[00:00:01]
HE'S NOT COMING. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. ALRIGHT. LET'S SEE. CAN WE HAVE A STAND UP AND. OH WE HAVE A ROLL CALL FIRST. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SORRY. ROLL CALL. I'LL GET IT. I'LL GET IT GOING. HERE. JUST A MINUTE. CHAIR BRECHBILL HERE. VICE CHAIR MOSER HERE.
BOARD MEMBER. JAMES. HERE. BOARD MEMBER. MANARA HERE. BOARD MEMBER. WHALEN. AND BOARD MEMBER. SHERER HERE. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE 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. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. LET'S GO WITH. THE
[APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE. A SECOND, SECOND. SECOND. BY BONNIE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THAT ONE PASSES. WE'RE GOING NOW. OKAY.[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
APPROVAL OF THE MAY 6TH MINUTE MINUTES. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT, LET'S SEE. LET'S SEE. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC RELATIVE TO NON-AGENDA RELATED ITEMS? NO. I HAVE NO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. OKAY. COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS ON NON
[COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS (Non-Aqenda Items)]
AGENDA ITEMS. YES. OKAY. GO AHEAD. I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO GET OUT CLEAN. I'M GOOD. SO I DON'T KNOW WHO I KNOW. MARK AND FREDERICK WERE AT THE CRA MEETING LAST WEEK AND I ATTENDED JUST TO SEE HOW THINGS WERE GOING. AND I LEARNED A LOT DURING DURING THAT SESSION. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK FREDERICK AND I ARE ALIGNED ON SOME THINGS. WELL, YOU KNOW, SOME ASPECTS CAN BE A LITTLE BIT DISCOURAGING. BUT THE WAY I LOOK AT IT IS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I HAVE MUCH MORE CLARITY. AS TO HOW THE CRB CAN HELP THE CITY OR HELP THE CRA MAKE SOME DECISIONS AROUND INVESTMENT. AND I, YOU KNOW, SITTING AND LISTENING TO ALL THAT. YES, THERE IS A BIT OF A CONFLICT BETWEEN, LET'S SAY WHAT MAYBE THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY COMMISSION, NOT THE CRA, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY COMMISSION VIEWS AS PRIORITIES VERSUS ACTUALLY THE MISSION OF THE CRA.SO WE JUST HAVE TO FIND WHERE THOSE TWO OVERLAP, BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY DON'T CURRENTLY OVERLAP COMPLETELY. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. WE JUST WE FIND THE COMMON GROUND AND WE WORK IN THAT SPACE. BUT I WOULD ALSO REMIND THIS GROUP THAT, YOU KNOW, I WAS SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE LISTENING TO THE DISCUSSION, AND THEN I STARTED COUNTING. HEADS ARE SO THE CRA. HAS TWO MEMBERS, TWO VOTING MEMBERS FROM THIS BODY. PLUS, YOU KNOW, WHICHEVER CITY COMMISSIONER. SO THAT'S FIVE PLUS TWO IS SEVEN. SO IN A WAY SOME THINGS COULD GO FOR THREE. SO THAT ALSO SORT OF SHEDS SOME LIGHT ON HOW I THINK THIS BODY CAN GET SOME THINGS DONE FOR STUART. OF COURSE WE SHOULD BE ALIGNED AS WE DISCUSS THINGS IN DEBATE THEM. BUT I ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT AS I LISTENED TO THE DISCUSSION. I THINK THERE'S STILL SOME CONFUSION AND I, I FEEL A LOT BETTER BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST ME MANY MONTHS AGO. BUT WHEN I JOINED THIS BODY, THE THERE WAS A LOT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION THAT I RECEIVED AND, AND IT COULD BE A LITTLE MISLEADING. AND I FOUND OUT AT THAT MEETING LAST WEEK IT WASN'T JUST ME. MOST OF THE MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM WERE CONFUSED ABOUT AT LEAST ONE THING. SOME WERE CONFUSED ABOUT MANY THINGS LIKE ME, BUT. SO WHEN WE JOINED THIS BOARD, WE WERE GIVEN LOTS OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION, WHICH IS SUPER HELPFUL. FOR NOW. I'M NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT, BUT AND WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THOSE SUMMARIES AND STUFF FROM, FROM THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND IT INCLUDED ANALYZES AND PLANS AND VISIONS BY DIFFERENT SOURCES. AND I SAW WHAT I THOUGHT WERE PHOTOS OF LOTS OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, LIKE WORKSHOPS AND PEOPLE TAKING TOURS AND ALL THIS KIND OF STUFF. AND THAT'S WHY I
[00:05:04]
WAS KIND OF LIKE, WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO SOME THINGS. WE WOULDN'T WANT TO REDO THAT. THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. WE SHOULD LEARN FROM WHAT WE SHOULD BUILD ON WHAT WAS DONE BEFORE. AND WE HAD SOME DEBATE IN HERE ABOUT, WELL, DO WE WANT TO GET COMMUNITY INPUT AND SO ON. AND I GUESS IN MY MIND I WAS KIND OF LIKE, WELL, DIDN'T IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. IT WAS OVER THE LAST, WHATEVER, 5 OR 6 YEARS.DIFFERENT ASPECTS. AND I THINK TO SOME DEGREE THAT'S TRUE, BUT IT'S NOT COMPLETELY TRUE. YOU CAN ALWAYS YOU CAN NEVER GET TOO MUCH INPUT, OBVIOUSLY. BUT I REMEMBER THE MAYOR SAYING LAST WEEK THAT, WELL, THERE'S YOU KNOW, THEY FELT LIKE THERE'S BEEN ENOUGH COMMUNITY INPUT. THE PLANS ARE THERE, THE DIFFERENT IDEAS, THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS. THEY'RE IN A LIST. LET'S JUST I THINK THE WAY I TOOK THAT, FREDERICK AND MARK, THE GUIDANCE THAT I HEARD WAS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THAT. LET'S PRIORITIZE IT. LET'S FIND THE COMMON GROUND AND WORK ON THOSE THINGS THAT ARE COMMON. IMPLEMENT THAT WE CAN IMPLEMENT. AND I THINK WHERE THERE'S COMMON SUPPORT AND I THOUGHT, YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. NOW, SOME OF THOSE MIGHT BE WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS THE, THE, THE, THE NO BRAINERS. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE RIGHT WORD, BUT THE WHAT I WOULD CALL STREETSCAPING OR PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY STUFF. GOD, THAT'S JUST TO ME IS JUST SUCH A NO BRAINER. PENDING OTHER ASPECTS AND COST AND THINGS. BUT SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT I MIGHT CALL BIG AND BOLD, YEAH, WE CAN THINK ABOUT THOSE IF WE AGREE AND WE FEEL IT'S RIGHT. AND WE ASK NOW TO, YOU KNOW, PROCEED WITH SOME OF THOSE AND RECOMMEND THEM TO THE CRA. WE CAN I'M JUST I'M JUST THINKING, WELL, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S GOING TO FIND COMMON GROUND. IT DOESN'T DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T RECOMMEND IT. IT JUST MEANS IT MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE TOUGHER HURDLE. BUT THAT'S OKAY. AGAIN, THE NO BRAINER STUFF WE SHOULD JUST WE SHOULD BE SUPPORTING, PROMOTING, RECOMMENDING TO THE CRA. AND LET'S JUST GET GOING. AND I THINK. SO ONE MORE ASPECT OF THAT WHEN I SAY THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION. SO EVEN EVEN AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS, THERE WAS CONFUSION ABOUT WHO RECOMMENDED WHAT VISION OR VERSION OF WHICH VISION. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME SLIDES WERE BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF DOWN AROUND CITY HALL IN THE FUTURE. THERE WAS MASS CONFUSION OVER WAS THAT FROM A CITIZEN WORKSHOP, OR WAS THAT FROM A AN ARCHITECT OR A PLANNING GROUP OR MAIN STREET? AND THEY JUST HELPED ME REALIZE THERE'S A BIT OF CONFUSION OUT THERE. I FEEL LIKE I'M I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD HANDLE ON IT NOW, BUT I'D BE HAPPY IF THIS BODY WANTED TO DISCUSS ANY MORE OF THAT TO GET CLARITY AMONG AT LEAST THESE FIVE PEOPLE. BUT AGAIN, IT WILL BE MY POSITION TO. AND I DID ASK PANEL TO CIRCULATE THE LIST OF AND AGAIN TERMINOLOGY MATTERS AND WOULD HELP CLARIFICATION IF WE HAD THE SAME WORDS FOR THINGS. BUT I'LL CALL THIS SHEET THE MAYBE THE CIP SHEET, OR MAYBE THE PRIORITY SHEET, BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF PRIORITIZED OR RANKING THE RANKING SHEET, I'LL CALL IT THAT. I ASKED YOU TO SEND THAT AROUND AGAIN, BECAUSE I THINK BASED ON WHAT I HEARD LAST WEEK, THAT WOULD MIGHT INFLUENCE ME A LITTLE BIT ON HOW I WOULD RANK THESE THESE PROJECTS WITH THE IDEA OF WHICH ONES WOULD GET MORE SUPPORT VERSUS THOSE WHICH MIGHT NOT GET SUPPORT, AND SO KIND OF TACKLE THOSE FIRST. THAT'S THAT'S MY VIEW. THAT'S WHAT I WILL WORK ON AS PART OF THIS BODY TO TRY TO HELP THE CRB AND THE CRA AND GREATER STUART.
THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. I'VE GOT SOME COMMENTS THERE, BUT I'LL BET IF SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO JUMP FIRST FRED GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. I JUST LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE CAME ON WE WERE NEWBIES AND WE HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS EXPECTED OF US. AND THEN, LIKE YOU SAID, ALL THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION WAS GIVEN. AND I KNOW PERSONALLY I DIDN'T AVAIL MYSELF. I DIDN'T JUST DIVE INTO IT. SO I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. BUT I'VE BEEN WATCHING AND I'VE BEEN LISTENING AND I'VE BEEN OBSERVING AND I'VE BEEN LEARNING. AND SO SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT THAT WERE BEFORE US THAT I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRIORITIZED, THE MORE I UNDERSTAND NOW BECAUSE OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PASSED DOWN, MORE OF THE CHANCE I'VE HAD TO LOOK INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND UNDERSTAND IT A LOT BETTER. AND SO I GOT A I DON'T GET SO DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT THE, THE, THE CITY COMMISSIONERS WERE NOT REALLY RESPONDING TO OUR REQUESTS, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER NOW.
AND I SEE HOW TO FACILITATE WHAT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE AS A VISION. ONCE WE COME UP WITH THE VISION AND PASS IT ON, I KIND OF FEEL THE SAME WAY IF I HAVEN'T, LIKE, YEAH, I HAVEN'T DOVE IN AS MUCH AS I SHOULD. AS MUCH AS CLAY HAS BEEN AND ATTENDING OTHER MEETINGS AND THINGS, AND I MADE THIS MONTH, I MAY I MAY GO TO THE CRA MEETING. I THINK IT'S A IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR US TO AT
[00:10:02]
LEAST OCCASIONALLY ATTEND, YOU KNOW, TANGENTIAL MEETINGS LIKE THAT. YEAH. WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING EVERY SO OFTEN. IT'S ONCE A QUARTER I THINK SO. SO THAT'S BUT BUT BUT LIKE YOU SAID THAT THE ADVANTAGE TO HAVE BEING IMMERSED IN THIS IS THAT IT MAKES YOU MORE PERCEPTIVE AND AWARE AS WE'RE GOING AROUND. STUART I'M NOT SEEING IT AS, YOU KNOW, A BOARD CITIZEN TRYING TO GET TO THE NEXT STOPLIGHT. I'M SEEING IT AS SOMEBODY THAT MAY BE ABLE TO MAKE A SMALL DIFFERENCE AND A MORE ALERT AND AWARE TO THINGS, AND I'M MORE OBSERVANT OF THINGS. AND I'M LOOKING AT THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND THE CROSSWAYS AROUND CONFUSION. I'M LIKE, OKAY, WHAT'S A BETTER SOLUTION FOR THIS? YOU KNOW, IS IT REALLY THE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY, THOUGH, YOU KNOW, OVERPASS, THE WAY TO DO IT OR, YOU KNOW, AND IT PUTS YOU MORE IN AN OBSERVANT AND THINKING MODE, YOU KNOW. BUT BUT I HAVE NOT DOVE IN, LIKE YOU SAID, AS MUCH AS AS I SHOULD.BONNIE, DID YOU HAVE COMMENT OR YOU WANT OR I CAN GO. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. I, I BRIEFLY LIKE GOT AN OVERVIEW OF THE CRA MEETING, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO WATCH THE VIDEO YET. LIKE TO GET THE FULL SCOPE OF WHAT HAPPENED SO I CAN COMMENT TOO MUCH RIGHT NOW.
