The River Yard Master Development Agreement, a key topic at the Planning Commission meeting, represents a strategic approach to utilizing city-owned property. The amendment discussed would allow for interim uses of the property, offering flexibility and waiving development fees to accelerate the process. Tim Bourbon from the Community Development department gave an outline of the amendment. The Commission scrutinized various aspects, including fire safety, tax implications, improvement necessity, and the benefits of centralizing temporary facilities.

Particularly, the Commission grappled with the liability issues associated with the interim uses and how the Community Redevelopment Agency would fit into the approval process. The interim use concept garnered support among the Commission for its potential to attract visitors and attention to the area, emphasizing its temporary nature. The plan includes enticing features like riverfront activation, a food truck court, a gazebo for live music, a sand volleyball court, and pedestrian safety measures such as a crosswalk flashing light.

The Commission examined the details of the plan, including ownership of improvements to the city-owned building earmarked for activation, which might eventually be demolished. The issue of liability and insurance was a point of concern, with the Commission seeking reassurance that the city would be shielded from lawsuits. The applicant assured that insurance requirements and indemnification clauses would be incorporated into the license agreement. The Commission also discussed fast-tracking permits to expedite the interim use’s implementation. Furthermore, the applicant stressed the project’s compliance with the existing purchase and sale agreement and the possibility of the temporary activity transitioning to a privately owned, taxable property.

Moving to the Riverwalk project, the Commission conveyed concern over the perceived stagnation of the development, despite the land being owned by developers for an extended period. Questions arose regarding the developers’ motives and commitment, with some Commission members acknowledging the developers’ efforts, like soil testing and planning, while others voiced frustration over the delays and the lack of progress. During public comments, residents echoed these sentiments, with one labeling the project a “gimmick” and expressing doubt about the developers’ intentions, and another apprehensive about potential delays and the project’s trajectory.

The discussion also touched upon the future of the Fish restaurant site, with references to the auction of items from the establishment and the upcoming opening of a new restaurant called “Tikki Do.” The Commission envisioned various activities and events that could take place in the area.