State for Richie Committee redevelopment age board meeting Tuesday January 27th and 26 like stand for the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> Madam clerk, have role, please. >> Chairman John Aver >> here. >> Vice Chairman Chris Mayer >> here. >> Member Robert Hubard >> here. Member Lisa Burke. Let the record show that Member Burke is absent from tonight's meeting. Member Christine Sullivan
>> here. >> City attorney Nancy Meyer, let the record show that our city attorney is currently not at the DEAS. And city manager Don King >> here. Um for Lisa, she's was excused absence. Do we need to redo that for this meeting, you think, or
>> I would just >> Yeah. So if I get a motion to excuse Lisa for her illness. >> Motion to excuse Lisa. Second. >> Okay. Any further discussion? Any public comment? Seeing none, I put a vote on favor by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Motion
carries. U. Next up is approve the board minutes. We've got two sets of board minutes. Um, first up, we'll just we'll do them separately. So, I need a motion to approve the January 13th, 26 CRA board workshop minutes. >> Make a motion to approve January 13th workshop minutes.
>> There second. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. Motion carries. Next up, I need a motion to approve the January 13th, 2026 CRA board meeting minutes. >> Move. Second.
>> I got uh Christine with a second a little faster. Um all in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. Motion carries. Next up is comments from general public. I do not have any signups. Is there any show hands? People like to speak. Seeing none, break back to comments from the
city manager. Pass it over, Mr. King for his comments. >> I have nothing. >> Okay. You had something to say. So, cuz Chris has to go to the bathroom. So, you're you're deferring. All right. Next up is board business item number two, Olner Park fence replacement project. I'll pass that back to Mr. King for
introduction. Um, we've done a lot of discussion about uh this project uh and with uh Derek um we've come up with a couple of options and uh what we'll do is uh Derek's going to present those today. email you know for your uh at
least information for potential uh approval and um selection. >> All right. So few months ago we talked about the need to replace older park fence uh with a like design from what we see at waterfront. Initially we went
with the total uh fence perimeter. Uh the last board meeting it was requested that we take out the portion that would double up along the vinyl fence on the neighbor's side. So we got that quote as well. But in the spirit of options, uh you also refresh the quotes for the
initial as well. So option A is what you directed in the last meeting with the partial project you omitting the the portion by the vinyl fence and option B would be the total fence. Um some thoughts we're having to include the full fence option is like we said before
the fences on property line uh it's not the same design. It doesn't have a completed permit. Also, you know, as we were thinking, you know, vinyl fences are the first to go in a storm. Uh my time down at Fort Myers saw that the person from people that they said they
would never buy a closed vinyl fence again because those things were all over the place. So, we know that eventually that will go. And so the idea is to think ahead and that's why we have option the other option for you if if you so wish to do that. There was also concern about weeding in there. The weeds have not been a problem. There's
some thick gravel that they've been using. But Daryl said too since the city will be doing the removal and replacement of any type of landscape that it was a concern put a mat down. But for your consideration is option A the uh completed fence project without
the vinyl portion covered. And then B would be the complete with the vinyl portion double up >> and the fence outlet is the recommendation, right? They're the cheapest. And the difference between those two options is four grand roughly, right?
>> Correct. >> Four grain is the piece that the vinyl fence is on. >> That's the difference between the options you have. >> So it's the same fence. We're going with the metal standard picket black thing, right? >> Exactly like park. >> And for four grand less, we use their vinyl fence, right? Correct.
>> So, here's what I'm thinking. If there is a storm or there is a flood and it comes pushing over, it's going to push our vinyl fence right on our metal fence right over too. So, I like option B. Option B, which is I'm sorry, which one has >> option A is going to be without the
double double portion of the vinyl. >> That's what I want. I want option A. >> When you say that the water is going to push over the fence >> because if there's a storm and it pushes over that that we'll call what it is kite of a fence. It's a PL piece of plastic that it's going to push it right over into our fence and damage our fence anyway,
>> right? Oh, yeah. Right. >> That's what I'm saying. So, it's if it's a foot away from it, it's it, you know, I mean, we might as well go ahead and just go with number A and their fence gets pushed over and they don't put it back up, we'll drop one in there later. >> Okay. So, a motion.
>> Okay. Second. Have a motion. Second. Any further discussion? Any public comment? See, I put a vote. All in favor signify by saying I. I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> Okay, great job, Derek.
>> Uh, on that, because their fence is actually on our property line, >> I talked to the building department. It's allowed. Having a zero lot line fence is fine. the issue that they came over on to our property, but the the uh
confirmed, >> right, the line has no no girth, right? It's a line. It's it's it's a so the fence on the line would naturally spill into each other's property because it has because a fence is probably The only time I've seen that come up is uh if you
want to get really precise, if you paint the fence, I technically you could say that that split the difference on the top of the fence. If you I guess if you could split that vinyl fence virtually in half, I guess you could say that. >> But it would be impractical.