WELL, LET ME JUST. I'M GLAD TO HEAR ALL OF THESE COMMENTS, BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY MAKING PROGRESS TOWARDS WHAT OUR JOB IS, I THINK. AND WE KIND OF HAVE A DUAL ROLE. YOU KNOW, OUR ROLE IS TO MAKE OURSELVES AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY SO THEY CAN HAVE INPUT INTO WHAT IS DONE IN THE CRA. AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF THE WE'RE KIND OF THE BOARD THAT'S THE LIAISON BETWEEN THE POPULACE AND, AND THE ACTUAL CRA BOARD AND THE CRA BOARD. YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAY, IT DOES HAVE IT HAS SEVEN MEMBERS INSTEAD OF FIVE MEMBERS. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, WITH WITH THE MAKEUP OF, OF THE COMMISSION, MOST THINGS ARE GOING TO BE DICTATED BY, BY THE THREE INDIVIDUALS THAT TEND TO VOTE AS A BLOCK. THE I WAS DISAPPOINTED BY THE CRA MEETING, AND THE REASON WAS BECAUSE I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING IN TERMS OF WE'VE GOT DIRECTION, WE'VE HAD ALL THESE THINGS. I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, UNFORTUNATELY, TO LIVE THROUGH MOST OF THIS. SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T AND I MEAN THAT IN A IN A GOOD WAY. I'VE BEEN THERE WHEN ALL OF THIS STUFF WAS BEING DEBATED, THE FIRST AND SECOND AND THIRD AND FOURTH TIME, I KNOW WHY CERTAIN THINGS WERE PRESENTED IN CERTAIN WAYS. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU MENTIONED CLAY, THE COMMENT RELATIVE TO THE PLANS FOR CITY HALL. RIGHT? I REMEMBER IN THE DAY WE WERE TOLD BY THE CITY MANAGER AT MAIN STREET IN OR NOT THE MAIN STREET CITY MANAGER, BUT THE CITY MANAGER. AT THE TIME, WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT PARKING GARAGES. YOU COULDN'T TALK ABOUT PARKING GARAGES BECAUSE IT WOULD GET TOSSED RIGHT AWAY. SO DON'T BRING UP ANYTHING TO DO WITH PARKING GARAGES. THE PLAN THAT WAS DRAWN UP BY SOME PEOPLE FROM FROM THE DESIGN COMMITTEE OF MAIN STREET, WHICH IS THEIR FUNCTION. THEY THEY HAVE FOUR FUNCTIONS. DESIGN IS ONE OF THEM. IT WAS DRAWN UP BY TWO OF THE MEMBERS OF THE DESIGN COMMITTEE, MCCARTY. AND.
MARCELLA CAMPBELL. AND SHE WAS ACTUALLY REPRESENTING GEORGE HART, WHO HAD WHO OWNED AND WAS JUST STARTING TO BUILD THE CONDOS OVER HERE. AND HE HAD MULLIGANS, WHICH WAS RIGHT DOWN HERE, AND IT WAS GOING TO INVOLVE A CHANGE IN THE PARKING. SO HE HAD TO AGREE TO IT. BUT THE POINT BEING THAT THAT PLAN WAS DRAWN UP SPECIFICALLY LEAVING CITY HALL OUT OF IT. IN OTHER WORDS, WE DIDN'T NEED CITY HALL TO BE THERE OR NOT BE THERE, WHATEVER THE WAY THAT IT WAS DRAWN UP. BECAUSE HISTORICALLY, FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS, AT LEAST 20, EVERY TIME IT COMES A DISCUSSION OF WHAT DO WE DO WITH CITY HALL? THERE'S A MOTION MADE WHICH WAS MADE, WELL, LET'S NOT DO ANYTHING UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH CITY HALL. DAVE DYAS BOUGHT HE WAS HE BOUGHT THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING SO THAT IT WOULD ELIMINATE WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS THE ARGUMENT THAT CONTINUALLY COMES UP WITH WHAT TO DO WITH CITY HALL AND THAT WE COULD MOVE ON TO SOMETHING ELSE, WHICH WE NEVER HAVE. SO, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY, I UNDERSTAND.
I MEAN, I JUST UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT AND I CAN UNDERSTAND COMING INTO THAT KNEW HOW FRUSTRATING THAT CAN BE. THE ONE THING THAT I THINK AND THE REASON I WAS DISAPPOINTED IS THAT WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN THE CRA. AND THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE
[00:15:03]
DONE HAS BEEN GOOD, BUT IT HAS ALL BEEN FOCUSED ON A COMP PLAN, AND THAT COMP PLAN IS SUPPOSEDLY ADJUSTED PERIODICALLY OR REVIEWED. IT'S NOT ADJUST, IT'S REVIEWED PERIODICALLY. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT ALL OF THE STUFF WE'RE DOING NOW IS BASED ON A COMP PLAN THAT SUPPORTS WALKABILITY, MIXED USE PROPERTIES, LIVE WORK, THE WHOLE THING. THAT'S WHAT IT WAS BUILT ON. THE PLAN WAS BUILT AROUND THAT CONCEPT AND EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE STILL RELEVANT, IT IS STILL RELEVANT IF IT IS, AND THAT'S THE POINT. WE HAVE THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO SAY IT ISN'T.THAT ISN'T WHAT WE WANT TO BE ANYMORE. WE DON'T WANT MIXED USE. WE DON'T WANT THAT KIND OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. AND SO AS A RESULT, IF YOU DON'T WANT ALL THAT, THEN YOU THEN YOU'RE SAYING YOU DON'T WANT A FAMILY ENVIRONMENT. ARE YOU ANTI-FAMILY? THAT'S THE QUESTION. I MEAN, IT'S NOT I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. WHAT THAT IS SAYING IS, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE WANT TO FOCUS ON NEIGHBORHOODS MORE THAN WE WANT TO FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S A VALID POINT. AND I'M JUST AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, I UNDERSTAND WHAT CHRIS AND LAURA AND SEAN ARE SAYING. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY ALONG THOSE LINES HOW STRONG IT IS. THAT'S MY QUESTION. BUT THAT LINE THAT'S GOING THROUGH THERE IS AND THE AND THAT PATH IS OPPOSED TO THE ORIGINAL COMP PLAN. YOU KNOW, WE USED TO HAVE A GOAL SETTING MEETING FOR THE BOARD, AND IT WAS OVER IN THE FLAGLER CENTER, AND WE'D HAVE IT EVERY FIVE YEARS OR WHATEVER. AND ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD, WOULD GET TOGETHER AND DECIDE WHAT WAS IMPORTANT TO STUART. THE RIVER WAS ALWAYS NUMBER ONE.
IT WAS ALWAYS THE FIRST THING. WE'RE NOT VERY GOOD AT THAT. I KNOW THAT THAT'S COMMENT HAS BEEN MADE, BUT, BUT, BUT THAT WAS THE THAT WAS THE FIRST TRANSPORTATION. PARKING WAS DISCUSSION. YOU KNOW, ALL OF THESE THINGS WERE, WERE DISCUSSED WITH THE IDEA OF WHAT DO WE WANT TO BE WHEN WE GROW UP? AND IS THAT STILL CONSISTENT? AND ALL OF IT WAS REALLY WITHIN THE COMP PLAN. AND THINGS THAT WERE DONE IN THE COMP PLAN WERE DONE BASED ON THAT ORIGINAL DESIGN THEORY. RIGHT? SO, I MEAN, THE STAFF DOES A TREMENDOUS JOB. I, YOU KNOW, AND I'M NOT JUST SAYING THAT TO BE SAYING IT. THEY DO A TREMENDOUS JOB. THEY WORK HARD.
BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT'S FRUSTRATING IS WHEN SOMEBODY SENDS YOU OFF IN A DIRECTION AND THEN AND THEN YOU GOT TO STOP AND THEN YOU GOT TO GO BACK IN THIS DIRECTION. AND IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO BE PUT IN AN EFFORT INTO SOMETHING AND THEN HAVE TO PUT, HAVE TO DISCARD THAT COMPLETELY AND GO DO SOMETHING ELSE. AND, AND OVER THE YEARS, THAT'S WHAT'S KIND OF HAPPENED. I MEAN, IT REALLY IS.
WE JUST CAN'T FINISH. AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS WHAT I WAS FRUSTRATED BECAUSE WHAT I AND I DON'T KNOW IF, IF CHRIS IN PARTICULAR DIDN'T BELIEVE ME OR DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BASICALLY WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT HE'S NOT RIGHT, THAT THAT PEOPLE IN TOWN NOW WANT MORE OF A FAMILY COMMUNITY. THEY DON'T WANT THE FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN AND ALL OF THE EFFORT AND MONEY THAT'S SPENT DOWNTOWN. THEY WOULD RATHER SEE, YOU KNOW, MORE PARKS, MORE RECREATION, YOU KNOW, OTHER OTHER ACTIVITIES. RIGHT? THEY DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T WANT PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT AND LIVING IN, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME AND BEING TRANSIENT. AND THEY DON'T WANT ALL THAT. I, I AGREE, I'M NOT SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW WOULD COME UP WITH THE SAME CONCLUSION THAT THEY CAME UP WITH 35 YEARS AGO, OR WHATEVER IT WAS WHEN WE DID, WHEN WE DID THE ORIGINAL PLAN, WHICH AND I CAN YOU SAY WHICH THE CITY FOUNDERS OF THAT, OF THAT EFFORT REJECTED, THEY DID NOT ACCEPT ALL OF WHAT HE PROPOSED. AND IT WAS NOT ALL ACCEPTED. SO AND SOME OF THE THINGS THEY OPPOSED MADE STUART MUCH AND DOWNTOWN STUART MUCH BETTER. YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE KEY THINGS IS THEY WANTED WALKABILITY AND THEY WANTED PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK DOWNTOWN AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING. BUT WE WERE GOING TO TEAR DOWN THE BRIDGES AND BUILD THAT NEW BRIDGE, AND THE OLD BRIDGES WOULD HAVE BEEN GONE, AND THEN PEOPLE WOULD HAVE GONE WHIZZING BY DOWNTOWN STUART ON US ONE, AND NEVER THINK TWICE ABOUT STOPPING DOWNTOWN. AND THE MALL WAS BEING BUILT. AND AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE WORRIED. EVERYBODY WAS STARTING TO THINK ABOUT SHOPPING AT THE MALL. AND I MEAN, I REMEMBER AT THE TIME I WAS LIKE, WELL, THAT'S CRAZY. WHY DO WE NEED THIS OLD BRIDGE? WE JUST SAID, WE DON'T NEED IT. LET'S TEAR THE DANG THING DOWN. RIGHT? AND I WAS WRONG. AND WHICH THAT HAPPENS A LOT, BUT I JUST I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND THAT'S WHAT I REALLY WOULD. I'M I'M DISAPPOINTED. I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR JOB AND MOVE ON. BUT BUT YOU KNOW, I, I HATE TO
[00:20:06]
PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT WHAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE REALLY WANT. THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO FIND OUT FROM MORE THAN 100 OR 150 PEOPLE WHAT WE REALLY WANT. I THINK PART OF THE QUESTION IS SOMETHING YOU'VE RAISED IS THAT WE HAVE A DIFFERENT, ENTIRELY DIFFERENT DEMOGRAPHICS NOW THAN WHEN THE PEOPLE FIRST DECIDED THAT MASTER PLAN. THERE'S SO MANY. THE POPULATION HAS RISEN SO MUCH THAT, OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE WANT TO BE ISOLATED AROUND DOWNTOWN BECAUSE THERE'S JUST TOO DARN MANY PEOPLE. SO THERE IT IS. IT'S A DIASPORA OF STUART IS MUCH LARGER, AND WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT. YEAH, I THINK I THINK TO SOME DEGREE THE, THE, THE FUNNY THING IS, AND THIS IS COMMON WITH A LOT OF PLACES, IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO GREW UP HERE AND NOW THEY DON'T WANT TO LEAVE HERE, BUT THEY'RE FACED WITH THE POSSIBILITY THAT THEY GOT TO LEAVE HERE. YOU KNOW, OUR DOWNTOWN HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER WHEN EVERY YOU KNOW, WHEN IT SEEMED LIKE EVERY SHOP WAS OWNED BY SOMEBODY WHO WAS DOING THE JOB PART TIME. THEY NEVER CAME IN BEFORE TEN. THEY CLOSED AT FIVE. THEY WEREN'T OPEN ON SATURDAY OR SUNDAY. THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE THING. AND WE FOUGHT AND FOUGHT AND FOUGHT AND THERE WERE PEOPLE ON THE BUSINESS SIDE THAT PATTY O'CONNELL AND SOME OF THOSE, SOME OF THOSE GUYS, RON HART AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT THAT PUSHED HARD FOR DOWNTOWN TO BE OPEN. BUT IT TOOK A LONG TIME TO GET TO THAT POINT. AND IT AND SO BUT NOW, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT LIKE YOU SAID, WE'VE GOT ALL THESE PEOPLE AND WE'VE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. SO SUCCESSFUL TO THE POINT THAT I WOULD CONTEND THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY OR WHATEVER DOWNTOWN ANY LONGER, BECAUSE ONLY THE VERY WEALTHY CAN AFFORD THAT. AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. SO THE PEOPLE THAT WORK DOWNTOWN, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WORK THERE. AND I WOULD I WOULD HAVE YOU GUYS LOOK AT THERE WAS A PIECE THAT WAS OUT. AND BONNIE, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT, BUT WHEN STUART MAIN STREET SENT THE INVITATION AROUND FOR THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROGRAM THAT THEY HAD DIWANIYA HAD RECOMMENDED THAT PEOPLE READ AN ARTICLE AND I THINK IT WAS ABOUT CHARLESTON. IT WASN'T IT OR IT WAS IT. IT WAS ONE OF IT WAS UP IN SOUTH CAROLINA, MAYBE. WAS IT DOWNTOWN CHARLESTON OR ONE OF THE. NO. IT WAS A TOWN THAT HAS GONE THROUGH THE WHOLE THING THAT WE AND NOW IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT. THE TOWN IS STARTING. IT'S BECOME SO POPULAR THAT PEOPLE GO THERE REALLY JUST AS A TOURIST LOCATION. AND, AND IT'S IT DOESN'T FUNCTION AS A COMMUNITY ANY LONGER. AND THAT AND IT'S NOW STARTING TO FALL APART. AND IT MADE ME THINK, ARE WE ON THAT SIDE OF THE EQUATION? I MEAN, TEN YEARS AGO WASN'T YEAH, PROBABLY TEN YEARS AGO, MAYBE 12. YOU KNOW, WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT GETTING RID OF MAIN STREET. WAS THERE. DID IT SERVE A PURPOSE ANY LONGER? AND THE PRESIDENT AT THAT TIME, RAUL OCAMPO, HE WAS IN FAVOR OF HE WAS IN FAVOR OF GETTING RID OF IT. YOU KNOW, FORTUNATELY WE DIDN'T. I THINK IT'S PLAYED A PART IN, IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOWNTOWN. BUT BUT ULTIMATELY, AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO STEP BACK AND SAY, WHO ARE WE GOING TO BE WHEN WE GROW UP? AND RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT WE'RE WHERE WE WANT TO BE, BUT THAT'S JUST A, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST A COMMENT THAT I HAD AND WHAT I WAS A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED ABOUT RELATIVE TO THE OTHER DAY, THAT AND THE FACT THAT I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT CAME THROUGH TO ME ON, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT IT AND FRED, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT IT, BUT I KIND OF THOUGHT THE OTHER THING THAT SAYS WE JUST WANT TO DO SMALL THINGS, WE DON'T WANT TO DO ANY BIG PROJECTS, WE JUST WANT TO DO LITTLE THINGS AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE FIX A SIDEWALK OR, YOU KNOW, CHANGE A DRAINAGE THING.YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT WHAT GETS THAT'S NOT WHAT MAXIMIZES THE BENEFIT OF THE CRA. THE CRA'S JOB IS TO MAXIMIZE THAT BENEFIT IN TERMS OF REVENUE THAT WE GET TO TAKE AND USE IN THE CRA VERSUS BEING USED IN THE COUNTY. IT'S THE SAME MONEY, BUT WE AT LEAST GET TO USE IT HERE INSTEAD OF IT BEING DESIGNATED FOR THE COUNTY. SO THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE AT. BUT ANYBODY ANYBODY ELSE. ALL RIGHT. I WANT TO MAKE SOME CLARIFICATIONS I THINK I THINK IT'S I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE CLARIFICATION THAT LIKE THE IDEA OF NEW URBANISM AND WALKABILITY IS NOT ANTI-FAMILY.
