On the agenda

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

   Pledge of Allegiance

   Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

   ▶ Jump to 0:22 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:25] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for [00:00:33] which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.

   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.a

   September 18, 2025 CRA Meeting Minutes

   approved

   The CRA Board approved the minutes from the September 18, 2025 CRA meeting.

   • motion:Motion to approve the September 18, 2025 CRA meeting minutes. (passed)

   #September 18, 2025 CRA Meeting Minutes

   ▶ Jump to 0:45 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:45] All righty, can I get a motion for approval of the minutes? To approve. All in favor? Aye. 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.

4. 3.b

   October 21, 2025 CRA Meeting Minutes

   approved

   The CRA Board approved the minutes from the October 21, 2025 CRA Meeting with a voice vote.

   • motion:Motion to approve the October 21, 2025 CRA Meeting Minutes. (passed)

   #October 21, 2025 CRA Meeting Minutes

   ▶ Jump to 0:45 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:45] All righty, can I get a motion for approval of the minutes? To approve. All in favor? Aye. 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.

5. 4.a

   Purchases/Payments for CRA Board Approval

   approvedon consent

   The CRA Board approved the consent agenda containing purchases/payments for CRA Board approval.

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

   ▶ Jump to 1:00 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:01:00] Could I get a motion for the consent agenda? Well that went up. I'll move to approve. I'll second. [00:01:09] All in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Moving on to business items. 5A, proposed

   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.

6. 5.a

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Main Street Landing project” — transcript expanded below

   Proposed Villa del Sol Redevelopment Agreement

   approved

   The CRA Board considered a proposed redevelopment agreement for the former community hospital site (Villa del Sol), a 23.69-acre parcel at Marine Parkway and Grand Boulevard, to be developed by NPR Grand One LLC (Grady Pridgen) into 300 apartments and ~153-160 single-family attached townhomes with a $150M capital investment. Staff presented a $23M incentive package including 12.5% capital reimbursement over 15 years, $3M public infrastructure reimbursement, 75% of building/permitting fees, and 100% of a reclaimed water line cost. The Board moved to approve authorization to negotiate the redevelopment agreement.

   • motion:Motion to approve authorization to negotiate a redevelopment agreement with NPR Grand One LLC for the Villa del Sol project under the proposed incentive package terms. (passed)

   📍northeast corner of Marine Parkway and Grand Boulevard🏢HCA🏢NPR Grand One LLC🏢Pridgen Development Company👤Eric👤Grady Pridgen👤Mr. Gammon👤Mr. Starkey👤Ms. Manns#2012 Community Redevelopment Plan#2019 CRP#2025-26 CRA budget#2026 CRP#Fire Station Number Two easement#Grand Boulevard bridge#Main Street Landing project#Swetman Center#Villa del Sol

