Ravaudage $1.2M -- No Risk, No Gain
Voice Reader Heeds Commissioner’s Advice
Editor's Note: Articles written by citizens reflect their own opinions and not the views of the Winter Park Voice.Guest Columnist Jan Hommel
Editor’s Note: On November 20, Commissioner Peter Weldon posted the following comment on the Winter Park Voice Facebook group. The post was in response to a November 18 article in the Voice titled “Ravaudage Gets $1.2M in Infrastructure Costs.”
From Commissioner Peter Weldon
Here are the relevant facts.
The Ravaudage road agreement pertains to specific lengths of specific roads the city of Winter Park acquired when it annexed the property. The background and agreement text can be found beginning on page 27 of the November 13, 2017 commission meeting agenda packet.
These roads are the city’s responsibility. They currently do not have curbs, sidewalks, or proper drainage. The developer intends to improve these roads with drainage, curbing, parking, and sidewalks at or above city design standards, but has no obligation to do so.
The $1.2 [Million] potential payment to the developer is ONE HALF of city staff’s estimate of what we would have to pay to do the minimum amount of work required to bring these roads up to city standards. The developer is going to do all the work subject to city approval of the plans. The developer does not get paid unless the city approved work is completed.
The bottom line is that the city can realize fully improved roads with parallel parking and wider sidewalks than our minimum standards for one half the cost the city would have spent if the developer chose not to improve these roads.
Ms. Mooney and those trying to create a political conspiracy would better serve the city and our residents by being better informed before speaking.
Come on folks. Study the issues before speaking publicly.
Regards, Pete Weldon
Winter Park Vice Mayor
Voice Reader Jan Hommel Responds
Mr. Weldon:
Thank you for requesting Voice readers get the facts before expressing their opinions. I did that. Here’s what I found.
In 2013, the city of Winter Park annexed the property as Home Acres. It was zoned single family, residential, with existing roads that were adequate for their intended use. According to Public Works Director Troy Attaway on 7/24/2017, it would cost about $30,000 to bring the public roads up to city standards for residential use. Commissioner Carolyn Cooper pointed out that when the city annexed the property from Orange County, the county had made no commitment to improve the infrastructure in the development.
The developer, Mr. Dan Bellows, now wants the city to help him bring the roads up to “minimum standards” — for his use in a high-density, mixed commercial-residential development. Building and upgrading roads and sidewalks is a normal part of a developer’s cost of doing business. Windsong and the Lee Road extension built by the Whole Foods developer are prime examples.
Although it is not unprecedented for municipalities to contribute to infrastructure cost, this usually happens in a weak economy as part of a public-private partnership to help kickstart development.
City Manager Randy Knight stated that the city is under no obligation, legal or otherwise, to give this money to Mr. Bellows. He said the only reason to do so is if the Commission thought it would help spur economic development.
This does not apply to Ravaudage. When pushed, the only recent case Troy Attaway was able to cite of the city improving a roadway to benefit business was the Fairbanks roadway improvement, which is not comparable.
At the August 14, 2017 meeting, the Commission voted 5-0 to have staff provide an analysis of the economic benefit the $1.2M payout to Mr. Bellows. Apparently none was provided.
Troublesome Rationale
Commissioner Weldon, your rationale for this give-away was particularly troublesome. First, you stated it will give us control over the roads. Winter Park already has control over public right-of-way road improvement by developers.
Second, you wrote we will get quality roads for half the price. True, but if we can get something for half-price or for free, shouldn’t we take free? As a developer, it is in Mr. Bellows’ interest to put in high quality roads and sidewalks. Mr. Knight clearly stated that we did not HAVE to contribute anything to upgrade the roads.
No Risk?
Next you supported this plan because it was no-risk. True, nothing will be paid out until the city collects money from the project in the form of unrestricted impact fees and property taxes. I am appreciative of the fact that you didn’t want to put city money at risk by giving Mr. Bellows money up front, but at that point, your reasoning fails.
No Gain
If you truly believe that Mr. Bellows needs an infusion of cash from the city in order to hasten development in Ravaudage, then fund him up front. As Commissioner Seidel observed, the timing of the flow of funds, while protecting the city, does little to serve your stated purpose of speeding along development. It may be no risk, but it’s also no gain. Why spend $1.2 million when only Dan Bellows benefits?
In summary, Mr. Weldon, you, along with Ms. Sprinkel and Mr. Leary, voted to give $1.2 M to Mr. Bellows. This money was not necessary to have functioning roads. This taxpayer money was in ADDITION to the high density accommodations that Mr. Bellows already received. This $1.2 M is certainly not needed to encourage development in our very robust Winter Park economy.
Please know the voters are watching. We will be taking these fiscally irresponsible actions into consideration when we go to the polls.
