Community Redevelopment Agency
Regular Meeting
Monday, January 14, 2013 @ 6:00 p.m.
Council Chamber, City Hall
Community Redevelopment Agency
January 14, 2013 Page 1 of 5
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Farley called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Boardmembers Present: Chair Jim Farley, Vice Chair Mike Gudis, Boardmember Paula Wheeler; Boardmember Ken Brown; Boardmember Robert Holmes
Boardmembers Absent:
Staff Present: Andy Houston, CRA Administrator; Michael Brannigan, City Attorney; Carol Harrington, City Clerk; Deanna Rowe, Finance Director; Jackie Gorman, Planning Director; Dave Burnell, Public Works Director
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion to approve the Agenda was made by Boardmember Wheeler; seconded by Vice Chair Gudis. Motion carried on a unanimous vote.
3. PRESENTATIONS
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes for December 10, 2012
Motion to approve the Consent Agenda was made by Boardmember Holmes; seconded by Boardmember Brown. Motion carried on a unanimous vote.
6. PUBLIC INPUT
7. CRA ATTORNEY
8. CRA ADMINISTRATOR
A. Consideration of Implementing the “Buy-a-Brick Program”
Background: [Agenda Sheet Requested Motion: Discussion Only
Summary: The City Council expressed interest in offering a BuyABrick Program to the public for the proposed N. Citrus Avenue Improvement Project. Staff identified two (2) methods of doing a BuyABrick Program, as follows:
Exhibit A – Laser Engraving
The photos labeled “Exhibit A” were taken at St. Anne’s Episcopal Church, which used Laser Engraving in their Memorial Gardens. Laser Engraving offers the opportunity to place photographic images and detailed line art on a granite surface and is long-lasting. The only drawback is that the tile can become slippery unless they are strategically placed on the sidewalk in areas of lower foot traffic. Samples of the laser engraving are located in the Community Development office and will be provided at the Council meeting.
Cost: $35.85/brick (includes materials) with an additional $10 if photographs are desired as part of the engraving.
Exhibit B – Sandblasted Brick
Exhibit B shows photos of the sidewalk along S. Citrus Avenue. Sandblasted brick works very well for walkability since the engraving is done on the brick and not granite, but it does not have the longevity that laser engraving on granite provides.
Cost: $14.99/brick (minimum 50 bricks); otherwise $21/brick. Limited to 13 characters/line – 3 lines (include spacing)
If Council is interested in fundraising, it is typical to charge $100/brick and proceeds could go towards offsetting the cost of this project or towards having laser engraved artwork included in specific areas along the walkway. The Finance Department can create a separate account for this project if approved.
Staff Recommendation: N/A End of Agenda Sheet]
Council Discussion:
Ms. Gorman had samples of the various bricks listed above. She stated that there are also the regular red bricks available that can be engraved. She noted that one disadvantage of the granite is that it could be slippery. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. We can mix the types of brick. She presented some pictures where the mixed brick was used.
Ms. Gorman noted that on the North Citrus Ave. plans, there are two courtyards built in. One is in front of Heritage Village and one across the street. This area allows us an opportunity for landscaping and could highlight the area at the edge with the granite and laser engraving. The other bricks could be used for the bulk of the courtyard where the public would be walking. She noted these are some of the options. She added that fund raisers are typically used to purchase the bricks or individuals can purchase a brick for engraving.
Vice Chair Gudis stated that the original program was started by Roger Goettelmann. He felt this might be a way to recognize some people and pay its own way with the purchase of bricks. This would be a way to give a little sentimental value to the City for individuals. He is in favor of this.
Boardmember Wheeler also stated that she is in favor of this program. She asked how long the red bricks would last. Ms. Gorman stated she did not really know, but they would not last as long as the granite bricks.
Boardmember Brown is in favor of this program as well. He does has some issues with the granite. It has already been stated that it is slippery and unless you use a porous material, the bricks will be slippery. If you roughen the surface to prevent slips, you lose the finish of the laser engraving. The granite also would not match the existing brick work. The granite appears to be more of a memorial and would make the downtown look more like a cemetery. He thinks of the downtown as festivals with all ages and types of activity.
Chairman Farley stated that he agrees with Mr. Brown on all his points. He doesn’t think the granite would look right and it would be too hard to make it safe to walk on. He cited an example of the new Sheriff’s Headquarters in Broward County that built granite floors in the lobby. It has become a safety hazard and they had to engrave cross-hatching into the floor for safety. He thinks the brick should be used and have some way of replacing the brick after 20 years or when it is worn down.
Boardmember Holmes likes the red brick the best also. He noted the granite is not very thick and could be damaged with someone dropping something of weight or with a jagged edge. Could the engraving be painted over the sandblasting so that it would show the names? Ms. Gorman stated that nature has its way of doing just that when it gets moldy, it darkens the sandblasting.
Ms. Gorman asked if this Board was interested in doing some corners in granite around the bench areas or none at all. The Board wanted to stick with the uniformity of the brick.
Vice Chair Gudis asked about the pricing of the brick. How much would we charge the public? He felt that the mentioned $100 a brick was a lot of money. He would like to talk about this a little more. He wants to make sure that the average citizen that wants to remember their loved ones would have the opportunity to do so.
Boardmember Wheeler stated that she didn’t think that was too much when it was for a cause. She thought for 20 years, $100 would not be too much. There will be costs connected with putting this down.