>> Derek, I do have a question because this was brought up to me about fence sharing in my neighborhood. If we use their fence, their fence gets destroyed. Could they potentially ask us to split the difference of replacing the fence >> since we are using
>> We're not using it. >> I would argue that you're not using it. You're just not putting the fence up on your side. >> And once it's destroyed, we would continue our fence. >> And we're not connecting to the fence either. You're going to have >> it on their property. >> So happens to be there. You're getting the benefit. >> Well, I know there's a lot of neighborhoods where there's agreements
all over my neighborhood about that that if if you attach to a fence and it blows down because you've decided to offset your your hard set, >> right? >> We're not attaching to it. We're putting a pole in the ground here and over here. And his fence just we're getting $4,000 of the taxpayer benefit by his fence.
Now, I will say if if uh if somebody's in the park and they do some graffiti on that side of the fence, I guess they probably have a claim that it was our park that caused that. But >> it's not really us, is it? >> It was still wasn't you? >> Good there, too. >> I would argue the person that did it.
I'd call the chief. That's fine. Handle is criminal mischief. >> That's why we gave you a radius. >> Now, we're going to get another police car sitting over there at the park. >> Cameras. Cameras. So, moving on to old business. I remember >> that's that cop car over here scared me
today. Okay, I'm driving up there. My goodness. >> That's what it's for. >> He was mayor. There you go. Hold on. I don't drive like the mayor. Okay. So, don't put me next time. >> Way off topic. >> Number three, discussion of old business. Is there any old business
discussed from a CRA perspective? >> I would like an update on the bait shop appraisals. I have I just received an email from the um engineer. I don't have much of an update for that. Um we are in the process of finalizing an agreement with
the firm. Um they sent me an email um that they are working on those properties. The the update I do have is that the question was from count from the board before about that it was going to be we'd have to pay for all three parcels. It doesn't work like that. It's just going to be the one.
>> Good. >> So, we are moving forward with it. So, that's the thing and that was the clarification. That's basically the update. Um, that since it's just going to be the one appraisal, we'll probably have to get two appraisals because of the cost of the pro, you know, the asking price of the property. But, it's
not we don't have to get one for every separate parcel. It's because it's being sold is that that's what we're getting. So, it's just going to be two appraisals on that property. Should we go ahead with the brownfield um survey or not survey? What do you call that? Uh
>> yeah, it's a environmental study. >> Yeah, study. Should we go ahead with that since Pasco offered to pay for it and it has to be done prior to purchase anyway. Should we get that started? >> Well, we we can't initiate that. Has to be a property owner. >> Yeah. >> Right. But well, >> he could do it any time.
>> Right. But I'm saying as far as requesting from him, you request the property owner to go ahead and do it and you you're the recipient of the study. The city would be the recipient of the study. >> So we we can coordinate it. >> He would get he'd be recipient and he
just it's it's not something that that uh >> we'd have to suggest. >> Yeah. Like hey, it's free if you want to get it done. It only helps him to sell you. >> If you want us to buy the property, we want you to do this or something like that. >> I'm saying get the ball rolling. Get it started. He he has that ability. Just
let him know >> and and then anybody say the city or s or whoever >> should >> that's just good good thing to do before you >> yeah depending on the results of that study we may need to renegotiate the price when the price comes in. So >> at no cost to us I don't see why not. I
mean just that you know put pass along to the owner and coordinate him with Pasco County you know get a consent letter. Yeah. And then move forward. So, we have move forward on the on the sur we're getting pricing on the surveys, right? >> Well, no. I thought the appraisal >> we're moving forward on the appraisals
of the property. Yes. >> We didn't have that discussion. We're supposed to get price for the appraisal. See if we were going to invest that or not. >> No, I thought the the question was because it was only about >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It was like $2,000 for the for the appraisals. I have to rewind tape, but last time I
>> Yeah, we'd have to look at that because I thought we had guidance and the only issue was >> we were waiting on the prices to see if we wanted to invest the money on the on the appraisals. >> Chris, am I correct in that? >> That's correct. >> I'd have to go back and look. I mean, I can stop I can stop the engineer moving forward, but the the direction that I
had in time >> where we have we have we ordered the appraisal. >> We've ordered the appraisal. Yes. Because it was the issue was >> Have they performed the appraisal? >> No, they haven't performed it yet. So, I guess there's no charges right now. So, >> we we were looking for a price for what it would cost and we were asking is it
one or three different appraisals? We're going to get back with us on one to three appraisals. We were we didn't approve appraisals. >> So, we could stop it. >> So, let's just address it here since we're here. >> So, yeah. Do we want to move forward? >> Well, how much how much is the appraisal? >> I don't have that exact amount on me. I'd have to get that information. >> Rough idea. I mean, what we talking?
