SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE
TOWN COUNCIL,
HISTORIC & ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD
AND PARKS, RECREATION & TREE ADVISORY BOARD
FEBRUARY 7, 2007
1. CALL TO ORDER: Pursuant to proper notice, Mayor Epps called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 4300 South Atlantic Avenue, Ponce Inlet, Florida.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Epps led the attendees in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL – a quorum was determined for each with the following present:
Council present:
Mayor Epps, Seat #1
Councilmember McCormick, Seat #3
Councilmember Hinson, Seat #4
Councilmember Comfort, Seat #5
Historic & Archaeological Preservation Board present:
Ms. Campbell, Chair
Mr. Hynds, Vice-Chair
Mr. Gannaway
Mr. Henderson
Parks, Recreation & Tree Advisory Board present:
Ms. DiFranco, Chair
Ms. Emerson, Vice-Chair
Mr. Joiner
Mr. Althouse
Mr. Gant
Staff Members Present:
Ms. Blissett, Town Manager
Ms. Clauss, Assistant Town Manager/Deputy Clerk
Ms. Konchan, Planning Consultant
Ms. Phillips, Planning Department Office Specialist
Mr. Schoenherr, Development Services Director
4. ADDITIONS, CORRECTIONS, OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None.
5. DISCUSSION OF 143 BEACH STREET – DAVIS PROPERTY. Mayor Epps explained that there would be no public participation during this evening’s meeting, but the Town Council will welcome comments at their regular meeting. With no additions, corrections or deletions to the agenda, Mayor Epps introduced Marilyn Crotty, facilitator for the meeting.
Marilyn Crotty then outlined the procedure for the meeting and asked that all sitting around the table keep an open mind in order to make the best possible decision. She continued by saying that this is not a new issue and asked Mr. Schoenherr to give the current status of the situation.
Mr. Schoenherr updated the situation for those present, after which the floor was opened to the advisory boards.
Ms. DiFranco expressed concern about the flooding on the property and whether that would impact the use of the building. Ms. Blissett explained that the Town's engineer will be present to address this. In response to Ms. Crotty's question, Ms. Blissett explained that we had an exceptional opportunity to purchase the home, knew there was flooding on the property as reflected in the minutes, and that it was a key piece of property in that area.
Mr. Hynds said that there has been some discussion about whether or not this was a post office or not, but that he did find that there was a Ponce Park Post Office, but its exact location is not clear.
Mr. Gannaway said that from his point of view, and he believes the Board's agrees, it is worthwhile to keep the old post office and perhaps the house as well, and that further study would help determine the viability of the house. He said that keeping the structure at its current location is their first choice, but if it not feasible, relocation should be considered.
Ms. Campbell read her comments (attached “Summary of the discussion and research on the 143 Beach Street Property”).
Ms. Crotty then summarized the Historic Board members’ comments.
Mr. Gantt said that we have a pretty good amount of history, and suggested that it could be incorporated into the museum, including information about the Ponce Preserve and the old tree.
Andrew Giannini, Quentin L. Hampton & Associates, serves as the town engineer and explained the topography of the site, saying that basically what we have is a depressional area with the buildings sitting below the grade of the road. He said that in order to remedy the drainage problem, the structures would have to be raised at least above the foot of the road and if parking is to be provided, the entire site would have to be filled in order to remedy the drainage problem. He said it would be possible to install and exfiltration system to direct the water into an inlet which would discharge into the river and that it would be costly to install such a system.
Ms. DiFranco asked if grating could be used in this case, to which Mr. Giannini replied that would be more costly as a structure would have to be constructed to hold the grating.
Mr. Schoenherr then explained what an exfiltration system consists of and that the cost is easily $150/foot not including the fill and restoration.
Ms. Crotty spoke about moving the small building to another part of the property and asked if there is another part of the property that it could be moved to while avoiding that must fill requirement. In response to Mr. Schoenherr's reply, Ms. Crotty said that realistically the flooding problem will need to be fixed.
Mr. Hinson expressed his feeling that the most important thing right now is the cost. He is a former postal worked and has spoken to the Port Orange Postmaster about the possibility of having a contract post office which would be leased by the Post Office and run by a civilian and is usually done in connection with a small shop.