   ▶ Jump to 1:15 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:01:19] Villa del Sol redevelopment agreement. Thank you very much. I'll initiate the [00:01:27] discussion on this agenda item. As you know, for some time now I have been [00:01:33] talking to Pridgen Development Company and we have Mr. Grady Pridgen in [00:01:36] attendance this evening to represent this agenda item about the redevelopment [00:01:42] of the former community hospital site. And tonight's agenda item is in large [00:01:50] part requesting your permission to negotiate a development agreement with [00:01:56] him in accordance with some specific terms which we'll outline to you this [00:02:01] evening in the form of an economic incentive package which we're presenting [00:02:07] for your review and consideration in respect to the former community hospital [00:02:13] site which is 23.69 acres in size and which he is proposing for use as a [00:02:23] residential project which will house 160 single-family attached units and 300 [00:02:31] apartments. The property is located at the northeast corner of Marine Parkway [00:02:35] and Grand Boulevard. And I'm going to allow Mr. Gammon, our economic development [00:02:43] director, to fully present the agenda item to you and he's prepared a [00:02:48] PowerPoint presentation and is prepared, as I am, to respond to what questions you [00:02:55] may have of us at the conclusion of the presentation. Mr. Gammon. Thank you, Ms. [00:03:02] Manns, Mr. Chairman, fellow directors. We're delighted here to be here tonight [00:03:07] obviously. This has been a long time coming, longer than my tenure obviously, [00:03:10] and longer than a lot of ours. So we're happy to be here to see if we can get [00:03:14] Villa del Sol to become a reality. How we doing, Eric, on the slides? [00:03:25] Well, if you had that slide up there you can see what it says. Okay, there you go. [00:03:33] There we are. Specifically, we're looking for authorization to negotiate a [00:03:38] redevelopment agreement between the city, the CRA, and a entity called NPR Grand [00:03:45] One LLC with the manager, Mr. Grady Pridgen, who's in the audience with us [00:03:50] tonight. He will be manager of that LLC. We have negotiated and agreed to terms [00:03:56] with Mr. Pridgen and once we memorialize that, we'd like to put it in a [00:04:01] redevelopment agreement and we will return to this board for formal [00:04:05] consideration. As Ms. Manns indicated, we are talking about a 24-acre site [00:04:12] basically at Marine and Grand. This is the former HCA community hospital site [00:04:17] which has mainly sat vacant after the demolition of the hospital that [00:04:23] relocated to Trinity way back in 2012. [00:04:31] I think this is a pretty interesting slide here. If you look back at property [00:04:35] values, CRA uses a base year of 2001. In 2001, when that hospital was there, the [00:04:43] valuation taxable value was about 23 and a half million dollars. Last year, it [00:04:48] was about 5.8 million. It's been a big hit on CRA not to have income [00:04:52] coming from this parcel for quite some time. [00:04:59] Redevelopment has been considered, contemplated for several years. In fact, [00:05:03] it was in the 2012 community redevelopment plan as identified as an [00:05:09] area for focus area. In the 2019 CRP, it was again highlighted as a redevelopment [00:05:16] target and we are going to have it in the 2026 CRP plan that we are [00:05:22] working on right now that you will see sometime soon. It identifies [00:05:27] it as an area that's a pillar for the community where redevelopment should be [00:05:32] focused. That's again the rest of the 2019 CRP and this is our 2016 that we [00:05:41] are working on. Let's talk about the concept real quick. Current status of [00:05:50] property is under contract. We'll close when we get all of his ducks in a row, [00:05:54] which we're working on doing. This is one of the ducks. Once purchased, the owner [00:05:57] developer will be NPR Grand One LLC. Again, Grady Pritchard is manager. It's [00:06:03] going to be a vital link, I think, between US 19 and the downtown area. As you [00:06:08] will recall, this council approved, not this council, but the City Council [00:06:11] approved rezoning of the property to PTD with not more than 473 density units. [00:06:21] This is the community that is planned for the site. As Ms. Manns mentioned, it's [00:06:26] Villa del Sol, 300 apartment units in four buildings and 153 townhome units. [00:06:32] Note how the property or the project ties to the neighboring communities. They [00:06:36] took great care in doing that with multiple vehicle and pedestrian access [00:06:40] points and consideration given to the setback and privacy of their neighboring [00:06:44] properties. I think Villa del Sol will be a transformative community, unique, [00:06:51] walkable, desirable. Mr. Pritchard is in attendance. If you would like additional [00:06:57] information about his concept after this presentation, he'd be happy to come down [00:07:01] and talk to us. Again, I think just looking at some of these pictures, it's [00:07:06] going to be an absolutely beautiful addition to the southern portion of our [00:07:09] city, hopefully drag some people down from downtown along Grand Boulevard. This [00:07:18] is what all the parties are going to bring to the table in this development [00:07:21] agreement. The developer promised us to build this project according to a [00:07:26] timeline. We'll discuss that on the next slide. Capital investment of no less than [00:07:31] $150 million and they're going to grant the city an easement for fire [00:07:36] station number two. The city and its obligations will do expedited permitting [00:07:41] and also we will in turn vacate a portion of a right-of-way on Grand [00:07:45] Boulevard. And CRA, the third party of the agreement, we will be the funding agency [00:07:50] on incentive of financial package. This is a timeline provided by the developer. [00:07:58] They are ready to start in two months, end of January of 2026. He anticipates [00:08:04] going vertical as early as May 26 and completion of all of the units by [00:08:09] December 31, 2027. Those are his timelines. [00:08:16] Anytime Ms. Manz and myself consider an incentive package, we start with probably [00:08:21] one question. Would this project not be financially feasible but for financial [00:08:27] assistance from the agency? We've answered that in the affirmative. We need [00:08:31] to help a little bit on this project to make sure it happens. So we've negotiated [00:08:35] agreement that benefits both the developing entity and the CRA. Then once [00:08:42] we determine all that, as we're doing now, we're seeking direction and [00:08:45] authorization from the board to proceed. I want to walk through a couple of the [00:08:52] assumptions on how we determined what kind of revenue might be coming in and [00:08:56] then how we can do an incentive package based on that. This slide is pretty easy. [00:09:01] This is how the property assessor assesses properties and when we [00:09:06] finally get the property taxes on it. So at January 1st of every year, they do [00:09:11] a valuation. So whatever's in place, December 31st is really what's there. So [00:09:16] something happens January 2nd, that doesn't happen, get on the tax rolls [00:09:20] until the following January 1st. So January 1st, it gets assessed. The [00:09:24] valuation goes in. You don't realize the property taxes revenue from that for a [00:09:30] year and three months until March of the following year. So for example, if we use [00:09:35] the developer's timeline when he anticipates all of the projects being [00:09:39] done December 31st, 2027. If you look at the year 2028, in January 1, 2028, that's [00:09:46] when it'll hit the assessment and we will get the property taxes from that in [00:09:50] March of 2029. Just kind of going through how the numbers work. This is an [00:09:58] estimate of the project value. It's very rough, but again we're looking at a [00:10:03] hundred fifty million dollar investment. Apartments basically at two hundred [00:10:07] ninety-five thousand dollars a door. Single-family townhomes would be at [00:10:13] about four hundred and two thousand dollars a door for a total of a hundred [00:10:17] and fifty thousand. I've spread that over two years just as an estimate to get [00:10:22] going on this. Sorry for this one, but this is kind of an important slide. This [00:10:31] is how all of the increment revenue is determined. So I'm going to take a little [00:10:35] bit of time on this one, how we do it. Increment revenue is the amount we can [00:10:40] expect to get into the CRA once taxes are paid. We get that not directly from [00:10:46] taxes, we get that into the CRA trust fund. Start on the very left-hand side, if [00:10:50] you will. The second column over is a total taxable value. If you look at 2025 [00:10:56] or 