CLEARWATER - Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce recently posed a set of questions about Clearwater's Municipal Marina, its potential for redevelopment, the State of Florida Reverter Clause that limits the property's uses and the need for a public referendum if its use changes.
Clearwater Assistant City Manager Rod Irwin responded to the Chamber's inquiry, assembling the answers from appropriate city staff members.
What follows are the questions posed by the Chamber and the city's answers in their entirety.
The Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce has been made aware of a proposed local bill to the Florida Legislature that would remove all state restrictions off of the Clearwater Beach Marina property and, as Chairman of the Government Committee, has asked me to discuss that issue with them at their next meeting on September 1.
City Response: The proposed Local Bill does not remove all state restrictions off of the Marina property. It releases the state reverter to the extent that the property is used and developed in accordance with the Florida Coastal Management Program, the Waterfronts Florida Program, the City Comprehensive Plan and the Code of Ordinances. It does not have any impact on the 2007 Local Bill requirement for a referendum if the "existing public land use designation" is changed. This change impacts only the upland Marina property west of the east abutment of the west bridge. The only thing this Local Bill relieves us from is the reverter when we are implementing the new policies of the State.
1. If the new bill were passed, would the city be allowed to sell the land to a private developer and, if so, would that require a public referendum
City Response: Yes, the property could be sold in furtherance of objectives of the Florida Coastal Management Program, the Waterfronts Florida Program, the City Comprehensive Plan and the Code of Ordinances. A referendum is not required to sell or exchange the property for fair market value; however, redevelopment of the site would likely require a referendum, depending upon the uses.
Would the city ever consider selling the land to a private developer?
City Response: We are not in a position to be able to answer this question at this time.
2. If the city entered into a public/private partnership whereby the city retained ownership of the land, would that require a public referendum?
City Response: Whether or not a referendum is required would depend on the proposed uses. A referendum would be required if the "existing public land use designation" is changed. It is likely that redevelopment would require a land use and zoning change, therefore requiring a referendum..
3. Could the city lease the land to a private developer?
City Response: Yes, the property could be leased in furtherance of objectives of the Florida Coastal Management Program, the Waterfronts Florida Program, the City Comprehensive Plan and the Code of Ordinances.
Would that require a public referendum?
City Response: A referendum is not required to lease the property for up to thirty years. However, It is likely that redevelopment would require a land use and zoning change, therefore requiring a referendum.
4. Does the city currently have any formal proposals from private developers to either acquire the marina property or enter into a public/private partnership with the city?
City response: No.
5. We would assume that, as there is a shortage of parking at the marina now, any new development would need to construct a parking garage over the existing parking. Would any such garage be required to contain parking spaces for the general public and not just for the use of the marina businesses?
City response: That would be a policy decision of City Council.
Would any such garage be restricted as to when it can be built under the terms of the agreement the city now has with the new Hyatt Hotel?
City Response: Yes, the development agreement between the city and Beach Walk Resort, LLC, limits the number of parking spaces available for use by the public that the city can build within a quarter-mile radius of the Hyatt Project for a period of five years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project. There is however, an exception if the parking spaces are constructed on the city owned marina site, the parking spaces are city financed and owned, they comply with the rate requirements set forth in the Beach Walk Resort, LLC, development agreement and the parking spaces do not open prior two years after the C.O. of the Hyatt project.
6. What is the height restriction on this property? This question would include any height that might be able to be obtained using city flexible development standards or comprehensive infill standards.
City Response: The Beach Marina is located within the Pier 60 Character District of Beach by Design. This character district does not provide any guidance regarding building or structure heights. Most of the City-owned property at this location is zoned Institutional (I) District, which generally permits a maximum building and structure height of 50 feet as a Minimum Development Standard, Flexible Standard Development (FLS) and Flexible Development (FLD). There are two small areas zoned Tourist (T) District, which generally permits a maximum building and structure height of 50 feet as a FLS (although Indoor Recreation/Entertainment is a range between 35-100 feet) and 100 feet as a FLD. Under both I and T Districts, the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project an option but that does not ensure or necessarily suggest that a height greater than that generally permitted would be allowed or recommended.
That portion of the property which retains I (Institutional) zoning has a land use designation of Transportation/Utility. A marina is an allowable use the T/U classification. This would appear to include normal uses accessory to a marina. In the event that redevelopment of the parcel is contemplated which may broaden uses such as expansion of restaurant and retail use as well has overnight accommodation, we believe it appropriate to reclassify from T/U to the RFH (Resort Facility High) category and provide for consistent application of the T (Tourist) zoning district. This may be the most appropriate scenario regardless of public ownership being retained.
7. As the city planning department discussed any ideas or done any "future planning" of what the city would like to see done with the marina property?
City Response: No.
8. What is the current income to the city for only the upland portion of the marina businesses?
City Response: The income to the City for the upland portion of the marina property is approximately $565,000 and includes building rents and parking revenues.
9. What is the current income to the city for the dock rentals, fuel services, etc.?
City Response: The income from slip rents, fuel sales, etc. (non-upland revenues) is approximately $3.9 million and this number can vary drastically and quickly due to fuel prices.
10. What is the current total cost to the city to own and operate the entire marina property?
City Response: The City operates the Marina as an enterprise fund with the goal to be a zero cost to the City (revenues equal or exceed the expenditures). In addition, the Marina fund pays a "payment in lieu of taxes" to the City's General Fund of 5.5% of revenues - which is currently approximately $250,000 and also pays its fair share of administrative expenses to the City's General Fund which is currently approximately $230,000. The proposed FY10 Marina Budget has revenues of $4.85 million and expenditures of $4.55 million.
