The Eustis City Commission voted unanimously Thursday night to move forward with a future land use amendment for the Eustis Community Center property, ending a tense meeting in which residents pressed commissioners for answers and commissioners pushed back.

Commissioner Willie Hawkins was absent.

What the Amendment Does

The amendment would change the designation of about 2.41 acres at 601 Northshore Drive, and a vacant lot across West Park Avenue, to Central Business District (CBD). The properties are currently Public Institutional and Residential Office Transitional.

Development Services Director Alicia Thomas says the change would allow more uses, including commercial, office and residential, while still allowing the community center. It does not approve a project, sell land, authorize demolition or require the center to close, she says. The waterfront parcels closest to Lake Eustis are not included.

City Manager Explains the Plan

Interim City Manager Rick Gierok opened the item by tying the amendment to the city’s downtown implementation plan, which he says puts the downtown master plan into action. The city has held four public workshops and hired Dr. Richard Levey as program lead, he says. The focus is waterfront activation, Ferran Park and trails.

“What we have right now, downtown is hurting,” Gierok says. “We need to help the businesses.”

The master plan named a handful of “catalyst sites,” including the former Waterman site, a Ferran Park extension and the community center, Gierok says. The land use change would let the city keep running the center while positioning the site for redevelopment, he says.

Developers submitted an unsolicited proposal for the community center site, Gierok says.

“Anybody can do that at any time,” he says.

The commission directed staff to begin due diligence on a possible purchase and sale agreement and a development agreement.

“There is no sale agreement at this time,” Gierok says. “There is nothing we would look at without guaranteeing we get what we want.”

The city has not said exactly what it wants, he says, “but we know that it’s a hotel. We need a hotel that goes in line with the master plan.”

Staff is still verifying that the developer has financing and can complete the project and that utilities can serve it, with help from a team of consultants, Gierok says. If it gets that far, the developer would present at a public meeting and take questions from commissioners and the public.

Gierok tied the issue to Amendment 3, approved by voters Nov. 3. A hotel on the site “is a huge revenue for us,” he says, and the city had already “cut our budget hard” last year.

He says it is premature to say the city will pursue the site. If it does, he says, the city is looking at other properties for a replacement community center and could not name them without losing “our competitive edge on property acquisition.”

“We will ensure there is a community center,” Gierok says. He says the new one would be “bigger and better than what we have now.”

“We hear you. We’re looking at it,” he says. “Something needs to happen for downtown. We’ve heard so many times that we have these plans and we don’t execute them. We are now executing them. And it’s uncomfortable. It is for us. It is for y’all.”

Residents and Commissioners Clash

Resident Gail Isaac-Thomas says Gierok’s remarks were what residents had wanted all along.

“Everything that has happened, even with the ‘Save Our Community’ signs and shirts, could have been avoided if the commissioners that we elected did what Rick just did tonight,” she says. “We’ve been asking that for months, weeks. And you sit there like you don’t even hear us.”

Commissioner Michael Holland says he had addressed the issue at an earlier meeting, which people would have seen had they stayed. He told the crowd that people take to social media to complain without staying to hear the full details.

“I promised, and I mean this: Nothing will ever happen to that building until there are public hearings done,” Holland says.

Vice Mayor Gary Ashcraft told the room how little the commission had decided.

“All we’ve agreed is for us to consider it and see if they can do it,” Ashcraft says. “We haven’t approved the sale.”

He says there is no replacement plan yet because the project may not happen, and that if it doesn’t, “everything stays the same.”

Ashcraft says Amendment 3 makes commercial investment necessary. The city faces “really, really tight budget hearings” in the next year or so, he says.

“If there’s no new revenue, guess where we get it from?” Ashcraft says. “We have to raise your taxes, and we’re trying to avoid that as well.”

He promised that if the project goes ahead, a new community center would be in place before the old one closes. “I promise you that,” Ashcraft says.

Commissioner George Asbate says the issue is not new.

“It’s too easy to Monday night quarterback it,” Asbate says. He says the commission has held many workshops on the topic and that, had residents attended, their questions would have been answered. He says it began years ago with a proposed sailing club he opposed.

Mayor Emily Lee had the last word before the vote.

“Rick wasn’t doing our job. Rick was doing his job,” Lee says. She said she hoped his remarks would bring “a period of calm and peace” so the city can work through the process.

She said the change would also allow other uses even if the building stays, such as a restaurant or a kiosk.

“We work hard to become elected,” Lee says. “You hired us to make decisions. Let us work through the process and quit dogging us, calling us names, accusing us.”

“Respect me and respect yourselves and respect these commissioners up here who are trying so hard to do the right thing,” she says.

Nearly two hours into the meeting, the community center was still the topic. The night ended with police escorting at least one person out and several residents trying to keep talking after Lee closed public comment so the commission could move to other business.

The city says no sale has been approved. Any purchase agreement would come back to the commission for consideration at a public meeting.