26 or 27, you see that five point eight million dollars that the assessed [00:11:00] value is right now. Then in 2028 it grows half to seventy five million and [00:11:06] then by 2029 we've got a hundred and fifty million dollar property on the [00:11:12] property rolls. Then the way it works is we get increment revenue. So the way the [00:11:22] funds come into the CRA is we have a base year and we use that five point [00:11:26] eight million dollars as the base. So we subtract from 150 that base year. We do [00:11:32] that and then we get 95 percent of those funds. Five percent goes to [00:11:35] administration fees for the city. So if you look at, again, year 2029, we get a [00:11:42] hundred and thirty six million dollars in assessed value that then we [00:11:47] can get distributed that the mill levy for both the city and the county. So the [00:11:52] city's mill levy of 8.2 and the county's of 7.58. If you extrapolate those out, [00:11:57] that means we get in the year 2029 about 1.1 million from county and we get about [00:12:03] 980 from, I'm sorry, 1.1 from the city and 980,000 from the county every year. So [00:12:11] about 2.1 million a year. You add it all up over the term of the [00:12:16] CRA. CRA expires in 2049. We're looking at this project bringing in about 62 [00:12:23] million dollars to the CRA. So those are the numbers we are looking at to be able [00:12:28] to negotiate an incentive package. Maybe it's a little easier. Those were little [00:12:33] bitty numbers. This might help a little bit better. By the end of the CRA 2049, [00:12:38] the assessed value will be about 270 million dollars at a three percent annual [00:12:42] bump. And into the CRA, the increment revenue will be about 62 million dollars. [00:12:53] Here are some of the fees and costs we consider as an incentive to help the [00:12:59] development move forward. This is help from the Development Department on a [00:13:04] rough estimate of what these numbers might be. This is plan review and [00:13:08] permitting fees. The big ones to look at here are the civil review, civil plan [00:13:14] review. That's basically the horizontal review. We estimated that at 1% of 30% of [00:13:19] the total cost. And then also the building plan review. That's the vertical [00:13:24] review, if you will. That's 1% of the remaining 70% of the cost. So all in [00:13:30] building permits, plan review, inspection fees, fire, all that kind of stuff is [00:13:35] about 1.6 million dollars in fees. That's an estimate from the Planning [00:13:41] Department, Development Department. Water and sewer impact fees. We don't [00:13:45] anticipate any are going to be needed for this. It would be about 1.5 million [00:13:49] dollars, but they should have enough credit. Mr. Pridgen has been working on [00:13:53] satisfying that requirement to make sure the water and sewer impact fees will be [00:13:57] zero. Other considerations. They'd like a improvement to the reclaimed water line [00:14:05] to bring it to the site. Had Public Works look at that. They've given us an [00:14:08] estimate of ninety eight thousand five hundred dollars to do that. And also Mr. [00:14:12] Pridgen is going to put a public infrastructure improvements in, totaling [00:14:17] about three million dollars. We will reimburse him for those over a time [00:14:21] period. So total fees, we're looking about four point seven six four hundred [00:14:27] seven hundred four million seven hundred sixty three thousand dollars in total [00:14:32] fees that we can kind of look at in an incentive package what we could do with [00:14:36] those. Here's the big numbers. This is what we're proposing. We have agreed and [00:14:46] we've negotiated with the developer and staff and came up with this incentive [00:14:51] package that we're recommending to you. Number one, we would like to reimburse [00:14:55] them twelve and a half percent of their capital investment. [00:15:00] into this project. We're not going to pay it up front. We're going to pay it over a 15-year period once the project gets up and running. [00:15:06] That would total at $150 million, $18.75 million. Again, payable over a 15-year time period, $1.25 million a year. [00:15:16] Request number two, we'd like to reimburse them the $3 million for public infrastructure expenditures. [00:15:23] That's $3 million, but we're going to do that over a three-year period again as a reimbursement once they're in place. [00:15:29] Request number three, we'd like to give 75 percent of the building and permitting fees. [00:15:34] That's $1,248,000 of the $1,600,000 we saw earlier. [00:15:40] And request number four, we'd like to reimburse 100 percent of that reclaimed water line of $98,000. [00:15:46] Total package, $23 million. Sounds like a big number. It is a big number. [00:15:52] I think we can talk a little bit later about why it's a reasonable number. [00:15:57] $23 million represents about 15 percent of the total project costs, [00:16:02] and about 37 percent of the anticipated increment revenue we're going to get into the CRA. [00:16:15] When you say $23 million, and I'm sitting next to the finance director, I don't want to give her a heart attack. [00:16:20] So we want to walk through this, how it would happen, and not give her a heart attack in case she can keep smiling. [00:16:26] This is how this would play out over the years. [00:16:29] First column is the anticipated increment revenue. We've just talked about that. [00:16:34] That's $62 million you see down at the bottom. [00:16:37] The agreed upon terms, we've agreed to give them a $23 million incentive, but this is how it's paid. [00:16:43] We were going to pay back the building and permitting fees of the $1.2 million plus the $98,500 in the first two years. [00:16:53] So that's those $673,000 you see in years 2026 and 2027. [00:17:03] The last column over is the cumulative balance. [00:17:06] What that shows is the biggest number we're out on this project in terms of incentive is $1.3 million. [00:17:13] We have that in the budget. We've already budgeted for it. [00:17:17] So that's the biggest one. [00:17:19] The remaining incentives are paid for with increment revenue that comes in from the developer. [00:17:24] So they're not coming directly out of CRA. [00:17:27] In other words, the development basically pays for itself. [00:17:32] And that's why we set it up this way for the capital reimbursement to be paid over 15 years once it's built [00:17:37] and also the $3 million to be reimbursed. [00:17:43] Any questions on those numbers before I move on? [00:17:48] Good enough. [00:17:50] Besides just the numbers, we consider many factors when negotiating an incentive package. [00:17:55] Obviously, we looked at the total capital investment. [00:17:57] The developers were talking about bringing the positive impact on the community, [00:18:01] taking vacant lot and creating a community basically down there. [00:18:05] It has to be consistent with the community redevelopment plan, which it is. [00:18:10] It's a quality project. [00:18:12] And did we also look, is it going to be fair to other developers in the city [00:18:17] that we're not giving them something special that makes it harder for somebody else to compete? [00:18:22] We talked about all of these on the final analysis, but I'll summarize just a few. [00:18:27] It's a transformational project. [00:18:30] It's a transformational product with these buildings. [00:18:33] It's going to expand the renaissance we've already created downtown south [00:18:37] and help incorporate some of the numbers we've talked about spending on Grand Boulevard, [00:18:43] on the bridge on Grand Boulevard, and of course, Swetman Center. [00:18:48] The redevelopment focus area for years on CRPs, the old CRPs and our new one coming up. [00:18:54] It's going to increase our tax base, obviously. [00:18:59] And it's going to help, I think, attract other privately funded developments along that corridor [00:19:04] to support those residents and what's happening down there. [00:19:07] And of course, we discussed the financial benefits, one to the agency and second to the city. [00:19:12] I didn't really mention that, like when the CRA expires in 2029, [00:19:17] it's not like the tax benefits are going to go away. [00:19:20] The homes and the townhomes are still going to be there, so those will still come. [00:19:23] They'll just come directly to the city instead of the CRA. [00:19:27] Budget, again, the 2025-26 budget has $1.9 million budgeted in redevelopment incentives. [00:19:35] We're talking about $673,000 in this period, so we're well within that, about a third of those numbers. [00:19:42] Recall also that those funds will be replenished as increment revenue comes in on those projects. [00:19:48] Moving forward, we'll make sure that all of these incentives are programmed into future budgets. [00:19:57] I know this redevelopment opportunity has been discussed for a long time, a very long time. [00:20:05] I