>> I think it was between two $3,000 per appraisal. >> Per appraisal for all of them because that's what we came to last time. The last meeting we were at. Yeah, it's about $3,000 per per one and now you just said it's just going to be >> three lots. >> I'm sorry. >> No, it sounds correct. That's this is
the same discussion that you guys had last time. They were around two to $3,000 per and you guys agreed to have him move forward with the >> appraisal. We just didn't we didn't want to do every parcel. So, that was the only difference. It was about if I can move forward if it was
only doing one appraisal, >> right? Not not we didn't want we didn't want to spend $9,000. >> We didn't want to spend $9,000 twice. >> That would have been that's the thing. It was because there's three parcels there. So the question was do we want to do one one one appraisal or we want to
do three. I found out that it's only one regardless. I can email them tomorrow and >> so it's a $3,000 appraisal at this point. >> Yes. >> At the most. >> Well twice because we have to do two because of the cost of the property. >> Oh, right. So, we got two different to do two separate appraisals. >> So, $6,000. So, the next question I'm
going to ask is, do we want to invest $6,000 in appraisals? Are we really that interested in buying this property? >> I thought we were. >> Yeah. Last week, I really thought >> it was if it was all three, include all three properties, go ahead and do it.
>> So, there there are there are folks on council that have the uh agreement that they want to buy. There's also people on council that don't want to buy. >> Why do you I did not know that. I didn't know. >> Well, that's the discussion of one price is outlandish. >> Well, we don't have the appraisals in yet to start the negotiation,
>> right? This other part of is we don't have, you know, it's not necessarily a budgeted purchase. We do have land acquisition money in there. We also have a water plant that we're trying to acquire as well. It has to be done. So, um I think before we spend $6,000, we need to make
sure that we are actually intending on moving forward with purchase. September 9th, we approved uh for Andy to move forward on purchase that property to get that. >> That is not true. >> That is not true. >> We asked him to take the money. >> Again, that is not You can rewind the tape, but that there's been no approval.
There's no motion or anything to move forward to purchase property. We we we gave the the uh the direction to look into it. We didn't give the >> negotiations negotiate. That's not purchasing. That's that's talking about price and and
whatnot. We don't even really nobody's come back with money. We wanted to be fiscally responsible. How much of the the last time I left here, I didn't know there was $3,000 for one lot or three lots. It was it was 3,000 or none. So, we're going to get clarification on that. And we didn't get that clarification then. Now all of a sudden,
we're ordering. >> So, now we got the clarification. It's going to cost us $6,000 to appraise the property. So, with that information, I think now we need to make a decision. Do we move forward to do we want to spend that $6,000 or we just are we just fishing? Can we table it to the next
meeting? >> We can. You got to stop it for now because we haven't gave authorization. >> Stop it now. If you're going to make that motion, I'll second it. Table it till the next meeting. Right. >> Well, this is up to Christine, too. This is her and I got the
>> just the first I've heard that there's a lack of interest in this. I thought that we were all on board. >> I'll repeat the same thing I've I've said since day one is I don't think it's the city's place to to speculate on real estate. I don't think it's a city's place to purchase real estate. Um, especially if we're not going to we
don't have a plan to do anything with it. >> I thought we did have a plan. I thought that we were I thought that we had discussed this many times. What's the plan? >> And discussed at least some parking on it, whether it be just boat trailer parking. >> Christine, if you remember that we were securing that we wanted to secure that
property for parking purposes for the park. So if something happened between then and now that there's a lack of interest on aware the >> it is parking right now. >> Okay. So does the city want to pay $1.6
million for for a a a parking lot that's already a parking lot? >> That's a question, right? >> Well, we don't want someone else >> 1.6, but we don't have appraisals yet to begin actual negotiations on price. If the appraisals came in at 800,000, then
we wouldn't be at 1.6 six anymore, >> right? And and then I guess if we fast forward to that, let's say that he he wants 1.6 the price come back $800. He's going, "Okay, have 800." I doubt that's going to be the conversation, right? I want 1.6. >> He may drop it a little bit, but if it
comes back again, we don't know, but again, we're going to pay $6,000 to do all this, which is fine, but at the end of the day, when we get those back, I mean, in order before we throw out $6,000 in appraisals, we need to be pretty darn sure we're going to move forward with the purchase of that. then
I don't think we're there. I'm not. Um maybe maybe the rest of you are and that's fine. But uh again that you're talking about a significant investment and then what do we do with it after that? You know we don't have money to improve it anyway.