Sincerely.
Jan Hommel
P.S. To the Voice readers, according to City Attorney Kurt Ardaman, this matter should come to the Commission again. Please voice your opinion to the Commission.
At a minimum Mr. Bellows is required to put in roads, sidewalks and infrastructure that meet City of Winter Park codes. If that code is good enough for other parts of the City why should the Commission be giving away my tax dollars to help the developer of another part of the City exceed the requirements? Who will benefit? Only Mr. Bellows
Rick, staff confirmed that the specific roads addressed in the agreement are the city’s responsibility. These are platted roads annexed into the city. The city is not providing any support to the developer for roads he created. If the roads in question were not the city’s responsibility there would be no reason to participate in the cost sharing agreement.
Hey Pete Weldon- the Club for Growth should send your multiple contributions back since you are now part of the big government spending crowd. And cancel your membership in the Libertarian party also.
Pete, staff confirmed that the specific roads addressed in the agreement are the city’s responsibility. These are platted roads annexed into the city. The city is not providing any support to the developer for roads he created. If the roads in question were not the city’s responsibility there would be no reason to participate in the cost sharing agreement. PS – while believing in the importance of liberty, I am not a member of the Libertarian party.
Mr. Weldon, you keep comparing apples and oranges. Yes, we are responsible for the platted roads, but only to maintain them for the purpose for which they were originally intended, single family residential. Mr. Attaway indicated it will cost about $30,000 to repave the roads for this purpose.
City Manager Randy Knight said we were not obligated to give Dan Bellows $1.2 million. If he needs better roads for his commercial development, let him pay for it. Developers do this all the time, in every city, including Winter Park. Why the special treatment for this one developer?
Jan, please go look at the specific roads in question as requested in my earlier email to you. Then, go speak with Troy Attaway to understand the differences you assert. Then, comment on what you find out.
Sorry, Pete Weldon. I did review the facts and i agree – these are city roads and the city is responsible for maintaining them. I now believe that having the developer contribute 50% to this maintenance and improvement of CITY roads is good financial decision that will benefit the city.
Lots of folk like the kind of roads they grew up with. For some they are dirt roads. Only a few months ago, Elizabeth, the street that runs south from Palmer, was paved over. Prior to that it was a dirt road.
It was never explained why Elizabeth was paved. Did the residents vote to have it paved? It was one of the only charming roads left in Winter Park.
It’s not that long ago that Genius Drive was dirt.
Winter Park needs more dirt roads. There are people who like them. They are easy on the knees and ankles for folk who like to walk and run. They don’t cost anything to pave. Nobody ever dug a stormwater drain on a dirt road. They don’t invite cut through traffic.
So, why not just make Ravadage all dirt roads? Sure it might get a little dusty, but there’s a self service car wash right down the street.
Ravadage could be transformed into the new “Olde Winter Park” that is being replaced in the older sections of Winter Park with the latest new fangled building fads.
Ravadage could even add live peacocks, walking around on all the dirt roads. Apartment buildings, townhomes, restaurants? Who needs ’em. Give me some 1,000 sq. ft. concrete block homes and some of those old style two stories with the big wrap around porch with the rocking chairs and the pitcher of lemonade. If Ravadage did that, everyone in Winter Park would move to Ravadage. And the City Commissioners would say, “Where’d everybody go?”
Would it be possible to move the digital tree to Rauvadage and make that site the center of WP’s digital holiday extravaganza for city leaders and residents who prefer bright lights and lasers and globalist culturally homogenizing architecture?
Ever since the politicians bought The Booby Trap on Lee Road, they’ve been systematically turning Winter Park into the honky tonk capital of Florida.
Tatoo parlors once taboo in town are now not only legal, but encouraged. Gorgeous red and green Christmas lights on Park Avenue have been replaced with hideous, neon white, high glare, blob eyesores, dangling overhead, that have nothing to do with Christmas.
And every time the politicians do such stunts, they have an excuse that sounds like it came right out of a Madison Avenue public relations firm. Changing the much loved Christmas lights to the neon white nuisance lights was said to be “for traffic safety.” Really? Anyone who can’t tell the difference between an 18 inch diameter Christmas ornament and a green light shouldn’t be driving.
The digital “tree” is one step closer to jumbo tron digital billboards in Central Park, complete with the mayor’s face, 40 feet tall, directing everyone to the nearest tattoo parlor. (That will be said to be for “safety” also.)
In the old Christmas movie, It’s a Wonderful Life, George Bailey gets the rare opportunity to see what life in Bedford Falls would have been like without him (see link):
As Winter Park degenerates by the day into something resembling the depraved “Pottersville” from that movie clip, residents search for a modern day George Bailey to run for WP mayor in 2018.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCFePlm0Gkw