know the developers have been doing it for many years, [00:20:07] and everybody up there probably has been talking about it for many years. [00:20:10] It's here. I think it's time to do it. [00:20:12] We're really excited. [00:20:14] We, Mr. Bridgen, Ms. Manns, myself, we're available if you have any questions. [00:20:20] Any questions? [00:20:24] Just one, and thank you for that good presentation. [00:20:28] It really laid it out in a way that's not so fearful when those big numbers come up, [00:20:33] when you show that it's coming from the increment. [00:20:36] So the only thing that I saw that differed, I think, in some cases, [00:20:41] and you talk about how other developers will come in and how these deals could be struck, [00:20:47] oftentimes, and I think with Mr. Starkey, who we made an arrangement with, [00:20:52] there was a rebate of a certain percentage of the tax increment. [00:20:56] I see you're dealing with fixed numbers there, and I guess that can work both ways. [00:21:02] It's the fact that it's still well below our expected positive take from the development, [00:21:10] and you're dealing with pretty constant expectations of our tax rates, et cetera. [00:21:20] So if we reduce our taxes, the payment is still the same. [00:21:29] So I think maybe that – I'd just like to understand some reasoning for that, [00:21:34] but I think it's really smart, and it was unexpected on my part, [00:21:39] because I'm used to the other types of things. [00:21:42] I think it gives maybe clarity to the developer in terms of his understanding of what he's obligated to do. [00:21:50] And then the other thing is that when you showed that you were hoping [00:21:53] or expecting that the project would be complete by the end of 2027, [00:21:58] you were showing a 50 percent from a conservative standpoint [00:22:03] so that you were not overestimating to us what might be available to us in terms of the differential. [00:22:10] So thank you for being straightforward and direct and not all rosy. [00:22:18] I think it was a good presentation. [00:22:20] That was maybe a question or maybe just an acknowledgment that that was a little different. [00:22:26] I don't know if there's any reaction to that. [00:22:29] And I think the first question is doing it on a property tax rebate [00:22:33] versus a capital investment reimbursement, correct? [00:22:37] One, technically we can't do a property tax rebate. [00:22:40] It's against state constitution. [00:22:42] I'm sorry, a share of the increment. [00:22:44] Once the increment gets into the CRA, it's not property tax anymore. [00:22:48] Correct. [00:22:49] So that's why we did it that way. [00:22:50] And based on your fix, that's why we did it at the 12 and a half percent of the capital reinvestment. [00:22:55] And, again, that won't be refunded until the project is completed. [00:22:59] So, again, it will be done. [00:23:00] Hopefully there will be enough in there to see. [00:23:02] You can see through this slide that there is still money coming into the CRA, [00:23:07] hopefully to cover, I see what you're saying, on property taxes could come down, those kind of things. [00:23:12] But I think there's enough cushion, if you will, to make sure it's okay. [00:23:16] Because if you look down at the bottom, the CRA will have about $39 million in there of that $62 million. [00:23:23] So we're not pushing it. [00:23:25] I hear what you're saying. [00:23:26] Thank you. [00:23:27] Yeah. [00:23:30] Any other questions? [00:23:31] No questions. [00:23:33] No. [00:23:34] No, no questions. [00:23:35] I have got comments, but I'm going to keep it for the motion. [00:23:37] Okay. [00:23:38] Do you have any public comment on this? [00:23:42] Seeing none, we're going to bring it back to council. [00:23:48] I'll move to approve. [00:23:49] I'll second the motion. [00:23:52] Discussion? [00:23:54] I mean, I think it was a well-set-up PowerPoint. [00:23:58] I mean, it explained it very well. [00:24:01] I think it's a well-needed project. [00:24:03] That spot has been, you know, kind of abandoned for a long time, and I'm happy to see it moving forward. [00:24:10] And I think, you know, these type of incentive deals are kind of what we need to do to get development. [00:24:16] So I think it's a great idea. [00:24:20] For my part, just on, you know, experience, [00:24:23] I know that there had been some hesitation back in the day when the Main Street Landing project was first underway. [00:24:31] And, in fact, I think Mr. Pridgen already owned the property downtown at that time when that was happening. [00:24:38] And when we approached the city council, and I was not on the city council at that time, [00:24:42] so I was on the private side trying to make that happen to bring density down, [00:24:47] that project was the solution that we had to use some of the tax increment from the project [00:24:53] to help pay down some of the development costs was turned down by a three-to-two vote. [00:24:59] And that project sat there, and nothing happened. [00:25:03] So, you know, the downtown businesses need and the city needs money on the general fund side, [00:25:11] which it will get from communication taxes, population shared revenues. [00:25:19] And so really for the CRA to help us to see the kind of development we want, [00:25:25] these incentives also can still be offered to the next project that comes along, [00:25:30] and the next project, if it's based on them actually completing something and bringing that tax money in, [00:25:36] which we can use once the CRA is over. [00:25:38] So I'm much more favorable to these kinds of incentives as mentioned by the maker [00:25:46] because it doesn't inhibit future, and it doesn't commit our $9 million or $10 million a year coming in [00:25:55] beyond the level that he's projected, which is within the budget. [00:25:59] So thank you for that. [00:26:01] I know it's been a long time, but it seems to me as much as I push that things happen in their time. [00:26:10] So I'm glad to see this in front of us. [00:26:13] Councilman Butler? [00:26:15] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Murphy. [00:26:16] I think I'd start by saying that for the last at least decade with our city manager [00:26:26] and executive director of this board, where these vehicles and these techniques have been used, [00:26:33] these incentives have been used to try to spur some level of strategic development, [00:26:38] you have seen success not only in terms of public space, but in the people that are able to move in, [00:26:49] but also in terms of the benefit to our downtown and how it complements the people that are already here. [00:26:56] And this is the latest example of that, where you are quite literally building a neighborhood within an existing neighborhood, [00:27:03] and I think the state would agree that that was the purpose of the CRAs is to redevelop. [00:27:09] And that's what this is. [00:27:12] Mr. Altman and Mr. Jonas said that this was a long time coming and this area needed that, and it did. [00:27:23] Mr. Gammon pointed out how this area was, the word used was abandoned by the former hospital there, [00:27:32] and it was definitely an area that needed this. [00:27:35] That all being said, the word big number was used, and I agree, the incentive package is a big number, [00:27:42] but it's for a big project. [00:27:44] And when we keep in mind the neighborhood that's there, it abuts up to Gulf High School, [00:27:50] it is nearby Gulf Middle School, there's Marlow Elementary down the road, [00:27:55] all of which have some enrollment issues that could benefit from a spur of population. [00:28:03] It leaves me at a point where I just have to say the word that comes to mind is partnership, [00:28:08] and that we do have good faith developers who want to negotiate with our city in a way that is both a benefit to the city [00:28:19] and our neighborhoods and is not just a money grab, so to speak. [00:28:24] So this definitely feels like, it looks like, and the numbers show that it is a public-private partnership [00:28:30] to make our city move in a positive direction. [00:28:33] So I'm very satisfied with the terms of this incentive package. [00:28:38] Thank you. [00:28:40] Yeah, I think this is going to be, in my opinion, a great project. [00:28:43] That space has been vacant for a very, very long time, just kind of doing nothing. [00:28:50] It's going to be a great incentive to our downtown, the economy. [00:28:55] I think it's just overall, it's just a win-win. [00:28:58] And like I said, those incentives seem big, but for the amount of what's being invested, [00:29:03] it's the same percentage as we usually give for any other project. [00:29:07] So looking forward to seeing the ground break on that one. [00:29:11] All right, I have a motion and a second. [00:29:13] All in favor? [00:29:15] Aye. [00:29:17] Opposed? [00:29:19] All right, all four. [00:29:21] Thank you. [00:29:22] Thank you.