It's a procedural thing. This is going to be a CRA expenditure, right? And so when you are making these expenditures, you need to specify the purpose. And so you need to establish the purpose for the property beforeh hand, >> right? Even spend it. >> We we have it's in the plan. Generally, it's a there's a line item, but when you
start getting into the weeds, you really need to specify what you're going to do with it. >> Yeah. So I'm not I'm not trying to be a Debbie Down here, but we there's there's things we need to take consideration for. We just >> Yeah. So >> can I say one thing? >> Sure. We were talking about land acquisition year when Adam stand up stood up the podium two three meetings
ago and all of a sudden we were 250 short on our money like we'll just pull that from land acquisition we gutted that land acquisition out of our budget at that meeting right >> and there was some there was some yeah changes that >> discussion about that with Adam and so that 250 that we're going to use for land acquisition right then just went
away so I I'm not saying that it's not a value to assess the value of that property I don't know to $6,000 is wise fiscally for us to do right now. And obviously there's nobody running in there to buy it, right? But they'd have already been all over that point if they had
>> Well, he's waiting to hear from us. >> Yeah. I mean, we did we we did have a motion. >> Andy had we stopped negotiations >> doing the doing the he was in pursuit. >> So, so what you're saying >> I haven't talked to him. I don't know. >> I wasn't even aware. So, I'm sure was in
pursuit and that's all I know. That's probably I can tell you the bait shop is, as you well know, has sent emails. They had a packet here with all kind of pictures of what they were going to what we could do with it and all these different things. I mean, right, >> this has been this has been a cultivation of of a lot of things that kind of got spun out of control in my in
my opinion. Um, but uh obviously we need to we need to bring it back home, we need to find out if if we're going to move on property, we need to have a specific uh uh plan for that and then we go after it. >> Well, we we did discuss it. We we going to have like a you know welcoming
station we're going to have some green area and parking you know how we want to we've had ideas tossed around but we we have not for >> the reason I suggest table because some things have changed since then >> but I think talked to Don about this with his
guidance maybe and and Sal and Derek maybe um come up with some some options and bring it to the to the table again in next meeting possibly next year. And Lisa's not here too. >> Franc's drawings were unbelievable. That was some pretty stuff. Okay. But that is
not nearly as wide as big as that. >> I thought the screen wide enough for the whole world to hear. Um it's not nearly as wide as we need or somebody would need if they congregated the whole thing. So I don't know that it it is wide enough to be a standalone project by itself. you know, where you park the
the boats down there now and and if you purchase we have the the boat dock, but you know, if we purchase the other stuff there, I don't know if that whole that's enough property to really make it make sense. >> Well, you if we had the property that the Thai restaurant is on, you could
eliminate Old Post Road and Old Post Road be like one of the entrances there or part of the the entrance to that parking garage. You'd have all that that area to to do a multi-level garage. My only question with that is if you're going to have trucks and trailers, you
can't there's no way you can get them inside that parking garage. They can't they can't turn around and move. Is there going to be an external offset where we actually have a a single >> area where they can do that park this project? Because
I drive a big truck. I get inside those parking garages. Sometimes it becomes a challenge especially if you're towing something and it gets really hard unless it's created in in in depth to park as opposed to you know in width >> but automotive it wouldn't really work.
>> I'm not basing my questions tonight on uh Paul Lefron's uh that was beautiful and everything but you know obviously there's issues with that. Um, I just thought I this is just the first I've heard that we weren't unified in this because at some point, I
guess it was September, we did uh move forward with negotiations and if we decided to stop that at some point, >> I just nobody ever made me aware of it, nor did they make the bait shop owner aware of it. >> No. So, obviously the the negotiation price was there. He wants I think it's
1.6 million. That's that's what came out of that, right? And we we talked about that and that it seemed uh way more than it should be. And again, it's been sitting there and you can say he's waiting on it, but I can tell you somebody came in there $1.6 million. It's gone. >> Okay. If I went over there tonight and
said, "Hey, but here's $1.6 million." He ain't waiting on city. He's selling property, right? >> So, I don't I don't I don't uh >> I mean, we won't have opportunities again. So, it's good good that we're having this discussion. >> Yeah. No. So, we need to level set obviously because there's some
confusion. So, here here's here's some some some issues that I want to make you guys aware of. We're going to be having to build a $47 million water plant. Okay, keep that in back of your mind.
Let's say we had aspirations to build a parking deck and I don't and and I and I give you reasons why. I've given them before. Um, we have a parking issue very select times during the year. Fourth of July celebration. Got a parking problem.
Okay. Do you build this multi-million dollar parking garage Fourth of July? No. Okay. Especially now when we need a $47 million water plant and and a plethora of other things we need in the city. So, I appreciate the discussion, but we have to be real. Um we we we're
get we've got to put some plans together that are actually achievable. Um and we can go and buy property. We have that kind of dry powder. We could we could buy property. We bought that. We got about half a million dollars I think in the the little third acre corner of the two
houses were $400,000 $500,000 after demo and all that. And we've been sitting on that for six seven years >> roughly. We we purchased that when John D was city manager. So I would say about four
or five years. >> Yeah. So so we purchased those and that was the original intent for those was to do some parking and of course we did nothing with them and and um now we rent them out and we actually get something coming in. That was just recent in the last year or so. Um so for us to move
forward and let's just say that the appraisal comes back at $1.6 million. We buying it. >> I mean just >> it's neither here nor there. I've been asking about this every CRA meeting for months now. We've been waiting on the price you >> and now we're here and all of a sudden I
find out that there's a lack of interest and that's just something that hasn't been communicated in a way that it's being communicated tonight. It's fine. Lisa is not here. Um and I just recommend that we table this until everybody talk about it.