Chairman Farley suggested splitting the cost to $50.00. Boardmember Brown stated that he doesn’t think we need to call these memorial bricks. Someone might want to note a birth, wedding, achievement, etc. He doesn’t want to make it a memorial walk way. He would rather keep the theme of festivals and fun. He would rather see another name for the bricks. He also suggested coming up with a price after we determine the cost. Maybe give someone a little break if they want to purchase two or three.
Mr. Houston stated that staff will bring back a recommendation on pricing and a name for the brick.
B. Update on Riverwalk Project – Verbal
Background :
Mr. Houston stated that the last time we discussed the Riverwalk, we discussed that we had tentative buy-in from the affected property owners with certain conditions attached to that. The agreement was that Mr. Houston was to be given sixty-days to research the cost of the conditions and if they would be feasible for the City to complete them. That date will be the end of February for his report. This is an update of what has happened since the last meeting.
Mr. Houston reported that he:
§ Met with reps of CRAC that have also been working on this to find out where they were.
§ Contacted SWFWMD. Asked for information on elevations on the north side of 19. One of the requests has been to treat stormwater for the entire Riverwalk area. They would like for us to move the stormwater from the south side and move it to the north side. The property owners feel that this would allow them more flexibility and would also allow us to get better treatment of this stormwater.
§ Spoke with an engineering firm for cost information on looking at stormwater options.
§ Contacted a local contractor that does sea wall work. They have agreed to give us cost estimates for replacing some of the sea wall where requested. We will also be creating a sea wall behind the apartments.
§ Will be talking with the folks that did the Hunters Springs Park Master Plan for ideas of different designs for the Riverwalk. Something that might make it a destination point vs. a walkway around the water. Council has also expressed that they would like to make it something that draws people in.
§ Looked at the parking area in front of Crackers. This would accommodate 65 spaces. We are working on that cost with improvements and will then place a value on it. The question has been asked if we would consider leasing that space.
Mr. Houston was asked about the location of this parking. He clarified that it was the triangle, 6th street and U.S. 19. We have to bear in mind that the caveats are not firm, these could be negotiated.
He continued with the update:
§ We were asked about restroom facilities that would be available for the people coming to the Riverwalk. He noted that the facilities put in at Kings Bay Park was basically a shell construction that cost about $125,000.
§ He will be meeting with property owners along with a representative of the CRAC. They will look at seawalls and meet with one owner for clarification of his requests.
§ The noise ordinance has been mentioned and we will meet with the Sheriff’s Office on the way this is being enforced.
Mr. Holmes noted that he would like to look at rip-rap as being a preferred seawall method for future land development. He believes the rip-rap would give a more natural look and would work better. It would provide more stability.
Mrs. Wheeler stated that she did not think that we could afford to rip-rap all of the area. Boardmember Holmes noted that some areas might not be feasible to do so. He commented on erosion and turbidity of the water.
Chairman Farley suggested we let the engineers know what we want and let them work out the mechanics and the cost.
Boardmember Brown likes the idea of moving the stormwater across U.S. 19. Even if the Riverwalk does not happen, he would still like to see this done. He is not in favor of leasing the property until he learns more about it. If we do, we need to make sure it is for the Riverwalk and City activities vs. restaurant users. Mr. Brown noted that the apartment complex has an area that is like a beach. Are they talking about filling that in and creating a new seawall?
Mr. Houston replied that they are talking about going across there and filling in behind it. Mr. Brown asked if there is an actual spring there. Mr. Houston replied that we are not far enough along to know that. A couple of the Boardmembers noted from past personal experience that there was not a spring present there.
9. COMMUNICATIONS
10. BOARD MEMBERS COMMENTS
A. Jim Farley, Chair
B. Mike Gudis, Vice Chair
C. Paula Wheeler
D. Ken Brown
Mr. Brown stated that many folks have approached him and stated that walkability will never be successful until we can connect the two sides of US 19. When the trucks increase in 2014, it will be even worse. He stated that the Crossover at US 19 and Citrus Avenue might be a very expensive proposition with acquisition of property and probably not the most logical place for this. He had discussed this with some other folks and they had asked about the connecting the bike paths. We have one that goes to the North and one that goes to the South. That property would probably be easier obtained for easements and it would be connecting the downtown. He is asking that Council look at alternative ways and funding for connecting the North and the South parts of Crystal River.
Boardmember Brown stated that both of his items are interconnected.
1. Crosswalk at US 19 and Citrus Ave
2. Crossover at either US Hwy 19 and Citrus or the Bike Path
E. Robert Holmes
11. PUBLIC INPUT
· Corey McDonald
Mr. McDonald stated that he is a bike rider and it is very dangerous to cross US 19. He hopes that something can be done for safety.
· Dee Atkins
Ms. Atkins stated that she has a rip-rap seawall and loves it. Her seawall has a wide wall-cap over it. She doesn’t think there would be any problem with a boardwalk over that. She invited the Board to come and look at it if they would like.
Ms. Atkins also asked if the CRA could dedicate a brick to Roger Goettelmann since this was one of his projects.
The Boardmembers were in favor of dedicating a brick to Roger Goettelmann.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Farley adjourned the meeting at 6:31 p.m.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
______
ATTEST: JIM FARLEY, CHAIR
______
CAROL HARRINGTON, CMC
CITY CLERK
Community Redevelopment Agency
January 14, 2013 Page 1 of 5