   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. 5.b

   Proposed Option to Purchase Agreement RE: Riverside Baptist Parcel

   approved

   The CRA Board approved authorizing the Executive Director to sign a three-year option to purchase agreement with Riverside Baptist Church for a 1.65-acre parcel at $450,000 ($45,000 annual option payments applicable to purchase price), to complete an assemblage in the Rivergate Palm District and provide a third (Main Street/Acorn) ingress/egress point. The motion also included assurances to the church regarding access to the municipal parking garage to address parking concerns.

   • motion:Approve the recommended action authorizing the Executive Director to sign the option to purchase agreement with Riverside Baptist Church, including assurances to the church regarding city participation on parking concerns. (passed)

   📍6128 River Road📍6219 River Road, Newport Richey, 34652📍Acorn Street📍Main Street📍River Road📍Stonehaven📍US Highway 19🏢7-Eleven🏢Cigar Warehouse🏢Doering and Ahern🏢Gateway Church🏢Gospel Hope Church of New Port Richey🏢Kaiser University🏢Riverside Baptist Church🏢SunTrust🏢Truist👤Mr. Altman👤Mr. Gammon👤Mr. Jonas👤Mr. Murphy👤Ms. Manns👤Nolan Pierce👤Pastor Bowman👤Raquel#2019 Community Redevelopment Plan#2026 Community Redevelopment Plan#25-26 CRA budget property acquisitions ($1.5-1.9 million)#Option to Purchase Agreement - Riverside Baptist Parcel#RFP for development entity#RFP for listing agreement (sent Sept 22)#Rivergate Palm District#Villa del Sol