>> He would probably sell that to someone for 1.6 or someone came up with you. You could be right about that, but he may sell it to the city for less. If it comes up with appraisal of 700 or $800,000, we can make an all we need to say. This is what we'll pay. This is all we have. >> Yeah. He can say no. >> Right. >> We'd be out to $6,000.
>> Yeah. And and and if we if we wanted counter or whatever, >> right? And to be honest with you, if we if we were going to build a parking garage there, we could also if if if he wasn't willing to sell it for for a decent price, we could take it in a domain to build our parking deck, too. Again, I guess I'm looking much further past the land acquisition. Um because
the things that that you guys talk about or whatever, we have zero ability to move forward on. >> And so if if we have zero ability to move forward to build a parking garage, for example, why would we tie up $1.6 million of our money that we could
deploy somewhere else in the city that we actually get some uh benefit from? And again, if if parking is our if our motivation, I mean, you talk about that as a council. Um, you know, I I know for a fact as people come in and buy these properties, we can negotiate public parking in their development. And so we
can solve public parking outside of, you know, building a parking garage ourselves, which is going to be on us. And if if we was to build the the uh the Vegas style boat parking garage that was pitched to us, which was beautiful design. It was is interesting. Um, you're talking we we don't have the
ability to do that, right? >> It's just it's a non-starter. So we, you know, the last thing we want to do is we want to, we don't want to tie up good money in real estate for something that we think we might want to do in the future. We need to set a plan for it. We going to do something in the future,
whatever that is, and we need this property to do it. And and a water plant is a perfect example for that. We need a place to put the water plant and we have to go get that property and we're moving forward with that. That's perfectly fine. this other thing is is pipe dreams and and other speculation and it's it's
just not something that I want to entertain with taxpay dollar. That's my >> I've got a question if I can. >> Communication is helpful though. I mean we've been doing this for months. >> Communicate right now. Christine, um if we get one appraisal, let's just say
we get an appraisal. Is this property is worth 800,000? Just for do we have to go another appraisal if we're going to move forward to purchase it? >> Yeah. Negotiate you. But that that is a that's not a bad idea to go ahead and get one just kind of >> Let me ask you a question. When you went
out for this appraisal, do you have to go out to bid for an appraisal? >> Not at that. >> You just call somebody up >> for for that amount that's within the city manager and staff per here's the deal. I'd be willing to okay about a $4,000 appraisal. I'm at six.
I'm choking a little bit. I'm saying no, I'm not going to spend six grand. >> We could do, like you said, a two or $3,000 appraisal. get get that amount and you can want to offer them money. >> Well, here here's the deal. Here's the deal. I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Well, you offer and he says no or he says yes and they say, "Oh, well, it's
worth it. Let's buy it." Then he can get a second appraisal before we do anything and come up with a plan. I >> I think I think that I'm okay if we instruct S to go back and say, "Look, they wouldn't approve $6,000 appraisal. They'll approve $4,000 for an appraisal." And that's for both pieces. You know, I'd prefer Lisa be here, though, because if it's going to turn
out that she's she has zero interest in pursuing this either, then that 4,000 would just be >> That's an excellent point, too. >> Yeah. Wasted. So, >> maybe it does go at 800. Maybe >> I think I think what we need to do >> Okay, you're the mayor. Go for it. What do you got? >> Well, no, I'm not that. I'm just idea
guy, right? So, >> obviously Lisa's not here and it's important that we a decision like that would I think all five of us should be involved in it for 100%. Um, I think we need to talk about are we interested in
purchasing that property? Okay. And kind of at what level of interest are we? Are we, you know, if it was $500,000, would we jump on it or would we still be cautious? You know, kind of see what set that and then if there's if it makes
sense and we want to spend a few thousand dollars on appraisals, I think that's the right approach. >> I agree. Andrew with that >> during the busiest day in Newport Richie, the busiest day, whatever that day was, shut down the streets. I went over there
>> and I physically drove through the parking garage top to bottom. And that parking garage was about 80% vacant on the busiest day where they shut all the streets down. There's nowhere to go. >> Ours would be empty, too. >> I wasn't even, you know, talking about a
parking garage for now. I'm saying that this is the last opportunity to secure that property before somebody else purchas it purchases it. It's adjacent to our park and I thought it was something that we were considering because once it's gone, it's gone. >> Do we want do we want to keep somebody
from purchasing that? I guess is the question. Do we what are we going to do with it? We secure it, >> right? >> We can uh legal Nancy um from Boulevard to the bridge west of 19. Can we put a moratorum on property
down there if we're going to do form zone form based zoning or we're going to change the the codes? >> Um, I don't think I understand your question. Mortar about what? >> Put moratorium on on anything going because if if someone's going to look to buy the property and they want to put storage units on it, well, they won't be
able >> for temporary time. We can actually say no storage units. >> Well, we can say nothing can be done and because we we're in the process of changing. >> Yes. idea for a mortorium is you should pause while you investigate >> right a temp a six month temporary
moratorum on that district >> I'd say possibly without having all the details about what you're thinking I I don't know what that area is I don't know what it would entail what specific are you talking about for that specific the waterfront district >> district right >> what do you want to stop from happening >> well I just like a moratorum on
virtually anything uh until we change the code >> you can't just say you can't do anything have to be very specific about what we're doing and why we're doing it >> well we're in the process of of changing the codes in that district. I mean, you may not put a moratorum, but anybody want to do anything. We're in the process of changing the codes here. So,
you might want to wait or something until >> Well, you can't you can't disadvantage property owners from doing something with their property. I mean, if there's things you don't want any more storage, you can definitely do that. >> The moratorium, you can. That's >> Yeah, but not you can't just blanket moratorium, so you can't do anything. >> I mean, you could say whatever, but you
want to make sure you do it properly. >> Yeah. So I it sounds like what without more information what you're telling me is very broad. I don't think that would work. >> Something specific like we talked way way way back about mortoriiums I think on car lots which we never did. It's very specific in this certain area.