AND ACTUALLY, I THINK IT'S AT THE HEART OF A LOT OF WHAT IS CONCERNED OUR VOTERS AND OUR, OUR COMMISSIONERS IS THAT WE, YOU KNOW, DOWNTOWN STUART DOES FEEL LIKE IT LEANS REALLY INTO
[00:25:06]
TOURISM AND TOURISM, SUPPORTING OUR BUSINESSES. AND WHEN IN REALITY, THERE ARE CITIES ALL OVER THE COUNTRY THAT ARE OUR SAME SIZE, THAT DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TOURISM, THAT ARE FULLY SELF-SUSTAINING IN THEIR DOWNTOWNS, ARE BOOMING BECAUSE THEY'VE MADE IT REALLY EASY FOR THEIR RESIDENTS TO GET THERE. AND I THINK THE MAJORITY OF US ACTUALLY LIVE CLOSE ENOUGH THAT WE COULD WALK AND BIKE TO DOWNTOWN. AND PART OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN WITH A VISIONING EXERCISE, WHICH MAYBE THIS IS NOT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE WANTED, WAS HOW DO WE EMPHASIZE THAT? HOW DO WE MAKE IT MORE FAMILY FRIENDLY? HOW DO WE MAKE DOWNTOWN MORE FAMILY FRIENDLY AND CONNECTED WITH THE IDEA OF PARKS AND GREEN SPACE AND GREENWAYS AND TRAILS THAT CONNECT TO THOSE THINGS. SO I THINK THAT'S THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCONNECT THERE THAT I WISH WE COULD COMMUNICATE WITH THE REST OF THE CRA FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND, LIKE IT'S NOT LIKE A THIS OR THAT, BUT BUT I TOTALLY AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IT'S JUST NOT NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, THE IDEAS OF DUANY. THEY DO SOMETIMES CREATE CITIES THAT ARE SO DESIRABLE THAT THEY BECOME REALLY EXPENSIVE OR THAT TOURISTS REALLY WANT TO GO THERE. AND I'VE HAD TO WORK ON SOME PLANS IN THESE COMMUNITIES AND OUTSIDE OF THEM IN THE PANHANDLE, BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY TOURISTS THERE THAT THEY'VE HAD TO ABANDON DOWNTOWN. NO, NO, THEIR DOWNTOWNS ARE BOOMING. BUT IT'S LIKE EVERYONE HAS RENTED OUT THEIR HOUSES YEAR ROUND OTHER THAN THE TWO WEEKS THEY GO THERE FOR TOURISTS. SO WE'RE HAVING TO RESTRUCTURE GOLF CART PARKING AND BICYCLE PARKING BECAUSE EVERYBODY LOVES SO MUCH GOING TO THESE COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO GET INTO A CAR TO GET, YOU KNOW, TO THE BEACH OR TO THE RESTAURANT THAT WE TURNED ALL THEIR CAR PARKING INTO GOLF CART AND BIKE PARKING. SO IT'S A VALID CONCERN, AND I THINK ONE THAT I FEEL REALLY PASSIONATE ABOUT, I THINK THAT IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAVE TOURISM, IT'S GREAT FOR THE BUSINESSES THAT WE HAVE TOURISM. BUT FOR US AS A CRB, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN WE FOCUS ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY, THE PARTS THAT WE HAVE CONTROL OVER TO MAKE IT BETTER FOR OUR RESIDENTS. BUT HOW DO YOU TURN IT OFF? I MEAN, WE ARE ONE OF THOSE CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES THAT HAS BEEN VERY, VERY SUCCESSFUL. AND SO NOW IF I HAVE A HOME ANYWHERE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF DOWNTOWN, I'M NOT GOING TO LIVE IN IT. I'M GOING TO TURN IT INTO A VERY PROFITABLE VRBO, AND I'M GOING TO MAKE A FORTUNE. NOW THAT TAKES AWAY ALL THE HOUSING FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WORK DOWNTOWN.SO THEY CAN'T LIVE HERE OR WORK HERE ANYWAY. THEY START MOVING TO OTHER LOCATIONS TO WORK EVEN BECAUSE THE FIRST THING IS THAT THEY'RE IN OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE THEY HAVE TO LIVE, AND NOW THEY HAVE TO. SO THAT'S WHERE AND THAT IN THAT ARTICLE, THAT'S WHAT DUANY TAUGHT. THAT'S WHAT IT'S NOT DUANY, BUT WHOEVER HE IS, WHOEVER WROTE THAT ARTICLE, WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS TOWN IS THAT THAT'S WHAT JUST WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT THE DOWNTOWN HAS BECOME. IT'S ALMOST SOLELY IT'S ALMOST SOLELY VACATION PEOPLE. AND IT'S RELATIVELY SEASONAL, BUT IT'S ALL THAT KIND OF. SO WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE DOWNTOWN, THEY ARE I MEAN, THE WORK DOWNTOWN, THEY HAVE MOVED OUTSIDE AND NEW COMMUNITIES ARE BEING FORMED OUTSIDE OF THE CITY WITHIN THEIR MAYBE 45 MINUTES, 40 MINUTES FROM THE CITY. BUT THEY'RE OUTSIDE THE TRAFFIC.
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SOURCE OF BUSINESSES. AND ALL OF THESE AND A LOT OF THE LOCAL BUSINESSES ARE OUT THERE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO BE DOWNTOWN. THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING DOWNTOWN NOW. YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO RUN A BUSINESS DOWNTOWN UNLESS YOU'RE CHARGING REALLY HIGH END. SO, YOU KNOW, SO AT THAT POINT, I MEAN, IF IT'S IF IT'S NOT GOOD, IF IT'S NOT STOPPED SOMEHOW, IT WILL EAT UP WHAT WE KNOW AS STEWARD. IT JUST WON'T HAPPEN. WE WON'T BE HERE ANYMORE BECAUSE IT'LL BE ALTERED. AND I MEAN, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $1 MILLION FOR A HOME THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU IF IT WAS 12 MILES WEST, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE HALF OF THAT. I MEAN, A THIRD OF IT. YEAH. SO I MEAN, THAT'S AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO THAT'S WHAT I PERSONALLY HAVE THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH AND, AND WAS HOPING TO AT LEAST MAKE SOME INROADS ON WAS THI THAT CAN WE SEE WHERE THE WE WANT TO BE IS WE CAN GIVE PEOPLE VISIONS. THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THIS HAPPENS JUST LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS WHAT WE COULD DO TO TRY TO STOP THIS. BUT THIS IS WHAT WE LOOK LIKE HERE. HERE'S WHAT WE'D LOOK LIKE HERE. HERE'S WHAT WE LOOK LIKE HERE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING A KIND OF WE'RE HAVING A FIGHT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY POOL. RIGHT. AND THERE'S A, THERE'S A BIG THING GOING ON AS TO WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO THE COMMUNITY POOL.
THAT POOL. POOL, BY THE WAY, WAS BUILT BY THE KIWANIS CLUB AND GIVEN TO THE SCHOOL TO BE USED AS A COMMUNITY POOL, BUT WITH THE IDEA THAT THE ONLY THING THAT THEY WOULD MAINTAIN IT. BUT
[00:30:03]
IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNITY POOLS, AND YET A LOT OF PLACES UP NORTH, THEY HAVE LITTLE COMMUNITY CENTERS THAT HAVE A POOL. RIGHT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, BUT HERE WE ARE HERE, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THAT FUNCTION. AND WE HAVE SAILFISH SPLASH. BUT THAT'S COMMERCIAL. I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING MONEY. SO, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK I DISAGREE WITH THE CRA FROM THE STANDPOINT OF IN SOME DEGREE, THE COMMISSION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF I DO THINK IT'S TIME TO ASK FOR SOME INPUT AND FRANKLY, WITH WHAT'S JUST HAPPENED WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND THE SIGNING OF THIS BILL ROLLING EVERYTHING BACK TO AUGUST, IT'S A PERFECT TIME TO DO IT BECAUSE WE CAN'T ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING. SO WHAT WE COULD DO IS WE COULD HAVE THESE VISIONING MEETINGS, AND THEN WE COULD DETERMINE WHERE WE WANT TO GO. AND THEN WE CAN START MAKING ZONING CHANGES OR, OR KEEP THE ONES THAT WE MADE OR GO AHEAD AND MAKE OTHER ONES. AND FRANKLY, IF WE'RE ARGUING WITH THE STATE ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT, IF I'VE GOT HALF MY POPULATION THAT HAS SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT, THESE ARE POLITICIANS. THEY NEED VOTES TO STAY ALIVE. AND IF YOU'VE GOT 9 OR 10,000 PEOPLE THAT ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT, WE ALL MET, WE'RE ALL FRIENDS, WE GOT TOGETHER AND THIS IS WHAT WE WANT, YOU KNOW? AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE LOSING AN OPPORTUNITY ON. BUT ANYWAY, SO PART OF THE ISSUE WITH DOWNTOWN TOO IS I MEAN, WE PROBABLY ALL KNOW SOME PEOPLE THERE THAT ARE BUSINESS OWNERS AND THERE'S A LOT OF. INVESTORS COMING IN PURCHASING UP THESE SEPARATE BUILDINGS THAT ARE DOWNTOWN BASED ON PROFORMA ROI. OH, WE CAN DOUBLE OR TRIPLE THAT RENT BECAUSE OF COMPARING IT TO SOME OTHER COMMUNITY OR WHATEVER THE REALTOR TOLD THEM. AND SO YOU'VE GOT THESE LONG TERM BUSINESSES IN THERE THAT ARE INSTRUMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY LONG TERM, THAT ARE ALL OF A SUDDEN COMPLETELY PRICED OUT OF THEY CAN'T RENEW THEIR LEASE, AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GO OUT AND FIND SOME BUSINESS THAT'S A MUCH HIGHER ROI THAT CAN AFFORD THAT LEASE RENT THAT MAY NOT BE AS AS BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY. RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT THIS WHOLE, YOU KNOW, STRANGE VERSION OF, OF, OF THE MATURING OF DOWNTOWN, WHICH ISN'T I DON'T CONSIDER IT A POSITIVE THING, BUT IT'S, IT'S WHAT DO WE DO TO PREVENT THAT? I MEAN, NOTHING REALLY, BUT YOU GUYS ALL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. HAVE SOME PROFESSIONALS ADVISE US. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. BUT OBVIOUSLY I WAS WRONG. I'VE BEEN WRONG BEFORE. I'LL BE WRONG AGAIN. SO. BUT I JUST I'M REALLY ENCOURAGED BY ALL OF THE THINGS YOU GUYS HAVE SAID. AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING DISCOURAGED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M NEVER I NEVER GET DISCOURAGED. I'M JUST A POSITIVE GUY. BUT BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO PUSH FORWARD AND WE WORK WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THAT WE WORK WITH. AND, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S AND, YOU KNOW, DO WHAT DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO. AND WE'LL HELP STAFF WITH DIRECTION IN TERMS OF WHAT WE THINK. I MEAN, SOME OF THAT'S GOING TO BE DRIVEN, I THINK AT THIS POINT BY BY WHAT WE REALLY THINK THAT THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO GOING TO THINK, BUT BUT THAT'S OKAY. THEY WERE ELECTED AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, TO TELL US WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, EVEN IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH THEM BECAUSE WE'RE JUST A BOARD. WE ONLY HAVE A COUPLE FUNCTIONS THAT WE ACTUALLY LEGITIMATELY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR. AND ONE OF THEM'S PUBLIC ART. THERE'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE MUCH OF THAT FOR A WHILE. SO IF WE'RE NOT DOING ANY DEVELOPMENT. BUT ANYWAY. ALL RIGHT, I THINK COULD I JUST CLARIFY THAT I HEARD I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT MY WORDS WEREN'T MISUNDERSTOOD OR MISINTERPRETED. SO I WOULD VIEW AGAIN, MAYBE I'M USING THE WRONG TECHNICAL TERM.STREETSCAPING, I DON'T KNOW, SIDEWALK TREES, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY GREEN SPACE PARKS. I WOULD CONSIDER THAT FAMILY ORIENTED. SO I WAS REFERRING TO THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO INVEST IN THE CITY AS POTENTIALLY NOT SUPPORTING SUCH THINGS. BUT THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT I THINK I DON'T SEE IT AS A ALL OR NOTHING THING. I THINK SOMEONE ELSE RAISED THAT. THAT'S WHY I SAY I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S ACTUALLY THAT'S WHY I SAY I GOT CLARITY LAST WEEK.