   ▶ Jump to 29:24 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:29:24] Moving on to 5B, Proposed Option to Purchase Agreement, Riverside Baptist Parcel. [00:29:31] Thank you. [00:29:36] This, too, is an item that we've been working on for some time, [00:29:41] and it relates to the assemblage of property surrounding the former SunTrust property. [00:29:49] And it is all in an effort to motivate reinvestment in the Rivergate Palm District. [00:30:00] The purpose of the interest in the Riverside Baptist parcel is to establish [00:30:09] a third means of ingress, egress into the assemblage that's already been put in [00:30:16] place and this would enable a Main Street means of ingress, egress into the [00:30:23] parcel. There's already a US Highway 19 access to the parcel and a River Road [00:30:31] access point into the parcel and it was determined that a third means of access [00:30:39] would make the property all the more marketable. We're hopeful that that's the [00:30:43] case. We are currently in the process of hiring a realtor that will represent our [00:30:52] interest in the sale of that property and later on in the agenda we have an [00:30:59] RFP which has been prepared which we would like to let later this year on [00:31:08] the agenda which we were asking you to approve so that we can do so. And this is [00:31:14] again related to entering into an option agreement to purchase a portion of the [00:31:21] Riverside Baptist Church property on an option agreement and Mr. Gammon is [00:31:27] prepared to fully present the agenda item to you. Thank you again Ms. Manns. [00:31:33] Mr. Chairman, fellow directors, as the Executive Director mentioned this is [00:31:40] kind of the final piece of a puzzle on an assemblage we have over in the [00:31:44] Rivergate Palm District. So we're pretty excited to be working on this again like [00:31:49] Villa del Sol. This is something we've been working on for quite a while. What's [00:31:54] presented this evening, we're actually looking for a request to authorize the [00:32:00] Executive Director to sign an option to purchase agreement. The agreement will be [00:32:05] between the agency as the buyer and the Riverside Baptist Church as seller. The [00:32:10] terms have been negotiated between the parties and Pastor Nolan Pierce is here [00:32:15] in the audience from the church and he might have some comments after this [00:32:18] presentation. Again, parcels in the Rivergate Palm District across the [00:32:26] bridge from downtown. Anybody doesn't know where that is. We've had many, many [00:32:30] visioning sessions on what can be done around town and this is one of the areas [00:32:34] that has really been a focus area. It can complement the historic district [00:32:39] downtown obviously. It's a gateway, it's more of a transition area. It can [00:32:45] be things that maybe are a little different than downtown. Maybe we can [00:32:47] have a little higher densities, maybe a little taller buildings, those kind of [00:32:50] things we can't do down here. And for the past several years, staff has been [00:32:55] assembling properties in this area for future private sector development. This [00:33:02] is what we're talking about. These are the parcels. These two parcels are owned [00:33:06] by Riverside Baptist on the red outline parcel there on River Road. That's their [00:33:11] fellowship hall basically. And then on the yellow piece kind of on the northern [00:33:16] part of that, they have a few offices and child care services there. We're not [00:33:21] talking about all of it. All we're asking to do is that yellow piece. We've asked [00:33:26] if we could have that yellow piece from them on an option to purchase. They would [00:33:30] still keep all of their building and everything they need in place. We're [00:33:35] talking about the yellow piece. And why is that one so important? As Ms. Mann [00:33:39] said, we own quite a few properties already in there, we being the CRA. That [00:33:44] piece you can kind of see in the cross hatch there just kind of connects it [00:33:47] all. And again, as Ms. Mann's mentioned, we have a connection on three roads, US 19 [00:33:53] obviously, we've got River Road, and now this gets us to Acorn. And Acorn gets us, [00:33:59] you can see a very top part there, a little right-of-way on the main street. [00:34:02] So it really does put it all together. Let's talk about the parcels for just a [00:34:08] second. Parcel 1, that's the former Truist building. It's on 2.2 acres. We [00:34:14] purchased that in November 22 for 2.8 million dollars. Parcel number 2, this [00:34:20] one's been around a long time. This is the former Gateway Church on 2.3 acres. [00:34:25] We purchased it back in March of 2006 for a little over a million dollars, a [00:34:30] million fifty three thousand. Parcel 3, that's the former Cigar Warehouse. You [00:34:34] can see that kind of L-shaped building there. We purchased that in August of [00:34:39] 23 for 800,000. And Parcel 4, over to the right, just south of Stonehaven there, [00:34:45] the little waterfront lot, we purchased that last May for 380,000. So [00:34:50] summarizing those really quick, including the subject parcel, which is the [00:34:56] 1.65 acres from Riverside Baptist. We're looking at about five and [00:35:01] three-quarter acres, and we've invested about 5.5 million dollars in those [00:35:06] properties. Again, as Ms. Manns had mentioned, we're in the process of [00:35:14] marketing this assemblage. On September 22nd, we sent out an RFP for listing [00:35:18] agreement to retain a professional real estate brokerage company that could [00:35:23] market this property for us. On November 10th, we received bid proposals from a [00:35:29] couple of those, and tomorrow the executive director and myself are [00:35:32] interviewing those companies to see who we would like to bring back to this [00:35:36] board on December 2nd to recommend signing a listing agreement with a [00:35:40] professional real estate group to go forward. And again, as Ms. Manns [00:35:45] mentioned, the next agenda item is the RFP for the development entity to help [00:35:50] the real estate agent know what they're looking for to market this. Again, like [00:35:58] the former hospital site, we've discussed this parcel for a long time. [00:36:02] It's been in our community redevelopment plans. It was in the 2019 as it [00:36:07] identified as a redevelopment target, and also we will have it in the 2026 [00:36:12] community redevelopment plan when we bring that to you, hopefully someday in [00:36:16] the next couple of months. Factors we considered, a chance for another major [00:36:25] redevelopment project. Again, five and three-quarter acres is a pretty nice [00:36:29] assemblage. It's a cohesive assemblage. We've got it all together in one package. [00:36:32] It benefits the district, obviously, and the other businesses over there, bringing [00:36:36] more residents, hopefully. It also expands our reach out of downtown, just like [00:36:42] Villa del Sol brought it south along Grand. This brings it west along Main [00:36:45] Street, which is what we want to do, continue that renaissance out of [00:36:49] downtown. So we'll keep moving in directions as much as we can, and of [00:36:53] course it remains consistent with the CRP, which we need to do. We retained [00:37:00] Doering and Ahern to complete an independent valuation on the property. [00:37:04] That value came in, you can see, at $430,000. You can also see in the map, we [00:37:10] looked at two other properties to see if they would do it to even make our [00:37:13] holdings a little bit stronger, but neither parcel one or parcel two were [00:37:17] interested in selling. So again, we've negotiated with Pastor Bowman and his [00:37:24] board of directors under these following terms. We've got a price of $450,000. [00:37:30] That's a little bit higher than the appraised value. The reason it is is [00:37:33] because it's a three-year option, so we don't have to buy it for three years, so [00:37:36] it gives a little incentive for them that it will probably increase in value. [00:37:40] The agency, upon execution of the option agreement, will have a 60-day [00:37:48] due diligence period, and then a 60-day period after that in which to close the [00:37:53] option. So that's when we would pay our first option payment, 120 days from [00:37:57] execution of the option agreement. The annual option payments are $45,000. [00:38:01] Again, it's a three-year option. Any option payments made are applicable to the [00:38:05] purchase price. So if we make the first option payment of $45,000 for [00:38:10] instance, and we buy it after nine months, the price would be $450,000 minus [00:38:14] $45,000, $405,000. I was questioned about why this should be an option. Good [00:38:21] question. Number one, I think the most important, it allows control of the [00:38:25] property, which is what we want, so we can market it. Number two, it's a smaller [00:38:29] investment, so it doesn't take too much of our CRA funds, but we still control the [00:38:32] property. And number three, our ultimate goal isn't necessarily to own the [00:38:37] property, it's to assign this option agreement to the successful development [00:38:42] entity that goes through our bidding process. So that's why we did [00:38:46] the option. Budget, we have room in the 25-26 CRA budget for property [00:38:54] acquisitions. Actually, we have $1.9 million in there, or $1.5 [00:38:58] million. We shouldn't be getting too close to that at $45,000. So it [00:39:03] meets our budget expectations and recommendation. Again, we're asking for [00:39:08] approval to sign the option agreement. The Executive Director can do that. Once [00:39:12] it's fully executed, we still have to get Riverside Baptist. He's working with his [00:39:16] Board of Directors this weekend. As soon as that's done, we'll have a [00:39:19] fully executed agreement. We can move forward with the due diligence, and if [00:39:23] all goes, we'll do the first option payment in four or five months. Again, [00:39:30] any questions? Any questions? All right, any public comment on this? Come on down, [00:39:39] sir. Please state your name and address for the record. Nolan Pierce, one of the [00:39:48] pastors at Riverside Baptist Church, 6219 River Road, New Port Richey, [00:39:52] 34652. Riverside Baptist Church, soon-to-be Gospel Hope Church of New Port Richey, is grateful for the opportunity to partner with the city of [00:40:03] New Port Richey in this ongoing growth and development. We desire to be a good [00:40:09] neighbor, where we always want to be the church of the city, with the city, and for [00:40:14] the city. We will present this offer to our church for consideration at a future [00:40:18] members meeting. Riverside is a congregational church, meaning that [00:40:23] church members ultimately decide. We, as the pastors, will guide them in the direction [00:40:28] that the church ultimately decides as the