>> Yeah we messed up because sorry um but that's very specific a specific area for a specific time. >> It was chosen not to do it for that particular instance but you need to be specific about where and what you're doing. just a blanket. There can be no development. That's a lot of property
rights you just took away and I don't think that's going to apply. I'm happy to look into it, but I don't think that would work. >> Well, I just wanted offering suggestions and looking for some. >> Yeah. Um, but we could look at something specific. I mean, if >> protect people from making an investment for something that it's not what they planning on doing is all
>> Well, they make an investment and they come in and they do and it's it's aligned with our code, they can they're going to move forward. There's there's we can't stop them. I mean, it's they want to come in and they want to put something up that they it's a approved business. Let's say a apartment building with the appropriate density, maybe we
can't stop that. That's that's code's for is to >> put your your guard rails up and if they're within a guard rails, you're good to go. >> Now, again, mortoriium, like I said, if there's something specific in there that you're thinking about extracting from the the overlay district,
>> um like say we're not going to allow any residential in there. Well, we could put a moratorium on residential while we meet to take it away. That's >> then that's the idea. Give you give you time to do the research, the study, hire the people you need to make those determinations, but it needs to be it can't just be a blanket.
>> That's not a big deal. I was wondering if you know to protect someone to do that. >> I see your point, but I don't think a blanket just nothing, no development, whatever appropriate. >> Okay. I think growing land like back
appraisal I think six grand is a lot of money and I think I'm more comfortable with four grand. I just looked up, you know, highs and lows. You just went talked to an appraiser, you know, right? >> Well, no. >> Where'd you get them? This was the
company that uh Andrew Butterfield assigned to not only do the properties that we were doing for the water plant, but also these properties. So that's that's where we're moving forward with them. But the thing is that I'm not as as of right now, I'm not held to
anybody. I have no I have no quote um no official um invoice. Uh I've not issued a PO for the appraisals for the property, but I definitely want clarification tonight what I'm doing. >> Yeah. So I I say >> I'm not leaving this room. >> Sound like my consensus. Put that on
hold until next meeting. Uh well, I guess >> we'll get Lisa here for more. >> Is that okay to talk about that during comments? I guess. >> Yeah. >> Okay. It's too late for agenda. >> And I think the best piece of that it gives us the opportunity, you know, as we move forward because, you know,
$4,000. Let's let's let's put ourselves in a place of negotiation with what what we want to spend on it with whatever contractor we're looking at because we can probably negotiate some of the price to get a two properties done at that cost if we wanted to look at that. But
if we want to look at just one and we can do that. My only concern in the long long long run is do we have do we have something do we have a project or do we have an idea of what that propertyy's for? because that goes back to the CRA defining that being able to execute that money and then to
what end are we going after this property. So, is it something that's going to generate revenue for us? Is it something that's going to provide, you know, ease of of parking or ease of space or, you know, just kind of what it is? Because what I want to make sure is that when we make the investment in it
that we're getting our return for what we really want out of it. I mean, one thing I can tell you is buying speculative real estate can be devastational to people and and to communities. Speculative real estate is exactly what it is. You drop 1.2 or 1.6
or whatever it is. It's another that parking garage they that he grew up there, that's a that's a $25 million parking garage. >> It's more than that, I think. >> Okay. I was on the cheap then, you know, but 25 million. I can get something. It looks like that. >> Maybe probably a little bit more. We
obviously that's a lot of options. you said that you can take away, but the possibilities are, you know, I'm just I'm just thinking that we're going to have, you know, going down to say, "Hey, we need a reverse osmosis water treatment plant for 47 million." And by
the way, we want to park our cars down there. It's another, you know, $30 million. We're trying to make sure we're prioritizing our asks. And what I don't want to do is be sitting on that property for two or three years with nothing on it at all that we spent, you know, 1.2 >> outside of an immediate plan that we are
going to execute on. Okay. >> I don't buy real estate. I would >> I think we're okay if I have a plan, too. I'm okay if we have a plan. >> I thought Yeah, I just I always assumed or presumed that we uh were working on a plan or acquiring that property and unifying it with the park. But
>> after looking at Paul Fronson's thing, I'm coming to more of a a determination that we need to find another alternate place for a boat ramp because that's right in the middle of all that stuff he drew up. It was right there. And you can have kids and dogs and all kinds of stuff there.
