Mixed-use development proposed for vacant lot in downtown Safety Harbor
By 
After months of discussions, the Safety Harbor City Commission recently came up with several ways to boost the economy in the downtown district.
Recruiting a volunteer liaison to assist with attracting new businesses to town, creating a survey to gain public feedback on the subject and empowering City Manager Matt Spoor to handle inquiries about certain properties in the area were a few of the solutions presented while officials decide whether there is enough money in the budget to hire an economic development director.
During Monday night’s commission meeting, Spoor reported the efforts were already paying dividends, as he informed the commission three candidates have applied for the liaison position and a local developer wants to build a mixed-use development in a vacant lot on the corner of Main Street and Second Avenue North.
“The City received the request to negotiate a development agreement from Bay to Bay Properties this past Friday, August 18,” Spoor said when introducing the New Business item.
He noted the site is a roughly one-acre parcel located north of Main Street and Second Avenue North.
The property is within the CRA and designated as Community Town Center (CTC) in the City code and is owned by Safety Harbor Property Holdings, LLC.
Spoor said Bay to Bay Properties, a construction management company located on Second Street South, has received a handful of critical accolades, including being named the 17th Fastest Growing Company in Tampa Bay according to the Tampa Business Journal, leading to an increase in employee growth and a need to expand the office space with a desire to remain in town.
In addition to the new offices, owner Joe Faw decided to incorporate additional elements into the project in light of the City’s aim to bring new business and development to the district.
“The proposed project would consist of two buildings,” Spoor said. “The first would be a three-story commercial building consisting of retail, restaurant and office, between 18,000 and 22,000-square feet on Main Street, and the second building would be a three-story, 24-unit luxury multi-family structure on the northern part of the property.”
Spoor added that Bay to Bay plans to occupy two floors of the office space on Main Street, and he noted that parking would be located behind and between the two buildings as well as along Second Avenue North and Second Street North.
The project is expected to create approximately 30 new on-street parking spaces that would be built on private property and dedicated to the City for public use.
The request was met with unanimous approval, yet mixed responses, from the commissioners.
While all five lawmakers ultimately approved the request to enter negotiations, Commissioner Cliff Merz questioned the proposed height of the residential apartment building, stating he did not want a three-story building overlooking residential homes on the back side of the parcel.
“Three stories overlooking one-story homes, I would have some concern with that,” Merz said.
According to the City code, the allowable building height on the subject property is capped at 45 feet.
Commissioner Andy Zodrow concurred with Merz about the height, and he also decried the project’s density and apparent lack of greenspace as well as the development’s compatibility with surrounding properties.
“I’d like to make sure it fits in Main Street,” he said.
Vice-Mayor Carlos Diaz, Commissioner Scott Long and Mayor Joe Ayoub fully endorsed entering negotiations.
“I’m all for it,” Diaz said, with Long adding he “had no problems with it, either.”
“I think it’s part of our vision to see something on that piece of property,” Ayoub said, “and there’s something to be said for doing it via a development agreement.”
It was noted that Safety Harbor is one of only two communities in the area that has a provision that allows negotiations with developers, a tool that can allow for extensive back-and-forth between the involved parties.
The public comments were overwhelmingly supportive of the proposal.
“It’s a dirt lot. Go for it,” MOSH chairperson Mercedes Ofalt simply stated.
“I’m in favor of developing the property,” Colin Young said while praising Bay to Bay president Joe Faw.
Desayna Daly agreed.
“I’m all for it,” she said, adding she’d never seen a building or a home that Bay to Bay built that wasn’t beautiful.
Vic Curti, cofounder of Smart Growth Safety Harbor, said he understood “change can be scary,” but added that “an empty lot is not good for our Main Street.”
After the city attorney noted this was just the first of many steps in the process and reminded the commissioners that Spoor is not authorized to give final approval on any aspect of the proposal, the request to negotiate a development agreement with Bay to Bay was approved by a vote of 5-0.
After the meeting, Spoor spoke about the next step.
“Staff will begin to negotiate with Bay to Bay on a mutually acceptable development agreement for the vacant parcel,” he said via email on Tuesday.
“Our goal is to bring essential terms back to the City Commission in the near future.”
Mayor Ayoub also shared his thoughts about the decision via email.