congregation. The main concern that [00:40:33] we, that's been expressed within our church and our board, etc., is the [00:40:37] limitation of parking, because that is part of our parking. The city has [00:40:41] suggested that Riverside have access to the municipal parking garage on a [00:40:45] potential, as a potential solution to the long-term parking needs that we should [00:40:49] have, should we outgrow our current capacity. And we believe this would be a [00:40:54] very applicable solution to the problem, but we would like to know that this [00:41:01] would be an opportunity that would be a permanent solution for us, if we outgrow [00:41:07] our current situation. Just want to say thank you for the opportunity, and we [00:41:11] look forward to many opportunities to work together for the good of the city. [00:41:14] Do we have any other public comment? Come on down, ma'am. [00:41:24] I live at 6128 River Road, and I live directly across from what you guys are [00:41:36] going to do, where the old church was. Yeah, I'm the house right across the [00:41:42] street there. You're talking about traffic coming in on River Road. Have you [00:41:47] guys been driving on River Road? Because it's a mess. I mean, it's tight. Are you [00:41:52] bringing more traffic into River Road, or up River Road, or what's your goal and [00:41:57] objective there? The project hasn't been designed yet, but traffic will be taken [00:42:05] into consideration, and in all likelihood, there will be some traffic changes on [00:42:11] River Road, which will increase traffic. No, I don't expect so. Well, that's a lot of [00:42:18] traffic. I mean, it's already the corner people coming out, fly out onto River [00:42:22] Road. That's going to be a lot more traffic onto River Road in that short [00:42:28] period, and it's tight, and there's, well, there's a lot of traffic on River [00:42:33] Road, and that's my concern. It's, you know, you're going to make that exit. I don't [00:42:38] know where you would make the exit onto River Road from that development, but [00:42:42] there's... At this point, the project hasn't been designed, but I know that a [00:42:47] lot of consideration is going to be given to River Road and its residents, [00:42:52] and we're going to want to minimize impacts to River Road. Okay, and how big [00:42:59] of a building are we looking to put across the street? We don't have any design done for [00:43:03] the project at all at this point. But you're already talking, it's going to be higher than the [00:43:06] buildings that we have in Newport, Virginia. On US Highway 19? Yeah. Not on River Road. [00:43:11] Not on River Road. All right, I just, because the traffic is bad there, and [00:43:18] people fly up and down that street all the time. And we may need to put in some [00:43:22] traffic calming on River Road, so I understand that. You already have speed humps on River Road that don't seem [00:43:28] to work very well. We'll be very sensitive to River Road residents' concerns. Yeah, [00:43:32] because I'm not the only one concerned about it, so. Understood, ma'am. All right, thank you. [00:43:38] Thank you. Do we have any other public comment? All right, seeing none, we'll bring it back to [00:43:46] Council for motion and discussion. Can I get a motion? I'll make the motion to approve [00:43:53] the recommended action and to also include it in the motion to provide some [00:44:00] assurances to the church that of the availability and the participation the [00:44:05] city would make with respect to their parking concerns. I'll second. All right, [00:44:12] discussion? Start with you, Mr. Jonas. You're doing a fine job, Deputy Mayor. I only [00:44:27] would like to say that the Department of Transportation also has concerns about [00:44:31] the traffic on Highway 19 that really backs up for a long time, so the [00:44:36] expectations as the design comes into play, and particularly if the residents [00:44:43] in that facility are like so many people in Pasco County, you know, suitcase [00:44:51] working in Pinellas and working in other places, if you look at the highest traffic [00:44:58] count [00:45:00] which is before and after work of the rush hour time frames, my expectation would be [00:45:06] that more folks would be moving to the south than they would be to the north. And the concern [00:45:14] really is how do folks get back onto Highway 19 if they see that as a convenient place. [00:45:21] River Road should remain and has those strong turns in it coming down the corner that really [00:45:26] force people to, well hopefully we put more traffic calming and whatever it takes to not [00:45:35] make it the favorable track. I had the opportunity to talk to the Department of Transportation [00:45:43] representative on the Regional Planning Council and he did a little study on that and suggested, [00:45:48] and I think that the developers should be linked to those kinds of transportation questions, [00:45:54] that small outlet onto Main Street would not be a fine place for someone to go out [00:45:58] and make a left. So if somebody wants to get to Highway 19, they would have to use River [00:46:04] Road if they were going to the north or they could go out on 19 directly if there was room [00:46:10] for them. It does get difficult to get out that way, so during that time traffic crowds [00:46:16] up. But to those going to the south, I think there's got to be a lot of consideration for [00:46:23] making that route doable. If that's what the development requires, I'm sure that any plan, [00:46:32] and just getting confirmation from the staff, any plan would be well presented and publicly [00:46:39] presented and available for comment when the time comes. It might help our downtown traffic [00:46:48] and our scenario to be able to have people get as efficiently out onto Highway 19 and back. [00:46:54] I don't think that the Main Street, that there's a cut through that way. And to get onto 19 to go [00:47:02] the other direction, it might be easier to go backwards to get in and queue up and get right [00:47:09] on 19 than to get into lengthy light. So our whole town is going to have to get smart with [00:47:15] our traffic signals and make sure that we can efficiently move around. But it's an exciting [00:47:20] opportunity, and I think it's a brilliant idea to do it as a option, and thanks to the developing [00:47:28] a church option that gives them some annual income in the meantime and gives us the time to find the [00:47:36] right development. So I'm in favor of it. I agree with what Mr. Altman has to say. You know, [00:47:48] I definitely want to make sure that we do follow through with the church. You know, [00:47:52] if their parking issues do come around, that we do work with them on the parking garage. And I [00:47:58] think, you know, to the residents on River Road, I mean, I lived on River Road for 10 years, [00:48:03] so I am well aware of the traffic. It's tight, especially, you know, people are telling when [00:48:09] their boats or trailers, you know, but obviously, it was not the best design back in the day, [00:48:15] but obviously, there's nothing we can do about that. So we kind of have to deal with what it [00:48:20] is. But I think getting this third parcel is our chance to help that scenario. Obviously, [00:48:29] nothing is perfect, you know, but we're going to definitely keep that in consideration with [00:48:34] whoever decides to do the development in this area. We're going to make sure that we, you know, [00:48:40] keep, you know, everybody in the area, you know, traffic-wise as conscientious as we possibly can. [00:48:46] Raquel? Yes, thank you, Mr. Murphy. And first, thank you for running a very smooth meeting. [00:48:54] Appreciate it. No, it's on swipe, I'm being sincere. And to Mr. Gammon for an excellent [00:49:01] presentation on the option, thank you for explaining the intent behind that. And for [00:49:05] the city manager for taking the time to engage in that back and forth. I know that's not always [00:49:09] the custom, but in your executive director hat for taking the time to do that. And for [00:49:16] representing the River Road community in expressing their concerns, thank you. I think, you know, [00:49:23] when we started to see the garage come up, Kaiser University, the word I was using publicly was, [00:49:32] you know, we seeing these Lego pieces and a 7-Eleven and whatever opinion you're is of the [00:49:38] sign. You have these Lego pieces that are coming up and for a while there, it was kind of hard to [00:49:44] see what the larger vision was. But now you're starting to see it come together and you're [00:49:49] starting to see how it ties into the larger redevelopment plan for it to be smart growth. [00:49:55] And just to point out that the opportunity here is for some level of redevelopment that [00:50:01] hopefully will serve to complement Main Street in US 19 and not affect River Road in a substantial [00:50:08] way. I know when it came to the prior vote we just took, I came out very, very much concerned [00:50:17] with some of the drainage issues and some of the problems that come with that. And I still have [00:50:21] those concerns, but I don't think that should prevent us from partnering with the developer [00:50:25] on incentive packages. And that's the same here. I don't think future concerns that are going to [00:50:30] come up when we get to the table with the developer should prevent us from entering a [00:50:34] partnership with a church who's willing to take on this unique opportunity to continue to fit [00:50:43] those parcels together. So in my opinion, your concerns over River Road are duly noted. [00:50:48] They're not, for me, they're not being excused. I don't think this purchase has really a relevance [00:50:59] to what will become the conversation with the developer. This needs to happen and then let's [00:51:03] talk about what the developer or developers want to do. And then at that point, you can expect me [00:51:10] to push back on anything that might threaten traffic onto River Road. That's where I stand [00:51:17] on this one. Thank you. Yeah, this piece is a vital part of the overall vision for that area, [00:51:24] so it's an important one. We have a motion and a second. Just one more comment I'd like to make, [00:51:31] because thinking about it, you know, Acorn Street was mentioned. I don't know if it was [00:51:34] one of the four streets you were thinking that we were at, but of the three streets, [00:51:38] you know, to that degree, Acorn Street comes out right at the Main Street landing area there. So [00:51:44] to the design, where is that traffic going to come out? Not across from you or down Acorn [00:51:52] Street. In which ways does it go? Making a design that's conveniently planned to not interfere, [00:51:59] I think, is everybody's goal. So I'm hopeful that we can arrive at a good answer. If I can [00:52:06] reply to that, I mean, I know that we didn't have anything to do with the actual, this council,