THERE'S ACTUALLY ROOM FOR WE CAN PROGRESS SOME THINGS AND LIKE I LIKE YOU SAID, MARK, SOME OF THAT MIGHT BE KIND OF RELATIVELY SMALL THINGS. BUT AGAIN THE WE CAN WE CAN PROPOSE LARGER PROJECTS. JUST DON'T LET IT SLOW DOWN THE NO BRAINERS. WE CAN JUST KEEP PROPOSING AND SUPPORTING THOSE. THE. SO I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING EITHER OR. I THINK WE CAN WORK ON ALL AND IF SOMEONE IF WE HAVE SOME. OH THE OTHER THING THAT MARK SAID THAT WAS SMART AND THAT HE LEAVES THE ROOM, THE IS THAT THERE IS THIS SO-CALLED COMP PLAN. THIS IS FANTASTIC. SO
[00:35:02]
ALONG WITH ANY OTHER OF THE SIX OR 8 OR 12 PLANS THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN TO LOOK AT AS BACKGROUND, I JUST THINK IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO LIKE WHEN PEOPLE I'VE HEARD MANY FOLKS SAY THIS, THE COMP PLAN IS THAT A COUNTY CITY, WHAT IS THAT? AND IT TO ME, UNLESS THERE'S NO OTHER PLAN, THAT'S THE PLAN IS FOR US AND WE SHOULD JUST. I'M SORRY. FOR US, IT'S THE CRA PLAN. SO WHEN WE ADOPT A CRA PLAN FOR WHAT OUR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE AND THE TYPE OF PROJECTS WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH. SO FOR US, WE DEPEND ON THE CRA PLAN, NOT THE COMP PLAN. SOME OF THE THINGS COULD BE IN THE COMP PLAN, BUT WHENEVER WE SAY, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CRA PLAN, THE GOALS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CRA PLAN. SO FOR US, OUR MASTER PLAN IS THE CRA PLAN. THE CRA PLAN SO WE ARE NOT ALLOWED WE THAT'S THE FLORIDA STATUTE REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ADOPT. AND WE CAN'T DO ANY PROJECTS OUTSIDE OF THE CRA PLAN. SO IF IT'S NOT IDENTIFIED IN THE CRA PLAN, WE CAN'T DO THAT. GOT IT. BUT BUT WE DECIDE WHAT THE CRA PLAN, RIGHT? SO USUALLY EVERY FEW YEARS I'LL BRING THAT FORWARD TO THE BOARD TO REVIEW AND UPDATE AND ADD ANY OTHER NEW PROJECTS. YEAH. AND THAT THAT WAS INCLUDED, I BELIEVE, AS PART OF YOUR PACKAGE, MAYBE NOT FOR EVERY AGENDA ITEM, BUT IT IS ALSO AVAILABLE ON ON THE CRA WEBSITE. EXACTLY. SO BUT WOULD BE NICE IS TO SEE WHERE THAT OVERLAPS WITH THE COMP PLAN.BECAUSE THEN IT'S JUST IT'S LIKE EVERYBODY HAS SAID THIS IS THE PLAN. SO WE JUST THAT'S THE PLAN. UNTIL WE HAVE A DIFFERENT PLAN, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND IF FOLKS HAVE CHANGED THEIR MIND TODAY, WELL THAT'S OKAY. THEY CAN VOICE THEIR VIEW. BUT I JUST DON'T.
OTHERWISE WE'RE JUST GOING TO GET IN THIS WHEEL OF REVIEW OR GET GET SOME INPUT REVIEW. NO WE HAVE THE INPUT. THERE'S CLEAR DIRECTION. THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT IT. AND OKAY THANKS MARK.
YEAH. NO THAT'S THAT'S GOOD. YEAH. AND THAT'S AND I THINK THERE IS CLEAR DIRECTION. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER WE'RE CONTINUING TO GO DOWN THAT PATH OR NOT. I THINK WE'VE CHANGED A
[2. PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) ACQUIRED PROPERTIES ]
LITTLE BIT. BUT OKAY, LET'S LET'S MOVE ON TO THE, THE I THINK THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WAS THESE WAS THE PROPERTIES WHICH, WHICH I THINK. IS GOOD. I THINK, BONNIE, YOU HAD MENTIONED IT, I MENTIONED IT AND JUST A BRIEF BACKGROUND. SO YEARS AGO WE HAD A COUPLE COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE IN FAVOR OF OWNING PROPERTY AND, AND ACQUIRING PROPERTY AND THEN LEASING IT OUT OR, OR DEVELOPING IT FOR, FOR USE BY. THIS WAS A LONG TIME AGO. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN AT SOME POINT WE HAD THIS PROPERTY. IT WAS PRETTY MUCH USED. WE HAVEN'T ACQUIRED WE HADN'T ACQUIRED MUCH MORE OF IT. EXCEPT OVER THE LAST 4 OR 5 YEARS. WE STARTED, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS A LITTLE MORE AND, AND DOING STUFF WITH SOME OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE BOUGHT.SO WE OWN PARCELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY EITHER VACANT OR BEING UTILIZED OR COMMITTED FOR FUTURE UTILIZATION. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO TAKE A LOOK TO SEE AGAIN. DOES THIS IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE DOING? IS BUYING PROPERTY IN COMPETITION WITH LOCAL INVESTORS WHO ARE BUYING PROPERTY AND THEN TURNING AROUND AND DEVELOPING IT? WE'RE NOT DOING THAT AS MUCH NOW. BUT WE DID DO IT BEFORE. AND WE OWN PROPERTIES THAT WERE BOUGHT SPECIFICALLY TO FLIP OR TO DEVELOP IN A CERTAIN WAY. AND, AND THIS VERY CRB COMPLAINED ABOUT ONE OF THESE ONES THAT'S ON THE LIST, BECAUSE WE BASICALLY GAVE THE LAND AWAY. BUT AND SO I JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MENTION THAT TOO. SO PEOPLE WERE KEEPING AN EYE ON THIS. I REMEMBER FRANK WALKER DOING THE MATH. AND HE HE WAS RIGHT. BUT ANYWAY, SO PANEL, DO YOU WANT TO KIND OF JUST GIVE US A OVERVIEW ON IT AND LET WHAT WHAT'S GOING ON. CRA DIRECTOR FOR THE RECORD. SO STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED FIVE PROPERTIES THAT WERE ACQUIRED BY THE CRA FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDEVELOPING AND REVITALIZING, REVITALIZING, REVITALIZING THE AREA. THE FIVE PROPERTIES ARE IDENTIFIED ON THIS MAP HERE. THE FIRST PROPERTY IS THE NORTH POINT PROPERTY, WHICH IS JUST NORTH OF THE OLD OLD DRAWBRIDGE, AND THE SECOND PROPERTY IS REFERRED TO AS A TRIANGLE PROPERTY, WHERE WE HAVE THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THE TWO ADJOINING PROPERTIES ALONG OCEAN BOULEVARD IS NEXT TO WELLS FARGO AND THE CANCER SPECIALIST BUILDING. THERE WAS AN OLD PLAZA THERE THAT WAS RECENTLY DEMOLISHED, AND WE JUST RECENTLY PUT SOD THERE FOR JUST PARKING OR JUST
[00:40:05]
GREEN AREA FOR FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT. AND THE LAST ONE, SORRY, CAN I JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT BEFORE WE GO GET THAT PROPERTY THAT SAYS MULTIFAMILY? THAT'S SO JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND, THOSE APARTMENTS THAT ARE BUILT OVER THERE, THE APARTMENTS ARE ON CITY OWNED LAND, RIGHT? WE LEASED IT. NOW IT'S A LONG TERM LEASE THOUGH, RIGHT? IT ISN'T A 99 YEAR LEASE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT ONE THAT WE CAN REALLY DO ANYTHING WITH BECAUSE WE COMMITTED TO A LONG TERM LEASE ON THAT PROPERTY. AND SO IT IS ALREADY COMMITTED. AND IT'S THE PROPERTY UNDERNEATH THOSE APARTMENTS. OKAY. SORRY. I JUST ASK JUST ONE MORE POINT OF CLARITY. SO CURRENTLY WE ARE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, SAY A PROPERTIES. THAT'S IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN CITY OF STUART PROPERTIES. WELL THEY'RE ALL CITY PROPERTIES BECAUSE CRA DOESN'T REALLY OWN PROPERTIES BECAUSE EVENTUALLY WHEN THE CRA SUNSETS IT GOES TO THE CITY. SO THEY'RE ALL CRA CITY PROPERTIES. BUT IF THE CRA USE TIF FUND TO PURCHASE THESE PROPERTIES, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CONSIDERED CRA PROPERTIES, WHERE THE CRB AND CRA BOARD CAN DECIDE WHAT TO DO ON THOSE PROPERTIES. SO IN THE. AND FORGIVE ME IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS OF THIS OF THIS ANSWER, BUT OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD IN THE HISTORY OF THE CRA, IS THIS THE TOTAL SUM OF PROPERTIES IT HAS PURCHASED? RIGHT. THESE ARE THE. YEAH.OKAY. NOW I'M I'M 100% ALIGNED. YEAH. WAIT, WAIT A MINUTE. ARE YOU ARE YOU ASKING IS THIS ALL THAT'S EVER BEEN PURCHASED BY THE CRA? BY THE BY CRA USING TIF REVENUE, NOT CITY? I THINK WE HAD SOME THAT WE'VE GOTTEN RID OF OVER THE YEARS. I DON'T THINK THIS IS ALL OF THEM. I THINK WHEN KRAUSKOPF WAS IN, WE USED TO BUY SOME OF THOSE AND WE AND BUT I THINK HE DISPOSED OF I THINK THAT COMMISSION DISPOSED OF SOME. I COULD BE WRONG, BUT DID THEY HAVE ENOUGH MONEY BACK THEN? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE CRA WAS. WELL, THEY HAD THE TIF AND THERE WAS THE ABILITY TO THERE WAS THE ABILITY. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY THAT WAS DISPOSED. THESE ARE NOT THIS IS THE INVENTORY RIGHT NOW THAT. YEAH, THAT'S THE INVENTORY THAT'S IMPORTANT. YEAH. IT'S IMPORTANT IF THEY'RE SOLD OFF THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT. THE LAST ONE IS THE WILLIE GARY GARY PROPERTY WHERE WE'RE DOING THE PROJECT LIFT PROJECT. SO THAT'S ALSO COMMITTED. HERE'S A LIST OF AGAIN THE FIVE PROPERTIES, WHAT THEY'RE COMMONLY REFERRED AS WHEN IT WAS ACQUIRED AND THE PURCHASE PRICE, THE PURPOSE OF ACQUISITION AND SOME OF THE SITE ACTIVITIES.