>> Possibility. >> You and I talked about that. >> That's a good possibility that we can do that. >> Yeah. So, I mean, there's probably another place for a boat ramp. And I'm not I don't want to take away our boat ramp. I'm telling you right now in the waterfront district. Another place for it in the waterfront district or out of it altogether. I
>> I want us to look at where the options are, Don, where we can put ramp. You know, >> we're working on it. >> You know, can we partner with >> Yeah. I' I've mentioned Richie I've mentioned the the south side of waterfront park where they were looking at doing one before >> they can't do it there I don't like doing it there either
>> you can't do it there boats around >> from a legal perspective >> FTC we got slammed last time >> boat ramps are >> you can yeah you can submit that to them >> I want to keep I want to keep the boats >> we did we tried it >> guys go ahead Chris >> the boats the trailers and the people
coming in off the water drunk from dropping around my kids okay that's what I want to stop from happening that's dangerous you Yeah. So there there's >> there's an issue with our main commercial district having a boat ramp right in the center of it. It's unfortunate it's there, but that's where it's at. And so obviously we've got a couple things that we we need to look
at. Um do we invest it and keep it there? Option number one. Option number two, do we move it somewhere else? Um or option number three, do away with it. I don't think option number three is an option. We need to have boat access, especially in Port Richie. We're right here on the water. Um so I think uh option number one, invest in it. I don't
think that's the right thing because if that's going to limit our ability to to have a vibrant uh waterfront and commercial activity and all that. So it make sense. I think we really need to look at finding a place to rehome it. Um that we we have very little options. I mentioned Brasher Park. I would and I
just tell you I met with Karen Taylor. I want to get Bill Rockus over here to look at possibly federal money to do a channel there if we were to look at a launch there. That's a great place for it if it had deep water. um definitely could be utilized for a smaller uh portion of boats if they if they watch
the ties. But the only other option and and there is a there is a um obviously the another project going on across the river that they're going to put a boat ramp in that's in place that's going to happen within the next couple years and Newport Richie is doing. Um, so there there's options over there. It's going
to help with that. If we was to move to the south end of Waterfront Park, providing we get um SCT approval, which I think that's I think there's a path to success there. Um, I don't know what what you've heard, but the conversations I've had, that's that's a legitimate use. They would have to approve it. We
have to show them the plans, but that's something that we could technically do um based on their current program, but we would have to go through approval process. But that's that's an option. And that's a very >> that before s it was a kill. >> I wouldn't I wouldn't completely dismiss it um as saying not to do it. But the
thing is is that when we're just not talking about a boat ramp, talking about parking for said boat ramp and where we're going to be parking all these boats and trailers after the fact now, that might be an issue because of what we'd have to do for lack of green space if we're going to make it all the parking lot. So we have to put them
somewhere. So if if we're going to if we're going to have a boat ramp at at Waterfront Park, where are all the boat boats and trailers going to go? >> So that's something to look at, right? >> And you're going to put an amphitheater at Waterfront Park. You're using that same property for parking for for for
boats and trailers. So that's the kind of switch. >> I'm just saying there's there's there's very limited possibilities where we can move it to. We need to look at that. again that dig down into it, but >> property down by America Marina on Epide is perfect.
>> Could we agree that we need to look for an alternative spot? >> Well, we are. Yeah, I I agree. >> Can we do that, Don? Have a little workshop or something. >> I've already got that as a note. So, okay. Yeah, that's >> one of the things that we'll address because S brought up the one thing that that that I wanted to bring up as we
discuss this because we talked Brster Park, we talk all these other places, but we still got a lot of trucks and trailers that we've got to figure out as a part of this because we can find a ramp. I don't think we're going to have a problem finding a ramp, but where is it going to be best fit in our community
to where it's it's it's appropriate for the entire package that will come with that program? Well, part of that too is how big of a boat ramp are we going to provide the public, >> right? Doesn't have to be six lanes and you know, but if it's free, you're going to get a lot of traffic.