   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. 5.c

   Request to Authorize RFP26-003 Real Estate Developer Rivergate - Palm District Properties

   approved

   The CRA Board authorized staff to proceed with RFP26-003 seeking a real estate developer for the assembled Rivergate Palm District properties, with the RFP incorporating an inundation pond and prior visioning work. Timeline targets developer offers by February 9 and selection presented back to the board around March 12. Discussion focused on stormwater design, reclaiming Acorn Street right-of-way, protecting existing River Road residents and businesses, and ensuring walkability/connectivity to US-19 and Main Street.

   • motion:Authorize agency staff to proceed with RFP26-003 for a real estate developer for the Rivergate Palm District properties. (passed)

   📍Acorn Street📍Main Street📍Marine Parkway📍River Road📍Rivergate Palm District properties📍US-19🏢Chipotle👤Director Altman👤Director Butler👤Mr. Gammon👤Ms. Manns👤Ms. Vance👤Robert Rivera#December 2nd listing agreement#February 9 developer offers#Main Street Landing#March 12 developer selection presentation#Pasco County remediation funding#RFP26-003#Regional Planning Council#Rivergate Palm District#SWOT analysis#Southwest Florida Water Management District (Swiftmud)#inundation pond#listing agent RFP#public-private partnership

   ▶ Jump to 52:10 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:52:12] this CRA had nothing to do with the development of the new Chipotle that went in on US-19. But [00:52:18] you try to get there from the back roads, and it's impossible. You have to weave around and [00:52:22] go almost all the way to Marine Parkway to get to it. And I am hopeful, but again, I can't speak [00:52:27] for what that developer is going to be. I am hopeful that those are going to be those same [00:52:31] conversations. How can we ensure the priority is on Acorn, Main Street, and US-19? And I really [00:52:37] think there's a way to balance between the two. And that's my commitment. I'm not just hopeful, [00:52:43] I'm committed to making sure my position is River Road is not going to become a burden. And so, [00:52:50] please note that down. Anyone else? All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? [00:52:59] Four to zero. Yeah, only got four. All right, moving on to business item C, [00:53:10] request to authorize real estate development Rivergate Palm District properties. As indicated [00:53:18] earlier to you this evening, this agenda item is in large part designed to get some input from you [00:53:26] and approval from you on an RFP that has been developed seeking a developer interested in [00:53:36] submitting a proposal on a project for the redevelopment of the property assemblage at [00:53:44] the Rivergate Palm District properties. We have proposed a timeline as well and it's contained [00:53:52] in the RFP which calls for a project as well as the incorporation of an inundation pond as part [00:54:03] of the project. And Mr. Gammon, do you want to fully present the agenda item? The last one, [00:54:12] thank you again Ms. Vance, I appreciate it. Chairman, fellow directors, again this kind of [00:54:18] ties in with what we just talked about. We are working right now with, so I've got that back [00:54:23] up to a lot of Director Altman's comments and stuff, getting off the acorn. Part of the RFP, [00:54:28] just so you know, is incorporating a lot of the visioning things that we've already talked about. [00:54:32] We've already hired very professional consultants to talk about massing and how it works on the [00:54:37] River Road side versus 19 and how it's still a walkable community. So those things are all in the [00:54:42] RFP to try to get that vision relayed to a potential development entity and I think for [00:54:49] Director Butler's comments, that's what we're trying to do is show them what we're thinking [00:54:55] about and what has already been envisioned on this kind of site. So again, this is a request to [00:55:01] proceed with the developer RFP. We've already done the RFP for the listing agent. We've assembled the [00:55:07] properties, which we know they're up there on the screen. The listing agreement, we're expecting [00:55:12] to bring that to you December 2nd to sign. Like I said, we're meeting with the, interviewing the [00:55:18] groups tomorrow and we'll have a recommendation and have a recommendation on December 2nd to go [00:55:23] forward with a group. This RFP helps that listing agent market this property so they know what we're [00:55:30] looking for, what the vision is going forward. As Ms. Manns mentioned, we have funds for an [00:55:36] inundation pond. We want that to be in the request for proposal for the development entity. In terms of [00:55:42] timing, if this is approved this evening, the city clerk will post this RFP as early as convenient. We [00:55:48] hope that the listing agreement, we can select the group on December 2nd and then they can generate [00:55:54] offers from a national database of developers by February 9th. It's a pretty aggressive time period, [00:56:00] but I think they can meet that. And if that's the ultimate goal, we'd present the successful [00:56:05] development entity back to this board with an estimated date of March 12th. So that's what [00:56:11] we're looking forward to doing on this. Again, I think it's time with some of these properties [00:56:16] that we've owned for a long time to get back on the tax rolls. In that regard, we respectfully [00:56:22] request that the board authorize the agency staff to proceed with this RFP. Any questions? [00:56:29] Do we have any public comment on this? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to council for motion and [00:56:39] discussion. I'll move approval. I'll second. Discussion? Just excited at listing through the [00:56:51] assemblage and process. The only thing I will say to your map is that as this process, as this [00:57:02] project does move forward, it's important that it does move forward on a quick time frame because I [00:57:07] know our grant, I think we have time still. We do. But I would suggest that Robert Rivera had [00:57:15] looked, and we're not going to have him around to advise us anymore, but he had looked at the [00:57:20] outfall locations and we, I really believe that the, what was Main Street Landing, I'll call it [00:57:28] that for the rest of my life, no matter what they change it to, but that Acorn Street, which is [00:57:34] owned by the city, was allowed to hold the retention and the detention or whatever it is for [00:57:41] that project. And so there's a swift mud, there's undoubtedly was a requirement for that because [00:57:48] there was additional work that had to be done. That pond fills almost to the level of the seawall [00:57:54] before it goes out. And so as we talk about some of the design that had been presented to us of [00:58:02] getting out to the river and the fact that we own the property next to it, I hope, because what we [00:58:11] were shown as far as the attenuation pond would have supported the fear is that the Deputy Mayor, [00:58:18] but now our Deputy Chairman is making, has made before that, oh look at the big space and how [00:58:28] much physical surface space it has to take. So we really need to make sure that we recommend and [00:58:35] have innovative design that will allow for that property next to the church to be, and all those [00:58:43] trees on that existing, for us to save as much of that. A dog park, a recreation, there's so much to [00:58:50] recreational stormwater, whether it's a moat around it or whatever it is. But back to the fact that I [00:58:58] saw a house for sale across from the storage facility, which is adjacent to our property at [00:59:10] the back end, and they have for a long time wanted to look at what they were going to do with that, [00:59:16] but didn't want to see commercial come out to River Road. But if an agreement could be made [00:59:22] with respect to that home that's across the street, there is somewhere between those houses [00:59:28] a release point of an unmanaged outfall into the river. And so I think it's a more direct and less [00:59:41] intrusive project than going across Acorn Street with that stormwater. So I would really encourage [00:59:54] us in this short time period to engage someone. [01:00:00] I work with on the Regional Planning Council, some folks that are top-notch at these kind of projects, [01:00:07] to advise us so that we can make recommendations and work hand-in-hand for our part of this project, [01:00:14] which is the stormwater part. [01:00:16] And I don't know if it's possible, but the acquisition of a property that may well have flooded, [01:00:24] that may be a part of a stormwater system, [01:00:28] could potentially be done through some of the money that Pasco County has allocated for remediation or removal. [01:00:38] But let's get creative. [01:00:40] And I know of a couple of firms that would probably quickly offer themselves. [01:00:46] I don't think the firm that designed this is the right firm, having been two years to get the design we got that was there for that. [01:00:54] But I think there's some exciting other opportunities that could allow that Acorn Street to be reclaimed so that it could be used. [01:01:05] Because, frankly, I don't know how that happened to begin with. [01:01:07] Any time we give up use of right-of-way, it sort of generally goes to both sides. [01:01:13] I don't think they own it. [01:01:15] I don't know that we've given it to them, but we've allowed them to use it. [01:01:19] And I think a good discussion with Swiftmont could allow us to reclaim that as a nice corridor to the river [01:01:25] and not be a stormwater pond, which would really make the piece we did acquire much more valuable, I think. [01:01:32] So I hope that we encourage the realtor that's representing us and that the city, [01:01:40] after all these years knowing that something's going to happen, that maybe we can jump to it and get some really good advice. [01:01:47] Because a public-private partnership does require the public to do our part. [01:01:53] And I think that a look down the street and seeing that for sale sign almost seemed like pennies from heaven to me [01:02:01] because I know there's a potential along the other side of River Road and a crossing that might be a lot easier to make, [01:02:12] particularly if we had some real estate to do it. [01:02:15] Anyway, I'm sorry to jump that into it, but I just wanted to make sure if we're going to get moving, [01:02:22] now's the time to really be thinking about how that's going to be designed. [01:02:26] We'd like to be more compartmentalized and not all spread out, like you said, Mr. Vice Chairman. [01:02:31] And it can be innovative and award-winning for us to do something. [01:02:35] We've got $900,000 plus we're matching it with another large amount, $5 million in it. [01:02:42] We should get some of our CRA money back and loosen up your purse strings and let us keep going. [01:02:48] I'm excited that you're moving forward. Thank you. [01:02:51] Good point. Mr. Second? [01:02:53] I'll keep it kind of short. [01:02:55] I'm just happy that these projects, not just this one, but several are finally moving along. [01:03:01] It was kind of my intent when I joined this council committee that that's what I wanted to work towards, [01:03:09] and I'm happy that we're finally doing that, and I'm just pleased that we're finally moving ahead. [01:03:15] But definitely we need to take those drainage and stormwater issues into consideration. [01:03:22] Obviously we want to keep the project moving forward. [01:03:27] Yeah, just two things. [01:03:29] One that came up based on some public comment previously, which was in this RFP, [01:03:34] it does call for potential uses to include minimizing impact on existing River Road residents, [01:03:41] and I'm going to hold whatever partnership we come up with to that potential use. [01:03:49] In the spirit of the public comments that were made, it should go without saying, but since it was brought up. [01:03:55] And then I agree, I'm glad Councilman Altman's comments were largely on Acorn Street, and for two reasons. [01:04:06] One, I might have a question for you, but two, the SWOT analysis that was called for in this was the potential, [01:04:15] the only threat that was presented was to those existing businesses there, and that would be my only caution, [01:04:20] is that as we're looking, it was actually mentioned tonight in terms of equity and fairness across developers. [01:04:27] Well, similarly with businesses, if we bring a developer in who wants to bring in retail or commercial into this district, [01:04:34] how does that fit into what has been historically, and I use this word sensitively to the people who take pride in these businesses, [01:04:44] but I've spoken to many business owners on this strip who feel relatively dilapidated compared to, obviously, the other side of the bridge. [01:04:54] And so Acorn Street is kind of that buffer right now where you have those businesses to the north who are going to feel some of the burn [01:05:02] when you have this new development coming to the south of them. [01:05:05] So I don't know if that plays into CRA business incentives in terms of grants for those businesses to the north, [01:05:13] but keeping that in mind. [01:05:15] Also, Acorn Street, Acorn Street, Acorn Street, I could see that being a major topic of conversation, as Councilman Altman pointed out. [01:05:23] And just trying to put a bow on this in terms of wrapping it back to what I was originally saying about River Road, [01:05:30] in my mind, the more effort we can put on pushing traffic towards Acorn Street and then to Main Street as opposed to further down, [01:05:39] not only serves River Road, but it also serves, one, the businesses on Main Street, [01:05:44] and two, it gets more use of our parking garage and promoting our parking garage. [01:05:48] So every part of this project has it in the best interest to try to gain meaningful access to US-19 [01:05:59] without hurting the existing businesses that are there or impacting the homes at River Road. [01:06:07] So I did have one question. [01:06:09] And when you mentioned Acorn Street, you said something about this, Councilman Altman, [01:06:13] you mentioned a right-of-way issue. [01:06:16] I'm just, I wasn't able to picture that. [01:06:19] Think between the river and River Road. [01:06:22] The portion that crosses River Road to go to the river is still Acorn Street, and it is now a retention pond. [01:06:31] So we allowed our right-of-way to be used by the developer to meet his, and, you know, I wasn't involved in any of that, [01:06:41] but if I was at the time or I was brought into it, I would have had some resistance. [01:06:49] But I think, most importantly, part of this project is to help in terms of floods with attenuation. [01:06:55] The other part is to make sure that the water that we're throwing into the river doesn't pollute it [01:07:00] and we don't continue to find a decline in our scallop population or whatever else is happening. [01:07:05] So the whole environmental part is a feel-good thing, [01:07:09] and I hope that the development interests come in and really play up that element of innovation. [01:07:16] And the final thing to say is walkability. [01:07:19] If you recall, our predecessor in that role talked about the potential of a corridor down Acorn, [01:07:27] around the landing property, and over to the bridge. [01:07:33] So to retailers, I think the increase of density and the potential business that could be had [01:07:41] is something they've been waiting for a long time, too. [01:07:43] So it will be real curious to see just how sophisticated of a redevelopment project it is. [01:07:51] It's not a replacement of businesses. [01:07:53] It needs to encourage and grow that retail on that side of the bridge. [01:08:00] So I'm with you 100%. [01:08:02] Those are hard questions that I think it will be exciting to see what kind of answers we get. [01:08:08] Thank you. [01:08:11] Any other comments from anybody? [01:08:14] Okay, we have a motion and a second. [01:08:15] All in favor say aye. [01:08:16] Aye. [01:08:17] Opposed? [01:08:18] Motion passes. [01:08:20] We're going to move on to communications.

   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. 6Communications▶ 1:08:22
10. 7Adjournment▶ 1:14:38