middle or just above the middle in terms of the holidays that we recognize, which [01:46:06] is why I thought we should reduce one floating holiday in recognition of the fact that we [01:46:13] would be providing an extra day off for city employees. So that's my recommendation to [01:46:18] you. Thank you. I'll open it up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to [01:46:24] council. Move for approval. I'll second. To the maker? I'll just say that, you know, keeping the same [01:46:33] amount, so. To the second? Yep, keeping the same number of holidays, but giving them some extra time. Deputy Mayor? I'm sure I would rather have a half a day [01:46:44] rather than a full day. But that's pretty tough. I have that same struggle with my office, so I think this is a good decision. Mr. Allman? I'll go along. I would note that since we're talking about Christmas and New Year's, that I miss the old Christmas parties we used to have when we would have spouses and family get together as a city, and I thought it was very [01:47:12] good to have our different departments have opportunity to all meet each other's spouses. And for some austerity purpose or reason, that has been left out. So I'm happy to be in the middle of the holiday and vacation day among other cities, but I would like to see when we do next year's budget to have a discussion about [01:47:42] putting back some recognition of families where we can have some events that will be more bigger team building, because our spouses are our team as well. And I know, it seemed to me they enjoyed it, and I got to meet families more than just the people. And when you do the lunches, it seems they take shifts, and one comes and the other covers. I like having an event. [01:48:11] So maybe next year. I know we talked about this at some point in the past. I honestly thought we'd actually already done it, but I'm certainly amenable to making this available, and I'm sure the staff will appreciate it. If there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is communications. I'll kick it off.

    This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

18. 9Communications▶ 1:48:39
19. 10Adjournment▶ 2:02:54