Ms. Campbell asked if there is anything to be done with the property that does not involve the expense of dealing with the water problem, to which Mr. Giannini replied that anything done on the property would require the same amount of work.
Ms. Emerson asked if the small building could remain and the property used as a small park without filling, etc. Mr. Schoenherr replied that as long as there are no site improvements such as parking that could be done.
Ms. Crotty said that if we keep the building there, the flooding issue will still have to be addressed, especially to prevent damage to the building. It could be open space for use by the town.
She then asked if all agreed that if there were no costs involved, we want to preserve the history of the site.
Mr. Schoenherr said that the stormwater would be a minimum of $100,000 and referred to the Chief Building Official's memorandum (attached) outlining the costs involved in renovating the house and the ballpark estimate for the site from South Mass Construction as outlined in the memo from Ms. Phillips (attached). He said there is also a maintenance issue that would remain ongoing.
Mayor Epps asked about the costs of restoration for both buildings, and if we are talking about a board for board restoration like the Wilbur Boat House.
Mr. Schoenherr said that the post office construction is a Hawaiian design and the roof would have to be replaced, but restoration could be accomplished.
Mr. Hynds said that there is hardly anything of historic value to the house, and would like to see the old post office possibly moved to the Davies Park with the property used as a park, but he does not feel the house is not worth the cost.
In response to Mr. Hinson’s question, Mr. Schoenherr said there is a possibility of grant money for restoration.
Mr. Henderson said that he has experience in historic restoration and preservation and has been looking at this from the point of view of a private owner. He suggested that the best way to proceed would be to pull together a master plan to see if it is possible. He suggested angled parking along Beach Street using a crushed stone surface to permit permeability, and consideration of using a wooden walkway for access to the post office and raising the entire building onto a new foundation for stability. He said that would create parking at street level. He would recommend the house be torn down and put a few picnic tables on the property to make it usable while saving the smaller building, without going to tremendous expense. He said that the post office will not have 50,000 visitors a year and if
we have a building that we can do something with, we should do it.
Mr. Giannini responded that it was a good concept, but the angled parking may be a problem under current code regulations.
Mr. Henderson explained that he suggested the angled parking after seeing it used for beach parking along Atlantic Avenue.
Mr. McCormick agreed that the post office is the only thing usable and likes the idea of a small park. His original thought was to move the post office, but agrees with the grants for stabilization and restoring.
Mr. Schoenherr said that he has asked Ed Gunn at the Lighthouse whether the Lighthouse would consider the relocation of the post office to their property.
Mayor Epps said that she likes the idea of a contract post office. She feels if the building had to be moved, she would like to see it in the park rather than in the Lighthouse property. She said if we did demolish the house and potentially move the post office, we could potentially sell the property to pay for the costs of relocation and restoration.
Ms. Emerson said that if we can get the grants, it would be better to keep it where it originally was.
A short discussion ensued about whether we know that the building is in its original location.
Mr. Hynds said that there is also a cistern that should be researched on the site.
In response to Mr. Hinson’s question, Ms. Campbell said that the small building was originally a fishing cottage and the house was built some time later.
Mr. Hinson recommended that the post office remain and the property be used as a small park. He asked if Council desires that he look into the idea of a contract post office further, which he was encouraged to do.
Ms. DiFranco asked if the post office could be restored on a movable base that would allow it to be moved in the future if it was determined to be the course of action, to which Mr. Schoenherr replied that could be done.
In response to Mr. Henderson's question, Mr. Giannini clarified that the low spot on the property in under the smaller building and that if the building were to be raised, it could be done as Ms. DiFranco suggested.
Ms. Campbell asked about the asbestos in the house and if there is a dollar amount involved even if it is demolished. Mr. Schoenherr replied that there will be a cost involved in taking it out before it’s demolished.
In summary, Ms. Crotty said that there is consensus to keep the post office building and restore it, demolish the house on the property and maintain the property as a passive park, allow some parking, fund it through a grant, and get figures on the cost for demolition. The second approach she hears is that if that does not work, restore and move the post office to another location.
Mayor Epps added that we have to explore the requirements for the National Historic Register.
Ms. Crotty said that staff now has a clear sense and needs to make a clear plan of action for a decision to be made.
5. Adjournment – With no further items to discuss, Mayor Epps adjourned the meeting at 5:59 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Margi Richard, Recording Secretary
| 