LIKE I SAID, THE NORTH POINT PROPERTY, WHICH IS NORTH OF THE OLD BRIDGE, WE'VE DONE A COUPLE OF RFQS THERE WHERE WE WHERE WE RECEIVE PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT. AND I THINK BOTH OF THOSE DID NOT MOVE FORWARD. THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS, I MEAN, SORRY, THE CITY MANAGER WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HERE TO KIND OF GIVE US MORE UPDATE ON THAT PROPERTY. I'M NOT REALLY FAMILIAR AS TO, YOU KNOW, AS A O WHAT HAPPENED WITH THOSE TWO PROPOSALS. I KNOW THERE WERE SOME LAWSUITS AND THINGS INVOLVED. I WAS GOING TO SAY, DIDN'T, DIDN'T AREN'T WE ON A LAWSUIT? NO. A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT PROPERTY. I'LL JUMP IN. FOR THE RECORD. LEE BAGGETT, CITY ATTORNEY. YEAH, SO THE NORTH POINT WAS INVOLVED IN TWO LAWSUITS. THAT PROPERTY INVOLVED TWO DIFFERENT LAWSUITS. AND ONE OF THE LAST ONE JUST KIND OF RECENTLY ENDED. SO THEY'VE BEEN KIND OF HELD UP IN LITIGATION FOR YEARS. YEAH. THE MOST OF IT PREDATED ME. SO I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT LITIGATION. YEAH. THERE WAS I MEAN, BOTH OF THOSE THAT NORTH POINT PROPERTY WAS OWNED AT SPLIT BY THE RAILROAD TRACKS IN TERMS OF HOW HOW IT FUNCTIONS. AND SO ORIGINALLY THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN ACCESS BY BOAT OUT THERE SO THAT YOU COULD GO BOTH SIDES. THERE WAS SOME SHOPS, RETAIL, THERE WAS A BUILDING THAT WAS TO BE BUILT OVER THERE WITH A WITH A COUPLE. I THINK IT WAS MIXED USE WITH SOME CONDOMINIUMS ON THE OR WITH A COUPLE CONDOMINIUMS ON THE TOP TWO FLOORS THAT I BELIEVE WAS GEISINGER WAS BEHIND THAT PROJECT. HE WAS THE ONE THAT AND THAT ONE ACTUALLY, BECAUSE IT'S ON TIDAL WATER. IT ACTUALLY THAT PLAN WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED BY THE CITIZENS. WE HAD TO HAVE A VOTE. IT WAS ON THE SAME THE SAME VOTE THAT WAS TAKEN WHEN THE MULLIGAN'S LEASE WAS, WAS DONE. AND I BELIEVE AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE DAILIES GOT RID OF THE PLACE THAT'S NOW HUDSON'S AND RECENTLY DID IT WITH THE MUSEUM. YEAH. WELL, SO ANYTIME YOU LEASE WATERFRONT PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS, WE HAVE TO DO IT BY REFERENDUM. YEAH. AT LEAST. OR LEASE OR SELL SOMETHING THAT'S UNTITLED. RIGHT. AND SO THAT WAS THAT HAD THEY HAD ALL THE APPROVALS. AND THEN I THINK THERE WAS SOME FUNDING ISSUES, BUT THERE WERE ALSO SOME ISSUES RELATIVE TO DEVELOPMENT. AND
[00:45:02]
THAT WENT INTO LITIGATION. AND I THINK THERE'S SUPPOSEDLY SOME DISCUSSION ON SOME PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT. I THINK BACK TO THE MAP. I WANT TO POINT OUT, TOO, THERE'S A TINY STRIP BEHIND THE AZUL. SO. ON ALL OF THAT MAP INSIDE THE. ITEM IS THE CRA IN THE PACKET. YEAH, THERE'S THAT LITTLE STRIP. IT'S ACTUALLY A RIGHT OF WAY. AND WE MADE IT INTO A PARKING LOT THAT AZUL IS ALLOWED TO USE. BUT IT'S TECHNICALLY, IF YOU LOOK ON THE THAT'S THE OLD FIRST STREET, RIGHT. THAT'S THE OLD FIRST STREET RIGHT OF WAY. SO YEAH. IT'S LISTED ON THERE, BUT IT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT. IS IT A SEPARATE PARCEL OR PART OF THE SAME PARCEL. IT'S A RIGHT OF WAY. IT'S A IT'S A RIGHT. IT USED TO BE A ROAD. IT USED TO BE A ROAD THAT WENT TO US ONE. THEY BUILT THE BRIDGE, CUT IT OFF. AND THEN WHAT YOU HAD, IS IT ACTUALLY AT ONE POINT ON THAT PROPERTY, RIGHT NEXT TO IT IS WHERE STERLING TOWERS IS. AND COMMUNITY SAVINGS AND LOAN.THEIR MAIN OFFICE USED TO BE THERE YEARS AGO, BUT THAT'S WHAT WHAT IT USED TO BE. MIKE WOULD REMEMBER. ALL OF THAT WAS ON FIRST STREET, RIGHT. SO STERLING. RIGHT. SO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE LITTLE PARKING STRIP WHERE HOW THAT STRIP GOT THAT WAS CREATED OFF. YEAH. IT'S STILL RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT. WHAT HAPPENED IS WHEN THEY ENTERED INTO THE AGREEMENT, THE LAND FOR A SCHOOL WAS THE SCHOOL WAS ACTUALLY THREE PARCELS WERE UNIFIED INTO ONE. AND THAT AS PART OF THE CONDITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCHOOL, THEY HAD TO BUILD ALL THE PARKING ON.
DIXIE, ON JEFFERSON. AND THEN IS THAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STREET IS. THAT GOES ALBANY, ALBANY, AND THEN ALSO THAT EXTENSION OF FIRST STREET THAT'S RIGHT THERE BETWEEN THOSE TWO PLAZAS. RIGHT. THEY BUILT THAT AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. IT COUNTED TOWARD THEIR PARKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT IS ALSO OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. SO ALL OF THE SPACES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, AND THEY CAN'T RESERVE THEM FOR PRIVATE USE AT THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. BUT IT WAS USED TO COUNT TOWARD THE PARKING NECESSARY REQUIRED BY THE APARTMENT COMPLEX TO BUILD THE PROJECT. AND I THINK RIGHT NOW THEY'RE THOSE A NUMBER OF THOSE PLACES ARE BEING ACTIVELY LEASED TO SAILORS RETURN TO FOR THEIR PARKING. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE CONDO ASSOCIATION OF THE WHATEVER THE STERLING TOWER IS, STERLING TOWER, THE ONES THAT ARE INSIDE STERLING TOWER BUT NOT ON THAT ROAD, NOT AT THE END OF FIRST STREET, RIGHT? YEAH, NOT. BUT I'M JUST SAYING MOST OF THAT PARKING RIGHT NOW IS TAKEN UP BY AT LEAST AT THE, AT STERLING TOWERS BY IT'S BEING LEASED OUT TO BE USED BY SAILORS RETURN. WELL SO THE STERLING TOWER PARKING IS DEDICATED TO STERLING TOWER CO. AND THEN THEY WENT IN AND ENTERED INTO A VALET PARKING AGREEMENT WITH SAILORS RETURN TO USE IT IN THE EVENINGS AND ON WEEKENDS, RIGHT. FOR VALET PARKING. I HAD THAT SAME LEASE. THAT'S WHY I KNOW, BUT BUT, BUT I WILL MENTION, THOUGH, THAT ONE OF THE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THAT PARCEL OR ABOUT THAT PARCEL YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND RIGHT THERE AND STERLING TOWERS, IS THAT THE CITY HAS THE AIR RIGHTS TO GO UP ON STERLING TOWERS PARKING. SO WHEN WE TALK TO THEM ABOUT THAT, WHEN WE WERE DOING THIS AND WE HAD DONE A DESIGN VERY EARLY ON FOR BRIGHTLINE, BECAUSE WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO IN THE PROPOSAL FOR BRIGHTLINE IS ACTUALLY PUT THE BRIGHTLINE STATION KIND OF DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF WHERE BRIAN MAASS OFFICE IS, RIGHT, AND HAVE THE PARKING GARAGE FOR BRIGHTLINE B, WHERE THE AIR RIGHTS WERE FOR STERLING TOWER. AND OVER THAT FIRST STREET AREA. BUT THAT GOT KIBOSHED FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS, PRIMARILY BECAUSE THE DESIGN OF THE NEW BRIDGE THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO BUILD WAS AT AN INCLINE THAT DID NOT MAKE IT ACCEPTABLE FOR THEM TO HAVE A STATION NORTH OF SAILFISH CIRCLE. AND AS A RESULT, WE COULDN'T SUBMIT THE PROPOSAL AND IT WOULDN'T WORK. WE ALSO HAD MET WITH THE FOLKS IN STERLING TOWER ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR THE AIR RIGHTS. AND ALTHOUGH WE HAVE THE AIR RIGHTS, WE DON'T HAVE THE FIRST FLOOR, SO YOU'D HAVE THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR AND YOU COULD PARK ON THE ROOF, BUT THE COST OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PARKING VERSUS THE SIZE OF THE PARKING LOT IS AN ECONOMIC FEASIBLE DIFFICULTY. I MEAN, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IF WE USED THE ENTIRE PARCEL OF WHERE AZULES APARTMENTS WERE OR SOMETHING, BUT JUST THAT SMALL CHUNK ISN'T ENOUGH. YEAH. TO MAKE IT. I MEAN, MAYBE ONE DAY, BUT NOT RIGHT NOW. YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK ULTIMATELY AT ONE POINT THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT BUYING THAT LAST STRIP THAT'S DOWN THERE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY, THAT FIRST PROPERTY FIRST WHERE
[00:50:04]
THE LITTLE PLAZA IS. YEAH, THAT'S NOT FOR SALE. BUT THAT NEVER CAME ABOUT. AND THEN THE ZOO PROPERTY, WE HAVE A LONG TERM LEASE FOR THAT. SO THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO WITH THAT WITH THAT PROPERTY. YEAH. THAT'S 80 YEARS. AND I THINK YOU ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE NORTH POINT.YEAH. AND THEN WE HAVE THE OCEAN BOULEVARD AND OSCEOLA STREET. THOSE ARE THE ADJACENT PARCEL NEXT TO THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING AND THE CANCER SPECIALIST BUILDING. WE DID RFP. WE RECEIVED TWO PROPOSALS FOR THAT FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THOSE THREE PARCELS. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY IN AN AGREEMENT WITH STEWART MEWS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE PARCELS. IT INCLUDES MULTIFAMILY TOWNHOMES, PARKING GARAGE. BUT IN ORDER FOR US TO DO ANY ACTIVITY, WE WOULD HAVE TO TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT OR TAKE ACTION WITH THE AGREEMENT IN ORDER FOR US TO EVEN DISCUSS.
TO BE CLEAR, STEWART MEWS IS THE REMAIN. IS THE FALLOUT FROM FROM URBAN NEW URBAN THAT BUILT THE ZOO, RIGHT? YEAH. SO IT'S THE SAME. IT'S TIM HERNANDEZ, RIGHT. WHO WAS ONE. NO. AND IT ALSO AT THE TIME INCLUDED MARCELLA AND SHE'S NOT MEL SALA WAS IN IT AND SHE'S NOT IN IT ANY LONGER. AND THEN THERE'S 2 OR 3 OTHER GUYS THAT WERE NOT AS PART OF THE NEW URBAN. SO THE ONLY PERSON FROM NEW URBAN WAS TIM HERNANDEZ, BUT HE WAS KIND OF THE FRONT PERSON ON IT. AND BASICALLY WHEN THEY WEREN'T SPLIT UP, THE DECISION WAS MADE TO ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY AND FLIP IT TO I MEAN, THAT WAS MADE AT A CR, A MEETING AT ONE POINT AND THEN A BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO BE AT THAT MEETING AT THE TIME, AND THE TO DO WHAT YOU SAID, ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY AND FLIP IT TO THEM SO THEY COULD BUILD TOWNHOUSES OR APARTMENTS ON IT. THAT WAS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF DOING THAT. WE DIDN'T NEED IT FOR THIS. WE DIDN'T NEED IT FOR. AND THAT WAS THAT CAME UP AT A MEETING, AT A CRA MEETING. I THINK IT WAS. THAT'S NOT ACCURATE. YEAH, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED BECAUSE IT HAPPENED. RIGHT? THE PROPERTY WAS FOR SALE AND THE SALE WAS FOR THE WELLS FARGO BANK AND THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO IT. RIGHT.
AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO SEPARATE THE PARCELS AT ALL. THE CITY WAS PLANNING ON PUTTING CITY HALL IN THE WELLS FARGO BANK UNDER THE CRA PLAN. IT'S MORE COMPLICATED BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE A CITY HALL. IT SERVES THE ENTIRE CITY, SO YOU CAN'T JUST USE CRA DOLLARS TO BUILD YOURSELF A NEW CITY HALL. THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE CRA EXCLUSIVE. SO THE CITY BORROWED $6 MILLION TO BUY THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING. AND THEN AS PART OF THAT TRANSACTION, TO MAKE THE TRANSACTION COMPLETE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY HAD A SERIOUS ROOF LEAK AND OTHER STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS. SO IT WAS BEING SOLD AS ACTUALLY VACANT. AND SO THE CITY COMMISSION SLASH CRA VOTED TO HAVE THE CRA PUT IN $1 MILLION AND BUY THAT VACANT PARCEL, AND THEN TO GO OUT AS A JOINT VENTURE TO RFP, WHICH IT AS WELL AS RAM DEVELOPMENT, SUBMITTED PROPOSALS. THE PROPOSALS THAT WERE SUBMITTED, ONE BY RAM SAID, LOOK, IF YOU GUYS WANT US TO BUILD YOU A PARKING GARAGE, WE NEED THE DENSITY BECAUSE WE CAN'T JUSTIFY A PARKING GARAGE WITHOUT THE DENSITY. SO THEY HAD 200 AND SOME UNITS IN IT. STEWART MEWS SURGICALLY MET WITH THE PEOPLE THAT WERE EVALUATING IT AND VOTING ON IT, AND GAVE EACH ONE EXACTLY WHAT THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS. AND AS A RESULT, THEY SELECTED STEWART MEWS, WHICH WAS 94 UNITS THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE BEHIND CITY HALL OR BEHIND THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING FIRST. BUT THE PARKING GARAGE WOULD ONLY BE THREE STORIES, AND THE TOP FLOOR OF THE PARKING GARAGE WAS GOING TO BE A GRASS OR GREEN ROOF. AND THEN ONCE THAT WAS FINISHED, THE 94 UNITS WOULD BE BUILT IN PHASES. IT WOULD BE BUILT ON THE. FIRST WOULD BE ON THE, I GUESS, CLOSER TO DOWNTOWN SIDE AND OR I'M SORRY, THE FIRST WAS GOING TO BE ON THE CLOSER TO THE BEACH SIDE AND THEN ON THE CLOSER TO DOWNTOWN SIDE. WHEN THE LEASE ENDED FOR THE WELLS FARGO BANK, BECAUSE THEY HAD THE RIGHTS TO THE DRIVE THROUGH, SO THEY COULDN'T BUILD ON ANY OF THAT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY RAM DEVELOPMENT INCLUDED THE ENTIRE BLOCK, BECAUSE TOM LOSITO
[00:55:05]
OWNED THAT PROPERTY AT THE END, SO RAM WAS USING THE WHOLE BLOCK AND THE STEWART MEWS WAS NOT.BUT THE COMMISSION DIDN'T WANT THE DENSITY. SO THEY WENT WITH THE STEWART MEWS PLAN. BUT THE STEWART MEWS PLAN REQUIRES THE CITY TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE. AND BY THE WAY, THE WHOLE THING WAS INTENDED TO RECOUP THE INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE CITY COULD GET MONEY BACK. WELL, THE PROJECT THAT STEWART MEWS WAS HAD PROPOSED, THEIR RENT WAS SO LOW THAT THEY WOULDN'T PAY ANYTHING REALLY TO THE CITY FOR THE FIRST TEN YEARS. AND THE PARKING GARAGE WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD WAS ALMOST 8 OR $9 MILLION TO RECOUP THE $7 MILLION INVESTMENT THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY STARTED WITH. AND STEWART MEWS DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING UNTIL A YEAR AFTER WE FINISH THE PARKING GARAGE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL NATURE. AND EVERYBODY THAT DAY WAS THAT, OH, WELL, IT'S GOING TO HAVE A GREEN ROOF. SO THAT'S SO GREAT. BUT I TRIED TO EXPLAIN TO THEM THE CARS UNDERNEATH IT ARE GOING TO PREVENT THAT WATER FROM PERCOLATING INTO THE WATERSHED.