“I am happy to see that we have a business that is interested in doing a mixed use project that would finally bring some life to a vacant and dusty piece of land that is in the heart of our downtown,” he wrote.
“By doing this through a development agreement it gives us the opportunity to be proactive and gain more control, which eliminates the risk of a project being built there that is out of character or not part of our vision for our downtown.”
Related content:
- Commission wrestles with ways to boost economic development in Downtown Safety Harbor
- Mayor Ayoub wants to form an economic development task force
- Mayor Ayoub promises to move quickly on issues affecting Safety Harbor
I have been serving the city of safety harbor for 14 years now, I own the First Choice Food and deli on Philippe parkway. as a business owner, I 100% support the idea and I would actually consider being one of the retail tenants. As far as being in the grocery business for the past 16 years, I dont think that a green/organic grocery store would survive having limited parking spaces, again i may be wrong but we are currently surrounded by 3 giant green/organic grocery store within a 3 mile radius. I am all for a high end restaurant to attract the out of towners to our city, but i would like it to be a mom & pop owned because thats all i support and i believe most of us do. I also think that the apartments would be a great idea since this town lacks affordable living to a great extent.
I think there is enough condos, apartments downtown, it should be businesses or something “family oriented”, enough of the condos, look what they are doing on the property across from the pier, enough!
There is exactly one condo building downtown. There aren’t any apartments located a half block off main street.
What would be family oriented? Crooked thumb already has kids running around everywhere.
Mary, I respect your opinion. But this isn’t a referendum. An owner and his developer may put up whatever kind of structure they want, provided it does not violate any regulations. Apparently, they feel there is a market for the residential product (apartments) they propose. Their money; their choice. Personally, I’m tired of looking at a giant block of dirt in the heart of downtown. I hope the owner does something nice with the property.
I saw someone post on the local hate site, “would you want to live next to that?”
Really? This is on Main Street, across from our library (which we hope gets a second story). They aren’t putting this in the ‘burbs.
Is everyone on that site ‘special’?
The operator of the local “hate site” should not cast any stones. She owns the eyesore in the 100th block of 4th Ave S. with a chain linked fence in the front yard, fake flowers stuck in the fence and tacky lattice everywhere. The question is, “who would want to live next to that? ” I would live next to a Bay to Bay property all day long before living next to that gawd awful ugly building.
Fake name. Fake news. This adorable cottage is what residents who are NOT here to make $$$ off this town want to see built. Concern for the direction this town is being pushed in is not hate. The only hate is from certain developer/investor types and their associates.
Ms Sharon, if that is an adorable cottage then you have bad taste. It is a plain substandard house, with a chain linked fence and concrete all in the front. And word is going around it is going to be a cat rescue center so not a home where a family is going to live. Typical house that should be in the burbs, not downtown. And who is using a fake name or fake news? You sound like you have a lot of pent-up frustration and are racist against the builders that don’t build what you like.
rac·ist
ˈrāsəst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Seriously Sharon? Most people are looking for development that ADDS to the charm. If you and Ms Schellenberg are going to be the watchdogs of character and charm then we expect more, especially from you. We should strive for better design and quality materials especially for the character districts. Who would choose chain link fence and a giant concrete front yard if they cared about charm over their own bottom line. Sorry, no it’s not adorable or charming, it’s merely propagating the lowest common denominator.. But add the chain link and concrete and it becomes offensive- especially for a prime location so close to Main Street. You both would have a FIT if the Bay to Bay town homes added chain link fence. Why is it ok for Ms Schellenberg? Well, for the majority of us, it is not ok.
Large Open Space? yes, the house and 2 parking spaces cover less than 25% of the 7,000 square foot lot. There is lots of green space and trees on this property. (shall we compare this to your property?)
Large Oak Trees for shade? yes, Live oaks were both saved and planted.
Off street parking? yes, this reduces the parking problem down town. Maybe you should take a look at the rest of the property, that is flowers, trees and grass, and permeable surface.
Chain link fence? yes, it’s allowed in this zoning (if it’s black or green). If you don’t like the zoning, tell the city to change it. Based on the trespassing we have experienced by some local people, it’s needed.
The property is zoned for a 3 story restaurant…or bar…or commercial building. This type of development could have been build with “zero” lot lines and 35 feet tall. Clearly a small house is more “compatible” with the two adjacent houses (next door and across the street) that look very much like this one. Ask the neighbors what they would have wanted to see here. The neighbors all have stated that they are so happy that we did not “sell out” to the developers, but go ask them for yourselves.