>> I can tell you I will never uh advocate for a free launch unless it's for city residents that that help pay and that's a whole other discussion. I think we need charge outside residents >> something. Well, the biggest problem with Brasher Park is Florida chapter 253. The same thorn inside Pasco's had
with Westport. Uh they've been trying for years. They've attempted a couple times to dredge because there's Westport, even citizens of Westport were going to try to pay for dredging and it's completely shut down by Florida EPA. This new won't allow it because of
the grass beds out there. They will not let you dredge out there. It's the same thing for Brasher unfortunately. Plus, you don't really have as much parking at Brasher as you would as this other piece of property looking by American Marine. >> Yeah. Well, that's a viable spot. I think that's a great environmental spot.
>> And then we have Crasher Park will be the park that we want for weddings all the front and all that stuff. Yeah. Yeah. >> But but the other part on on Eptide if you guys want to go by and look at that. Go down by American Rain and run right out Epide and you'll see it. I was in
the kayak went by there a couple times and it it would be ideal. >> Which space is that oneptide? I mean I know when you actually go >> you go you take the epidem you go it's the marina you've got the ho the condos and you got the marina it goes in
between them and then it takes you out to the houses out on the point >> right >> where balloon was >> right if you go out that on the right there's like a big lagoon and it's like six feet deep at low tide and there's a channel goes out and the channel that American ring goes right out to the to the main channel right there by the Gulf
and there's plenty of room for parking a two and a park and a bathroom and boat. >> I think does Pasco own all that? >> Yes. >> Land through there. >> So that we can probably work with Pasco and look at something there. That's >> we talked about that. We're going to be looking into that. So, but yeah,
there's there's other things, but that right now >> I'm not going to tell what I told Don about it, but it's ideal. >> Okay. And we've been discussing a lot of problems that you guys are discussing right now and options for it. I fought and I protested in here nine years ago
when the mayor at that time suggested he was going to eliminate the boat ramp and we ran up and down. That ain't going to happen because I used I used that boat ramp a lot over 50 years with several different boats, not just my own. >> We need if I had a choice I would go
somewhere else than try to fight pedestrians and and the the the dinner crowd and and and stuff like that with my boat and my trailer. Especially if we build that environment down there we're talking about. >> You don't want to you don't want to fight with you don't >> you don't no not a bad
go down limestone all the way to the end and then drop it in. You have a parking you got a quick exit to Gulf. I'm like every day >> and on side of the water there's so much empty undeveloped land over there. You could create parking lots over there real close to buying all kinds.
>> Yeah. The only the only negative to that I think a lot of positives. The only negative obviously you got a lot of residential area you have to traverse through to get to that. That's the only problem. >> Well, limestone is has got the speed humps. Um and I don't know if you'd want to go down sunsets. Limestone would be I
think the ultimate way to run down there and be boats go down there all the time. Marina down there all >> they go down there all the time. There's one turn that we could modify a little bit so it's not quite as sharp a turn but it's definitely doable with a 30 35 foot boat to go back there to that that
spot. No problem. Can I be the killer of this conversation? We're way off topic. >> We are chasing rabbits. >> So, we need to This is an agenda item, I think, for another day. I think Don has a direction. >> I just want to love hanging out with you all, but >> you pay me to be here. I don't think you
want anymore. I >> just want to mention too that tide is out of the jurisdiction of CRA. So, it cannot be a CRA project if you go that route. >> Right. >> And that and he'll bring that back when Don brings his stuff back. >> Yeah. So, let's wrap back in >> else's neighborhood now. look at boat ramp options so we can it all plays in
and the problem is all that kind of plays in the purchase of that property. I didn't put that. We've already tabled the appraisal or we're trying not talked about tableling it. I don't think we ever officially did. >> We did. We need >> consensus. We're consent. Any objections table?
>> No. >> An email right now. >> Motion to adjourn. Stop the appraisals. >> No, I don't think we can adjourn yet. You're not >> We got to the board. >> Move forward with no appraisals and have more discussion on the purpose of the land before moving forward. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Yes. That's what we got.
>> Thank you. Okay. Any uh any other old business? >> No. >> Okay. Comments from the board. Start with vice chair. Mayor, >> no comments, sir. >> Member Hubard. >> I'm more up. >> Member done. >> I as well. I'm done. I have to drive
town. >> Uh oh. Yeah. So, the public knows we have a CRA workshop February 12th at 300 PM that we we talked about on the previous meeting. So, we set that. >> Thank you, Derek.
of the park master plan on the 3 and you're going to see your new sign concept on the 10th. >> Okay. Your mic went on. So, >> can we calendar updates, please? >> Yeah. >> It's mixed up in my notes. >> We have a park master plan workshop at
5:00 on the 3 and then you're going to see the new concept on the 10th for the signs. >> Okay. >> I did put that out if anybody was taking notes. Mhm. It took a while, but they're all mixed. All those dates are mixed in.
>> I I try to make sure that I cover that stuff for you guys as best as possible. But if if you guys want a hard copy of it from now on, I give you a hard copy. >> Okay. Looking for a motion. >> Motion to adjurnn. Okay. Second. >> Second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Anyone?