RIGHT. BUT IN ANY EVENT IT WAS A JOINT BECAUSE THE CRA ONLY BOUGHT THE ONE THING AND THEY WERE NEVER GOING TO FLIP IT TO ANYBODY BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN RFP. AND THERE WAS NEVER A PROPOSAL FROM. THE WHATEVER. THE NEW URBAN GUYS, NEW URBAN DID BID ON THE BALL FIELDS THAT HAPPENED FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THAT, BUT THE CITY DID NOT EVER ENTER INTO ANY INFORMAL OR EVEN GESTURE WITH THEM THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE GIVEN ANY PROPERTY IN ANY WAY, FORM OR FASHION.
WELL, I'LL CHOOSE TO DISAGREE, BUT WELL, TELL ME THE MEETING. I'LL PULL IT. WELL, IT WAS A CRA MEETING. MYERS REPRESENTATIVE AND MATHESON'S REPRESENTATIVE WERE BOTH TOLD VOTE TO ACQUIRE THIS SO THAT WE CAN GET NEW URBAN AND FLIP IT TO NEW URBAN SO THEY CAN PUT HOUSES THERE.
THAT'S WHAT CAME UP. THAT'S WHAT WAS SAID. IT SOUNDS LIKE A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE. SOUNDS LIKE IT TO ME. BUT IT WAS AT A MEETING, SO I DON'T KNOW WHO SAID IT OR WHERE IT WAS. I'LL PLAY THE TAPES BACK. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS A THIRD PARTY, BUT THAT WAS I KNOW THOSE TWO WERE LOOKING TO THAT. THAT WAS AND THEY MADE THAT POINT CLEAR. I THINK AT THE TIME TROY MIGHT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH, WITH HE WAS IN SUPPORT OF IT. BUT I'M NOT SAYING THAT NEGATIVELY OR POSITIVE. I THINK THE ENTIRE BOARD WAS IN SUPPORT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE TO.
NO. THEY WERE. YEAH. TO UPDATE YOU ON THAT. I'VE SINCE MET WITH THEM ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT GOING TO BUILD THAT PARKING GARAGE, BUT I TALKED TO TIM HERNANDEZ IN PARTICULAR, AND HE OBVIOUSLY WOULD REQUIRE THE COMMISSION AND THE CITY TO APPROVE IT. BUT BECAUSE EVERYBODY DECIDED APARTMENTS WAS A BAD WORD, HE HAS ANOTHER PROPOSAL THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO AS WELL. THAT PROPOSAL WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE HE COULDN'T DO IT AS A LAND LEASE. HE'D NEED FEE SIMPLE IN ORDER TO DO IT, WHICH SOME OF OUR COMMISSIONERS FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT, LIKE PROVIDING FEE SIMPLE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. BUT HE HAD PUT TOGETHER A KIND OF A DESIGN VERY SIMILAR TO, LIKE THE PAINTED LADIES THAT YOU SEE IN SAN FRANCISCO OR OTHER PLACES. AND HE'S DONE IT DOWN SOUTH FLORIDA. BUT BASICALLY TWO AND THREE STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT HAVE TWO CAR GARAGES AND BACK. SO YOU'D PULL IN, YOU KNOW, INTO THAT CENTER LANE OR WHATEVER AND PULL IN AND PARK FROM BEHIND. BUT IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT MEMORIAL PARK, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TWO AND THREE STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, WELLS FARGO WAS ALSO A THREE STORY BUILDING, SO THE ROOF LINES WOULD BE SOMEWHAT CONSIDERED SIMILAR. I THINK THE DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT 30 HOUSES. AND IF YOU FIGURED $2 MILLION A HOUSE, THAT'S $60 MILLION IN REVENUE OR IN TAXABLE VALUE. AND WE WERE THINKING ABOUT THE 94 APARTMENTS. IF YOU TOOK A POOL AS THE BASELINE FOR THE SAME THING, AND YOU SAID AZUL'S 49 APARTMENTS AND ITS ASSESSED VALUE IS AT ABOUT 10 MILLION OR $12 MILLION. SO YOU DOUBLE THAT TO SAY THAT 94 UNITS WOULD BE SOMEWHERE ABOUT 20 MILLION TO $24 MILLION VERSUS DOING THE 30 HOUSES THAT YOU WOULD HAVE $60 MILLION IN VALUE, SO YOU'D HAVE AT LEAST THREE TIMES THE VALUE.
AND BECAUSE NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 30 YEARS, THEY'D COME OUT OF THE GROUND AT FULL VALUE. SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE HOMESTEAD SET OFFS AND THE SAVE OUR HOMES AND ALL THE RESTRICTIONS ON IT. ON TOP OF THAT, THE DISCUSSION ALSO INCLUDED DOING DEED RESTRICTIONS
[01:00:04]
SO THAT THEY COULDN'T BE AIRBNB AND TURNED INTO HOTELS, BUT RATHER COULD BE LEASED ON, YOU KNOW, ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR KIND OF STANDARD SO THAT THEY WERE LITERALLY INTENDED TO BE PERMANENT RESIDENTS RATHER THAN HOTEL USE. AND THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT WAS, OUT OF 30 UNITS, YOU'D GET TEN OF THEM THAT WERE OWNED BY PEOPLE THAT CAME FOR CHRISTMAS AND SPRING BREAK. YOU'D GET TEN OF THEM THAT WERE PEOPLE THAT LIVED THERE FULL TIME, AND THEN YOU'D GET TEN OF THEM THAT MAYBE WERE LEASED OUT OR THAT WERE TRANSIENT OR OR MORE TRANSIENT NATURE, THAT MAYBE A DOCTOR'S MOVING TO TOWN AND WANTS TO RENT IT AND FIND A PLACE UNTIL THEY FIND A PLACE TO LIVE OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, BECAUSE IT'S CLOSE TO THE HOSPITAL, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. BUT THEY WOULD STILL ROUGHLY GENERATE $60 MILLION IN ASSESSED VALUE, WHICH AGAIN, IF YOU TAKE THAT TO THE CRA AND SAYING THAT THE CRA GETS ABOUT TEN MILLS ON THAT, THERE'D BE $600,000 A YEAR IN NEW CRA MONEY, WHICH WOULD BE REAL MONEY, BUT IT HASN'T COME FORWARD BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T REALLY GET THE INDICATION, BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY TO REALLY DO IT WOULD BE TO PLAT IT AND TO SELL THE INDIVIDUAL PARCELS SO THAT PEOPLE COULD BUY AND OWN THE FEE. SIMPLE HOMES. THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT FOR THE 94 UNITS WAS TO LEASE IT. YOU COULD DO IT AS A CONDO, RIGHT? WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT HE OFFERED. I MEAN, YOU COULD PROBABLY DO IT AS A CONDO, BUT HE WASN'T GOING TO. I MEAN, BECAUSE A TOWNHOUSE CAN BE A CONDO, IT'S JUST I MEAN, ANYTHING COULD BE A CONDO. BUT HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY INTEREST IN DOING THAT. WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU KNOW, I JUST THE REASON I PERSONALLY BROUGHT THAT UP. WELL, AND FIRST, IN ALL CLARITY, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A VESTED INTEREST IN SOME OF THE STUFF THAT HAPPENED DOWN THERE PREVIOUSLY. SO. SO I'M NOT ALWAYS I'M SOMETIMES A LITTLE SKEPTICAL OF, OF SOME THINGS, BUT BUT MY ISSUE WAS WE BOUGHT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BASICALLY.AND NOW THAT ISN'T WHAT WE WANT DOWN THERE, I DON'T THINK I DON'T THINK THE CITY COMMISSION IS CURRENTLY GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING OF THAT SIZE. IN DOWNTOWN 30 HOUSES. YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S RIGHT DOWNTOWN, RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE COURTHOUSE. I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S A PRETTY DENSE AREA. I MEAN, SO IT'S 30 HOUSES DENSE OR NOT DENSE. WELL, I THINK FOR THAT SMALL OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT'S PRETTY I MEAN, YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY PARKING AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? THERE'S NO PARKING GARAGE COMING IN. WELL HE WOULD BUILD TWO, TWO CAR GARAGES FOR EACH ONE. SO THEY EACH WOULD PARK THEMSELVES. AND THEN THERE WAS GOING TO BE ADDED. THERE WAS GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT PARKING FOR CITY HALL IN THE CENTER OF IT BEING LEFT. AND AGAIN, IT WAS A SKETCH DESIGN DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO BUILD. BUT I MEAN, IF THEY WANT TO BUY, THEY WANT TO BUY IT OUT. THEY WANT TO FEE. SIMPLE, RIGHT? THEY WANT TO BUY IT. WELL, THEY WOULD WANT TO SELL THE HOUSES FEE SIMPLE. SO THEY'D NEED A PLAT AND WOULD THEY'D BE HAPPY TO BUY IT. THE PROBLEM IS THE CITY OF STUART WANTS TO CONTINUE TO OWN WELLS FARGO BUILDING TO USE FOR AN OFFICE BUILDING. SO THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME KIND OF POA OR HOA TO SHARE IN THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PARKING. AND WHEN I SAY PARKING, ACCESS TO THE BACKS OF THE BUILDINGS, BECAUSE THEY'D BE PULLING INTO THE BEHIND THE WELLS FARGO AND ACCESSING THEIR GARAGES FROM THE BACK BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE CURB CUTS FOR EACH HOUSE ON EAST OCEAN BOULEVARD OR OSCEOLA. BUT AGAIN, THAT MIGHT THAT THAT IDEA COULD BE LONG GONE FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE NOW TO THE QUESTION WOULD BE, DOES THE DOES THE CRB OR THE COMMISSION WANT TO SELL THE VACANT PARCEL NEXT DOOR TO WELLS FARGO? AND IS THAT HOLDING UP THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ACROSS FROM FROM THE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION, FROM THE COURTHOUSE, BECAUSE THEY OWN THAT PROPERTY TOO. RIGHT. WELL, OR THEY HAVE IT UNDER I KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT THE ELIZABETH IS WHAT THAT IS CALLED. NOW, I SPOKE WITH MR. HERNANDEZ ABOUT THAT, AND HE WAS HOLDING OFF ON THE ELIZABETH BECAUSE HURRICANES GAVE HIM SOME EXTENSIONS AND THE INTEREST RATES FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE HIGH. SO HE WAS JUST WAITING FOR THINGS TO GET HEALTHY AGAIN BECAUSE HE'S GOT I MEAN, THAT'S APPROVED, RIGHT. BUT HE STILL HAS GOT THAT OTHER PROPERTY THAT HE THAT HE GOT THE RFP ON THAT. RIGHT. SO HE HAS THE RFP ON THAT ON THAT PROPERTY EAST OF WELLS FARGO. EAST WELLS FARGO. YEAH, IT'S NOT EAST OF WELLS FARGO.
IT'S ALL OF WELLS FARGO. IT'S THE WELLS FARGO DRIVE THROUGH. IT'S THE PARKING LOT ON THE WEST OF WELLS FARGO. IT'S THE OSCEOLA FRONTAGE, AND IT'S EAST OF WELLS FARGO. IS THE WHOLE THING. SO
[01:05:12]
THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I MEAN, I WASN'T VOTING ON IT MYSELF. I KNOW YOU WEREN'T, BUT I'M JUST SAYING. ALL RIGHT, THE. SO THOSE ARE THE 325 AND 330. IS THAT THE TWO PARCELS THERE. RIGHT. AND I'LL TELL YOU, I, I LEFT THOSE BUILDINGS UP FOR A LONG TIME HOPING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD COME FORWARD. AND WE WERE GOING TO LET THE DEVELOPER INCUR THE COST OF TAKING THOSE BUILDINGS DOWN. BUT THEY WERE BECOMING SUCH AN EYESORE AND THEY WERE GETTING VANDALIZED, AND IT JUST BECAME SUCH A PROBLEM THAT I, LAST YEAR OR THIS YEAR, SPENT THE MONEY TO REMOVE THEM. SO THE PLAN IS TO LEAVE IT A DIRT LOT UNTIL IT'S GRASS. IT'S GRASS NOW. OKAY, WE GOT A BIG PINE TREE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT AS WELL. RIGHT? NICE. YEAH. I LIKE SHOCKED AT HOW QUICKLY THE GRASS CAME BACK BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED IT WAS GOING TO BE. I MUST HAVE JUST SEEN IT WHEN IT WAS JUST THE DIRT. CAN YOU CLARIFY WHERE THE NORTH POINT STANDS AFTER ALL OF THE LAWSUITS? LIKE IS THERE A CURRENT AGREEMENT OR IT'S JUST NORTH POINT IS THE IT'S A REMNANT PARCEL, AS YOU'RE AWARE, FROM FDOT, THE. PARCEL IS VERY SMALL. IT'S GOT THE RAILROAD TRACKS KIND OF RUNNING THROUGH IT. AND THE IT'S KIND OF THE NORTHERN END OF THE PARCEL.THERE'S A TRIANGULAR SHAPED PARCEL THAT FDOT MAINTAINED A DEED RESTRICTION ON THAT SAID THAT IT HAD TO BE MAINTAINED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE OR PUBLIC USE. TURNED OUT TO BE PRETTY SIMPLE.