“The Majority Voice” Your anonymity precludes taking your comments seriously. If you are too embarrassed to own your comments, then….well you should be.
Ms. Schellenberg, The idea that you can, with a straight face, call people out for social media integrity is unbelievable to me. You run a website where anyone that has a contrary opinion, even when presented respectfully, is banned from participation in the discussion. You have created a completely distorted dialogue and you seem to have absolutely no shame in your willingness to manipulate your audience or the facts. Take your recent post headlined with the claim that the main street survey showed that people do not want mixed use or housing. You shamelessly select the 11 responses out of 218 that were against it and then present this minuscule (5%) response as some sort of validation for your dated and suburban views. The truth is that 95% of the population understands that traditional main street planning, including mixed-use and residential is the right answer and have moved on to helping define what this walkable, mixed-use should include. Of course you need to run a one-sided website where anyone that is smart enough to read the information and understand your lies are banned from participation. 5% by any measure is NOT a majority. Using lies and manipulations to support your archaic ideas shows a lack of integrity that is beyond the pale.
Ms. Schellenberg, The excuse that you use to validate your cheap and trashy use of chain link fence in our Main Street character district is the epitome of hypocrisy. The number of instances where you have fanned the flames and pitted neighbor against neighbor when the identified “violation” is clearly allowed by code is staggering. Buildings that you deemed too high, trees that were too important, homes that were too close together, buildings that you deemed “BIG” were all completely in compliance with our code. This never stopped your vicious shaming and name calling. Now you want to exploit a loophole, even though you clearly understand that the intent of the code is to keep trashy cheap cyclone fence out of front yards and hide behind the idea that it is allowed so we should just accept your hypocrisy. Well we think it is awful.
Ms. Schellenberg; To question anonymity when you have created a website that has no shame is unfair. Calling people out by name, posting pictures, videos, addresses, all encourage personal attacks and harassment. You name call and belittle, while banning the subjects of your wrath from the ability to defend themselves. You are a shameless bully that has created the atmosphere of hate. You do not have any right to question social media etiquette. When you open your own website to a true two way dialogue, then, literally, we can talk.
Every word you posted is spot on. From the first day I crossed paths with Shelly Shellenberg six years ago, when she threatened us with “do you know who I am? — I’m Shelly Shellenberg, code enforcement,” it has been obvious she is the most divisive, hate-generating, do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do” hater our community has to overcome.
Thank you for joining the increasing numbers who are recognizing Shelly Shellenberg for what she is: a cancer eating away at our community.
I was wondering what was going on at that house. There are large cages behind the white lattice. The poor little pussies are being locked up in cages. Animal welfare should be called.
Tom, instead of trespassing and sneaking around…only say something false …why don’t you look at CATS of Safety Harbor on Facebook, if you really want to know “what’s going on”? Even better, why don’t you give me a call, and I will give you a personal tour. Who knows, you may decide that you want to help rescue cats instead of hurting them. My phone number is 248-736-0819.
Who said I was sneaking around and trespassing, you can see the cages from the sidewalk and hear the pussies crying in their cages. I’m a cat lover myself and have a cat. Please free those pussies from their cages! I’m afraid to call you based upon the articles that have been written about you and your bullying behavior. A lot of people in town talk about you regularly and not in a positive manner. I have heard you threatened your neighbors on Hillsborough Ave for turning you into the city for all the cats living On your property. Don’t think I’ll give you a call based upon your behavior patterns, frightening.
Everything you need to know about Shelly Schellenberg and all her local scandals:
https://safetyharborconnect.com/?s=Shelly+schellenberg
Tom, if choose to believe the lies that 2 or 3 people post here anonymously, then you stoop to their level. You have been invited to learn the truth for yourself. If you don’t want to know the truth, but rather perpetuate lies, then you are a moral coward.
Shelley, Lies, I saw the article on Safety Harbor Connect about you and your harassment of citizens, being called out by not just a few as the meany in town and you having to show up at a commission mtg due to all of your commotion so question yourself and not me. The cat shelter business you r hiding at the house you own on 4th Ave South behind the barbecue place on Main Street is only good because cats r being helped but is quite tacky with the white lattice, a lot of cement and the chain link fence has got to go. Take some advice from the neighbors around your house and put up a white picket fence which goes with the character of what others have done.