SAME THING WE DID AT THE SUNSET BAY MARINA. IF THE PARKING LOT GETS BUILT ON THAT SPACE, IT BECOMES PARKING. THEY JUST CAN'T HAVE IT. EXCLUSIVE PARKING. SO IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. WHAT WE DID AT AT SUNSET BAY IS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT THAT THEY WOULD MANAGE THE PARKING LOT, AND AS A RESULT, THAT'S WHY THEY DON'T CHARGE FOR VALET PARKING. THEY CAN VALET IT AND BY VALET IT, THEY CAN STACK WAY MORE CARS IN THE PARKING LOT THAN YOU COULD OTHERWISE PARK IT. WE GET COMPLAINTS NOW AND AGAIN ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PARK THEIR OWN CAR AND THEY GO IN THERE AND THEY SAY THIS IS. BUT THE PROBLEM WITH IT IS IT'S SO DANGEROUS TO HAVE PEOPLE PARKING AND VALET PARKING THAT THE DECISION WAS MADE LONG AGO TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THEM FOR THE MARINA SITE TO DO IT, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A DIFFERENT MEETINGS, ABOUT FOCUSING ON. THE GETTING THE DEVELOPMENT OR THE CONTINUING ON THE TRIANGLE PROPERTY DESIGN. THE TRIANGLE DISTRICT DESIGN. BUT RELATIVE TO THAT. WHERE IS WHERE IS THE BAPTIST CHURCH AT THIS POINT IN TERMS OF THE SALE OF THEIR PROPERTY, DIDN'T SELL, DIDN'T SELL. SO AND THEY'RE NOT STILL TRYING OR ARE THEY ARE THEY PULLED IT OFF THE MARKET. WELL, SO THE ONLY WAY THE BAPTIST CHURCH WILL GET REDEVELOPED IS IN COOPERATION WITH THE CITY, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF RIGHT OF WAYS AND ROADS AND THINGS THAT DISRUPT IT AS A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT. IF THE CITY COMMISSION WERE ABOARD THAT WANTED TO DO LIKE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE ALONG WEST OCEAN BOULEVARD THERE, AND WAS WILLING TO ABANDON A RIGHT OF WAY IN EXCHANGE FOR A DIFFERENT AREA TO BE A RIGHT OF WAY, TO KIND OF BE ABLE TO PARCEL THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. IT WOULD PROBABLY SELL AND GET DEVELOPED. BUT RIGHT NOW, BASED UPON THE POSITION OF THE COMMISSION, THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY OF THAT STUFF, THERE'S NO INVESTORS THAT ARE WILLING TO PUT IT TO GET AT RISK THERE, BECAUSE WHEN THEY START LOOKING AT IT MORE CLOSELY, BECAUSE OF THE ROADS AND THE INTERCONNECTIONS, THE WAY THE ROADS ARE, IT'S NOT CONTINUOUS BECAUSE THESE ROADS END UP RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE AND YOU GET THESE SETBACKS FROM THE ROADS THAT THEN INTERFERE WITH THE DESIGN, AND YOU WOULD NEED REAL COOPERATION, JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DID THE AZUL OR THE TRIANGLE PIECE, THAT WAS THREE DIFFERENT PARCELS. IF IT WASN'T FOR THE CITY BEING WILLING TO COMBINE THE PARCELS, AND IT'S ONLY THREE STORIES YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, LIKE WE TALK ABOUT HEIGHT AND DEVELOPMENT AND ALL THIS STUFF, THE CURRENT CODE WITHOUT ANY CHANGES, IS ALREADY SO RESTRICTIVE THAT A SMALL SITE CAN'T BUILD TO FOUR STORIES OR 30 UNITS AN ACRE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PARK IT BECAUSE THE IT JUST PHYSICALLY DOESN'T ALL FIT.
SO THE AZUL SITE, IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO PARK IT, THEY COULD ONLY GO THREE STORIES.
THEY COULD ALSO BE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF DIXIE HIGHWAY, ON JOAN JEFFERSON, ON ALBANY, AND
[01:10:08]
ON FIRST STREET, PLUS THE PARKING THAT'S ON SITE. ALL HAD TO BE COUNTED INTO IT. AND AS A RESULT, I MEAN THAT THE SAME THING WOULD BE THE BAPTIST CHURCH. I MEAN, FOUR STORIES WOULD PROBABLY BE, ESPECIALLY NOW WITH THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION THE WAY IT IS. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER WHEN WE DID AZUL, IT WAS 2014. WHEN THAT FIRST STARTED. WE WERE JUST BARELY COMING OUT OF THAT RECESSION. INTEREST RATES WERE GOING DOWN, NOT UP. AND I THINK WHEN THEY GOT THEIR CONSTRUCTION LOAN ON, THAT WAS PROBABLY TWO AND A QUARTER OR 2.5% INTEREST, WHEREAS NOW IT'D BE CLOSE TO SEVEN, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. AND SO THE BAPTIST CHURCH IS THE SAME WAY, THE FINANCING MONEY TO BUY IT, AND THEN THE CONSTRUCTION COST AT AT 6 OR 7% WOULD REALLY REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH MORE STUFF. WELL, THEN AND THAT WAS YOU BROUGHT UP PARKING AND THAT'S THAT WAS MY SECOND QUESTION THERE RELATIVE TO THAT TRIANGLE DISTRICT. WHAT COULD WE PUT WHAT WHAT DO WE WANT TO PUT IN THERE AND, AND WHAT AND HOW WOULD WE PARK IT. BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WENT TO THE SPEECH BY ANDRE DUANY. NO, I WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT, BUT WHAT HE THE SOME IN SUMMARY OF HIS COMMENTS WERE CAPITALISM WILL SOLVE YOUR PARKING PROBLEM. YOU SHOULD GET RID OF ALL YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND LET THE MARKET FIGURE IT OUT FOR YOU. BECAUSE. IS HE A PERSONAL FRIEND OF BOYD BRADFIELD? BECAUSE THAT SOUNDS EXACTLY LIKE THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE SAID ABOUT IT. THE IRONIC PART IS THAT THE MOST SUCCESSFUL LOCATION IN STUART IS THE PARKING EXEMPT AREA. I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT SURE ENOUGH, THERE IT IS, RIGHT THERE IN BLACK AND WHITE. WE REALLY THERE'S SO MUCH OF THE TRIANGLE THAT YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING WITH UNLESS THERE'S PARKING EXEMPTION, ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT FRONT DIXIE HIGHWAY. IT'S JUST IMPOSSIBLE. YEAH. THERE'S NOTHING. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING THERE WITHOUT. THE BAPTIST CHURCH IS THE BIGGEST IS THE BIGGEST PIECE OF PROPERTY THERE. UNLESS IT'S BIG TOO. YEAH, IT IS BIG AND IT'S MULTIPLE BLOCKS. IT GOES ALL THE WAY. IT GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO DIXIE. LIKE IT'S GOT A LITTLE SLIVER AT THE END THAT REACHES DIXIE. BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE BRIGHTLINE THING, THEY WERE TRYING TO GET THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, POSITIONED FOR A BID ON A TRAIN STATION OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. BUT THE OTHER THING IS, I MEAN, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PARKING AS WELL, YOU KNOW, IN A MONTH FROM NOW, IT'S GOING TO BE THE 4TH OF JULY. AND I'M JUST SPECULATING HERE, BUT I'M GUESSING JUST LIKE THE LAST 30 YEARS, 5 TO 10,000 PEOPLE ARE GOING TO MAKE IT TO THE BOARDWALK AND THEY'RE GOING TO WATCH THE FIREWORKS, AND THEY'RE STILL NOT GOING TO BE ANY EXTRA PARKING, BUT THEY'RE STILL ALL GOING TO MAKE IT BECAUSE THEY DO EVERY 4TH OF JULY. YEAH, MAYBE CLOSER TO 12 OR 13,000, RIGHT? I MEAN, THE NUMBERS ARE GETTING BIGGER, NOT SMALLER, BUT THEY ALL GET HERE AND THEY ALL MAKE IT AND THEY ALL WATCH THE FIREWORKS EVERY YEAR. AND SOMEHOW IT GETS FIGURED OUT. MR. CHAIR? YES. ARE WE ON AGENDA? I THINK WE WERE I DON'T KNOW, I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION ABOUT THE NORTH POINT PROPERTY AND MAYBE JUST ALL OF THEM, WHEN YOU DO ACQUIRE THEM, IS ARE THERE RESTRICTIONS ON HOW YOU CAN USE THEM? LIKE YES. SO WHEN IT SAYS THE PURPOSE WAS FOR REDEVELOPMENT, THAT NORTH POINT PROPERTY HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL, OR COULD IT BE FOR PUBLIC USE? YOU HAVE TO BE. YOU HAVE TO DO IT WITHIN THE CRA PLAN. IF THE CRA IS THE ACQUISITION OKAY? SOMETIMES REDEVELOPMENT CAN BE BEAUTIFICATION AND JUST ADDING LANDSCAPING. SOMETIMES REDEVELOPMENT CAN BE A RESTAURANT WITH A MARINA OR A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY. AND SOMETIMES REDEVELOPMENT COULD END UP BEING THE LANDING AREA OF A $225 MILLION BRIDGE EXPANSION. MAYBE. SOMETIMES RFQ. WHEN WE GO OUT FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, WILL I WILL SPECIFICALLY STATE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FROM THE PROPOSALS. FOR INSTANCE, WHEN WE DID THE WELLS FARGO SITE, WE WERE SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT WE WANTED. SO THAT'S THE KIND OF PROJECT WE SEE. WE WANTED MULTIFAMILY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WAS MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT RESTRICTIONS WERE ON IT, WHETHER OR NOT WE ACQUIRED OR NOT, BUT WHAT WAS DEFINED. CRA RESTRICTION IS WHAT IT IS, THE CRA PLAN ITSELF. WE CAN'T JUST BUY FOR INVESTMENT LIKE WE CAN'T BUY IT AND SAY, I THINK THIS WILL GO UP IN VALUE, SO WE'LL JUST BUY IT AND HOLD ON TO IT FOR A WHILE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS. IT'S GOT TO BE PLANNED FOR SOME PURPOSE. OKAY. SO AT THIS POINT, BASICALLY THE ONLY THING THAT WE GOT SITTING OUT[01:15:06]
HERE THAT WE OWN THAT WE COULD DO SOMETHING WITH IS WELLS FARGO AND THE PARCEL THERE, THAT'S 325 OCEAN AND 330 OSCEOLA. WE COULD I MEAN IF WE DECIDED WE DOESN'T OWN WELLS FARGO. THE CRA ONLY BOUGHT THE NO. THE CITY OWNS. RIGHT. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IF THE COMMISSION IS LOOKING AT WELLS FARGO AND SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT WHERE WE WANT CITY HALL OR, YOU KNOW, OR WE CAN'T GET IN THERE FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS BECAUSE OF THE LEASES THAT ARE IN PLACE. DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR, YOU KNOW, DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR US AS A, AS CRA TO AT LEAST RECOMMEND THAT THE PROPERTIES THAT WE OWN GET SOLD OUT? HOPEFULLY THE CITY WOULD GO ALONG WITH THAT AND WOULD SELL OUT THEIR PARCELS AND GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD ON WHERE CITY HALL IS GOING TO GO. IN MOST DEVELOPMENTS THAT I'VE BEEN EXPERIENCED WITH AS IT RELATES TO ENTERING INTO PURCHASE CONTRACTS, THEY GENERALLY HAVE A CONTINGENCY CLAUSE UNDER THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT SAYS IT'S CONTINGENT UPON GETTING THE APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT. RIGHT. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE I MEAN, IF IT INCLUDES MIXED USE MULTIFAMILY OR YOU'RE SAYING NOBODY WOULD WANT TO BUY IT, IF THEY HAVE THAT RESTRICTION, THE COMMISSION WOULD DENY THAT APPROVAL. AND SO IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO SELL. YOU'D PROBABLY GET A LOSS ON IT. AND THAT'S WHERE THE COMPLICATION COMES IN. UNLESS THE COMMISSION CHANGES ITS POLICY. THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD POINT. AND MAYBE I CAN ASK PANEL OR MAYBE YOU MIKE. BUT SO FOR EXAMPLE THESE JUST FOLLOWING ON WHAT MARK WAS ASKING. SO FOLLOWING ON THAT. SO IF THE CRA WANTED TO ENCOURAGE A CERTAIN TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN A SPACE LIKE, LIKE ACTUALLY IT'S ON THIS PIECE OF PAPER TALKING ABOUT 325 AND 330. SO EVEN IF THE RFP OR RFQ, EVEN IF IT COMES BACK, YOU GET A PARTNER AND THEY GO FORWARD. WHAT LEVELS OR WHAT BODIES HAVE TO APPROVE THAT DEVELOPMENT BEFORE IT HAPPENS. SO USING THIS, USING WELLS FARGO AS AN EXAMPLE. WELL, NOT WELLS FARGO A CRA PROPERTY, LET'S SAY. BECAUSE THAT'S MORE THAT'S THE REAL THING. WE'RE GOING TO DO THE FACTS LIKE THEY WANTED. WE WERE CITY WAS GROWING AS FAR AS PERSONNEL, AND IT WAS TOO SMALL TO BE IN THIS BUILDING. AND THEY WERE LOOKING FOR OTHER SPACE. SO THEY SAID, LET'S BUY THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING, MOVE THE CITY EMPLOYEES TO WELLS FARGO AND REDEVELOP THIS SITE AS A HOTEL OR SOME KIND OF TOURISM VENTURE THAT WOULD EXTEND DOWNTOWN AND DO OTHER STUFF. AND THIS WOULD BE PART OF THE MONEY THAT RECOUPED THAT INVESTMENT SO AS TO NOT TAKE A LOSS. THEY THEN GET IT UNDER CONTRACT. THEY BUY THE TWO PARCELS WITH CRA DOLLARS, THEY BUY THE BUILDING WITH GENERAL FUND LOAN, THEY GO OUT TO RFP. WHATEVER THEY'RE CALLED. THE STUART MUSE GETS THE CONTRACT THAT THE RESOLUTION AWARDS. STUART MUSE ESSENTIALLY ESSENTIALLY WHAT I WOULD CALL A RIGHT OF REFUSAL FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION. AND STUART MUSE HAS A PROPOSAL THAT THAT THEY SAY WE WILL DO THIS. AND THE CITY SAYS, OKAY, GREAT. BUT IN THEIR PROPOSAL, IT ALSO SAYS, WE'LL BUILD THE PARKING GARAGE FIRST AND SOME OTHER STUFF. AND BECAUSE OF THE LEASES OR WHATEVER. SO THEY'RE KIND OF NOW IN THIS LIMBO STAGE. IF THEY WERE TO COME FORWARD RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE VACANCIES HAPPENED OR WHATEVER HAPPENED, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THE CRB, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S IN THE URBAN AREA OVERLAY ZONE FOR APPROVAL ANYWAY. IT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THE CRA BECAUSE THE CRA OWNS THE LAND THAT IT'S GOING ON, AND TO ENTER INTO THE LEASE OR SALE, YOU HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THEM, AND IT WOULD HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION, BECAUSE THE CITY COMMISSION ULTIMATELY HAS TO APPROVE WHATEVER THE TRANSACTION IS WITH WELLS FARGO AND WITH THIS SITE AND, AND WHAT THE OTHER IS. SO IT'S A IT WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF A THREE BOARD CIRCUS, BUT WE ALSO SOMETIMES FORM A COMMITTEE RIGHT WHERE IT INVOLVES STAFF, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, CRA DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, RESPONDING TO THE RFP. RIGHT. AND WE REVIEW RFPS ALREADY ISSUED. WE'VE ALREADY YEAH. BUT BEFORE WE BEFORE AFTER WE RECEIVE PROPOSALS, WE DO FORM A COMMITTEE AND WE HAVE CRITERIA IN THE RFP. SO WE REVIEW THE PROPOSAL BASED ON THOSE CRITERIA, RANK THE APPLICANTS AND THEN BRING THAT TO THE CRB AND CRA WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN THEY MAKE THE FINAL MOTION. THAT'S THAT'S VERY HELPFUL. LET ME GIVE JUST ANOTHER HYPOTHETICAL. AND I[01:20:03]
THINK THEN I'LL HAVE A FULL PICTURE. BUT LET'S SAY THAT NORTH POINT PIECE, LET'S SAY THE CRB JUST JUST FOLLOW ME, JUST SAID, OH WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT A GREEN SPACE. IT'S A PARK. WHAT BODIES HAVE TO APPROVE THAT USE CRA. JUST THE CRA DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMISSION BECAUSE, WELL, THE CRA IS THE COMMISSION. RIGHT. BUT BUT THE PRIOR EXAMPLE, YOU SAID THREE PLACES.WELL, THE REASON I SAID THE COMMISSION WAS BECAUSE THE COMMISSION OWNED THE WELLS FARGO. SO THERE WERE TWO ENTITIES TO APPROVE THE LEASE, A PARK, THE CRA COULD WELL. AND ULTIMATELY THE PARK WOULD WOULD YOU? WHEN WE FIRST WERE BUYING THE PROPERTY, THE CITY WAS GOING TO TAKE THAT TITLE TO THAT IN THE NAME OF THE CRA. AND I WAS HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH PAUL NICOLETTI AND I SAID, WELL, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN 2039 OR 50 9 OR 89 OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THE CRA ENDS, RIGHT? HOW WILL YOU EVER BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING IF THERE'S NO CRA IF IT EXPIRES? SO THE CRA TAKES TITLE AND THE NAME OF THE CITY TO STOP. IF YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE THAT NORTH POINT A PARK, FIRST OF ALL, IF YOU KNOW, A PARK COULD PROBABLY MEET THE REDEVELOPMENT CRITERIA OF THE CRA PLAN. SO IT WOULD BE A FEASIBLE MATTER IF THAT PARK WAS GOING TO BE MAINTAINED IN PERPETUITY WITH CRA FUNDS, OR THE SCHERER FOUNDATION WAS GOING TO MAKE THAT DONATION. SOMETIMES WE'RE GENEROUS. THEN IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T NEED TO GO IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION AT ALL. BUT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A LEGACY COST, IT'S AN ONGOING MAINTENANCE COST. WHAT MIGHT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED WOULD BE A GENERAL FUND ISSUE, OR IF THE CITY WAS GOING TO HAVE TO RECEIVE THIS AS A, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU THIS PARK THAT'S ALREADY DEEDED INTO CONSERVATION THAT YOU CAN'T REDEVELOP, THAT HAS A DEED RESTRICTION ON IT, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF PAYING $125,000 A YEAR TO MAINTAIN, THEN THEY PROBABLY WOULD WANT SOME KIND OF PARTICIPATION IN THE DECISION.
SO THE REASON I ASK ALL THAT, MARK, IS THAT YOU GOT ME THINKING IS, I MEAN, THERE ARE THESE CRA, LET'S CALL IT OWNED PROPERTIES. BUT THERE'S IN TERMS OF WHAT THE CRB COULD RECOMMEND THAT HAPPENS THERE. IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S NOT THAT STRAIGHTFORWARD. IT ACTUALLY IS A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED TO WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT IT'S STILL GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH DIFFERENT APPROVALS. CRA THE CITY THE DEVELOPMENT NON DEVELOPMENT. IT KIND OF SOUNDS LIKE IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE USE BEING PROPOSED IS. ABSOLUTELY. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE USING THE STUART MUSE I MEAN IN THEORY THE CRB, THE CRA, THE LPA AND THE CITY COMMISSION HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ACQUIRING THE LAND, DECIDING THAT THEY WANT IT TO BE DEVELOPED FOR HOUSING, PUTTING IT OUT TO AN RFP FOR HOUSING, ACCEPTING THE BIDS, REVIEWING THE BIDS AND SELECTING THE HIGHEST BIDDER, HAVING PUBLIC HEARINGS TO ENTER INTO A RESOLUTION, ADOPTING IT. FOR STUART MUSE TO BUILD THIS HOUSING. AND IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT, THE CITY WAS GOING TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE AND WHERE WE WHERE WE LAND CURRENTLY IN, THAT IS OKAY. I IS ALL OF THOSE GROUPS HAVE ALREADY SAID YES, DO THAT. AND AT THE TIME, IT WAS UNDER THE PRETEXT THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE TAX MONEY AND PUBLIC PURPOSE GENERATED FROM THIS SITE. THE MY FEELING RIGHT NOW ON THIS SITE IS THE COMMISSION'S DIRECTION FOR THIS SITE IS GOING TO BE JUST A COMPLETE PARK AND GREEN SPACE. SO WHATEVER REVENUE WAS HYPOTHETICALLY POSTURED TO CARRY COSTS THEN IS NOW GONE AND YOU WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO SUPPORT THE COST OF THIS SITE BECAUSE, I MEAN, I'LL GIVE YOU GUYS JUST A HEADS UP, I THURSDAY I RECEIVED THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS VALUATION FOR THE CITY OF STUART, AND FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE RECESSION, IT WASN'T DOUBLE DIGIT GROWTH, IT WAS 7%. AND THE COUNTY'S WAS 13.5%. SO ABOUT DOUBLE PUBLIC.
THE CITY OF STUART GETS BETWEEN 17 AND $20 MILLION A YEAR IN AD VALOREM. THAT MAKES UP 36% OF OUR BUDGET. BUT POLICE AND FIRE TAKE UP 100% OF THE AD VALOREM, AND WE HAD TO GO OUT AND DO A
[01:25:01]
FIRE ASSESSMENT TO COLLECT MORE THE POLICE AND FIRE CONTRACTS WITH THE OTHER ASSOCIATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM REQUIRE THE APPRECIATION OF THE CITY TO BE 7.5%. AND SO THIS YEAR, BEING AT 7%, WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO GO NEGATIVE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LESS MONEY THAN LAST YEAR. SO IF IN FACT, WE HAD DEDICATED AND BUILT A PARK AND WE DIDN'T COINCIDE WITH THAT, BUILD A FUND OR SOME KIND OF REVENUE SOURCE TO MAINTAIN THAT PARK, THAT TOO WOULD START AN ADDITIONAL SEPARATION THAT'S GOING TO LEAD TO A TAX INCREASE. NOW AGAIN, PEOPLE SAY, OH, WE'LL JUST FIRE ALL THE REST OF THE EMPLOYEES. BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE PUBLIC SAFETY USES 100% OF THE AD VALOREM. AND SO THOSE THAT'S HELPFUL. AND, AND THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FUND THAT THE CITY CREATED BRINGS IN ALMOST $2 MILLION A YEAR, I THINK, NOW TO THE CITY THAT OFFSETS A, YOU KNOW, A, A TAX INCREASE. GOT IT. SO THOSE PURCHASING AND DEVELOPING AND HOLDING AND LEASING PROPERTIES HAS GENERATED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THE CITY. THANKS. APPRECIATE THAT. OFF THE TOPIC OF NORTH POINT A LITTLE BIT, IS THERE A WAY WE COULD GET LIKE A SUMMARY OF ALL OF THE WELLS FARGO? THINGS UNDER CONSIDERATION? I MEAN, THE THINGS WE'VE DISCUSSED, I'M SURE. I MEAN, I'LL SIT DOWN WITH YOU ANYTIME YOU WANT. I CAN GIVE YOU WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST ON IT. BUT I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, NOTHING'S UNDER CONSIDERATION RIGHT NOW. NOTHING I HAVE NO THERE'S NO MARCHING ORDERS TO ME AT ALL. IN FACT, THE CITY COMMISSION MADE IT PRETTY CLEAR DURING THE ZONING IN PROGRESS THAT THEY WERE NOT PROMOTING MULTIFAMILY. SO IT'S JUST IN LIMBO AT THE MOMENT. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY I TORE DOWN THOSE BUILDINGS, BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW. I DIDN'T WANT THEM TO JUST SIT THERE AND BE AN EYESORE FOREVER. RIGHT. OR A LIABILITY. OH, YEAH. THAT TOO. OKAY. THANKS, MIKE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR WHATEVER? FIRST I WANT TO JUST I WANT TO THANK PANEL FOR PUTTING ALL THIS STUFF TOGETHER. I APPRECIATE THAT. AND, YOU KNOW, WE APPRECIATE ALL THE STUFF YOU DO. SOMETIMES WE DON'T MAYBE ACT LIKE IT, BUT WE DO APPRECIATE IT. SO THANK YOU AND MIKE FOR COMING HERE AND KIND OF CLARIFYING SOME THINGS FOR US. APPRECIATE IT. LEE. WE DON'T CARE IF YOU COME OR NOT. BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT. SO BUT ANYWAY, I THINK AGAIN WITH NOTHING ELSE ON THE ON THE AGENDA, I DO WANT TO I DIDN'T MEAN TO. I MEAN, I KNOW YOU DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO TOO. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE MEETING WE HAD TONIGHT. AND I KNOW IT'S I KNOW IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING SOMETIMES WHEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE KIND OF HOPING THINGS ARE GOING TO GO ONE WAY AND THEY DON'T. BUT BUT WE'VE GOT A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO, TO HELP KEEP THE CITY ON TRACK AND DO WHAT WE'RE DOING AND OR KEEP THE CRA ON TRACK. SO WE I THINK WE JUST KEEP AT IT. I'LL JUST REMIND THE CHAIR IF IN CASE IT WASN'T CLEAR ENOUGH THE FIRST TIME, THERE'S SEVEN MEMBERS ON THE CRA, YOU GOT THE MAJORITY. OKAY. THANK YOU. I UNDERSTAND THAT ANYWAY. SO YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S TRUE UNTIL WE'RE THROWN OFF. SO BECAUSE REMEMBER TWO OF THOSE POSITIONS ARE AT LARGE. SO THEY CAN CHANGE IN A HEARTBEAT. SO BUT ANYWAY IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE I WOULD HAVE A MOTION IF WE COULD GET A COPY OF THOSE MAPS THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECTS. WHEN YOU SAY MAPS, THE ONES WE HAD UP THERE WAS PART OF THE AGENDA. OH, IT IS IN THE PACKET. OKAY. YEAH, IT'S JUST BURIED DOWN THERE. I MADE THE MISTAKE OF PRINTING MINE OUT ONE TIME. LIKE MY PRINTER STILL ISN'T AVAILABLE. WORKING IN LIKE A WEEK, AND I'VE TRIED REINSTALLING THE DRIVER'S TEN TIMES. I'M ABOUT TO TAKE IT SOMEWHERE. ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND, SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? YES.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.