Hello “fake shelly” and thanks for fake news. Why don’t you go talk to the neighbors, and ask them?
My given name is Michelle but have been called Shelly since 1st grade. Thinking about going back to Michelle now. And there is nothing fake about me.
Shelly Michelle – do not even go there with Schellenberg. It is not worth your time or effort. Please stay positive and thank you for supporting the Bay To Bay project. On a side note: I think you hit a nerve.
If you are referring to the facebook page known as Saving Safety Harbor, 1,273 people actually LIKE that page. The good news for you (fake Shelly no last name) is that if you are not interested in Saving Safety Harbor, then you don’t have to read what Saving Safety Harbor on facebook says. Where exactly do you live, that you hate the 4th Av house so much? It seems that the only “hate” site posted is here, by anonymous posters, who are too embarrassed about their comments to identify themselves.
Also, if a city is worried about event parking when someone proposes something like this, then the city is run incorrectly. Events are important, but they should not be the economic backbone of any city.
This project looks like the perfect catalyst to jump start economic development in Safety Harbor! The offices and apartments will provide additional customers to support the retail businesses on the first floor and well as supporting the rest of downtown. I hope the negotiations will include the types of businesses best suited to help make Safety Harbor a destination and walking town – and please something other than adding more salons, real estate or insurance company store fronts to occupy main street. Would love to see a specialty food market/restaurant combo in that first floor.
I don’t think you can really control who leases what space though.
Gary – as part of the development agreement we will be looking at making the first floor of the building a combination of retail and dining. That is one of the advantages of using a development agreement as it allows us to negotiate the uses of the space.
Sounds like a great plan! Retail on the first floor on Main Street where it will get foot traffic, office and residential space in the rest of the space which will bring more people downtown to shop, eat and work.
For the apartments did they discuss any specifics about size or layout?
There will be retail on the first floor. Second floor retail is very difficult to keep occupied. I support the additional office space because it creates office workers that in turn creates traffic for merchants / restaurants that aren’t seasonal.
Is there any way to regulate some kind of balance for even distribution of the proposed mixed-use retail, restaurant + office space? I understand the owner of any Main Street property has the right to put in any type of business they want but there is A LOT of office space on Main already and visitors don’t come to see that. The blocks from 2nd to 5th Aves are starving for retail. Already plenty of food/beverage there–and everywhere in town. Is anyone taking a look at the balance of already existing businesses?
That is counter productive. Let the free market work. This is brand new retail space. Something safety harbor hasn’t seen in ages.
I totally agree with Martha!
According to the article’s plan, the first floor is restaurant and retail and the top two floors will be offices occupied by the developer.
It is very good that SH has a development agreement process in place. It permits development to go forward in a wise and thoughtful manner.
Well said.
What a disaster, but it’s exactly what I expected from a bunch of amateur Florida politicians.
Rex, the disaster has been allowing an empty dirt parking lot on Main Street for so long. Experienced planners and politicians would agree this type of mixed use development is the best use for this land and for our Main Street. And 3 stories is totally appropriate for that location, similar to the 100 block buildings.
You’d rather see those trash barrels?
Why are you blaming politicians? The owner of the property is looking to have a developer build on it. Other than making sure that the structure meets code, the city has little to say about it. Are you really going to insist that the owner leave his (valuable) land as a parking lot? Would you feel the same if you were the owner?
It is going to overlook 1 maybe 2 homes. Stop with this f’ing nonsense. Let them build it.
One home and it is the side of the home, not the front. Agree – let them build it. Not only is Bay to Bay Properties a local “home” company but they build a good product that would only compliment downtown Safety Harbor. Better to know the builder and their reputation then not. A warning to the Status Quo – be careful because someone else can come in and build per code and not care what it looks like. At least we all know Bay to Bay wants to work with the city and community.
The other thing to consider is that it 75 feet from the house it will “overlook” to the existing sidewalk at the new development. Keep in mind there is going to be new parking in front of those apartments (another I think 18 feet) so we’re talking at least 95 feet from the existing home. I took a walk around the site today and it’s really not going to feel at all like a 3 story development is “looming” over the existing 1 story properties.