Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

Thursday, August 18, 2011

5:01 p.m. session

DISCLAIMER:

This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of third
party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.

05:04:24

05:05:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Good evening, and welcome to Tampa City

05:05:37 Council meeting.

05:05:37 The meeting is open to the public.

05:05:41 Can we have roll call, please?

05:05:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

05:05:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

05:05:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

05:05:50 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

05:05:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

05:05:54 We will start with our one item on the 5:01 p.m. agenda,

05:06:03 public hearing on item 1.

05:06:07 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Zoning administrator for the city.




05:06:12 This is the first public hearing, first reading of the

05:06:14 ordinance for the Westshore overlay district amendment.

05:06:17 It is a privately initiated amendment.

05:06:19 We have gone through several rounds of public workshops

05:06:23 including a public workshop with council, as well as the

05:06:26 public hearing for recommendation before the Planning

05:06:28 Commission.

05:06:30 Planning Commission staff is here to acknowledge that

05:06:36 hearing as well.

05:06:37 As you recall the workshop in April, I did present a memo

05:06:40 with seven items that went through some of the language,

05:06:44 changes that I saw that needed to be made, deal with some

05:06:49 rewording, and just the phraseology of how the formatting of

05:06:52 the language was laid out.

05:06:55 It's really the intent of what the Westshore alliance is

05:07:00 trying to do, dealing with applicability, tree and

05:07:03 landscape, building setback, signage, and the bonus ratio.

05:07:08 And we worked together for the last few months deal with

05:07:11 that language, and as far as the records are concerned are

05:07:16 from my perspective, the language meets the goals of what we

05:07:20 were supposed to achieve.

05:07:23 It reads in a similar voice if not the rest of the voice --

05:07:29 of the rest of the code and I have no problems with the

05:07:33 suggestions of the zoning administrator.

05:07:35 It is privately initiated as I mentioned so they will give a




05:07:39 presentation as well.

05:07:40 Any questions for land development?

05:07:47 >> Steven Griffin, Planning Commission staff.

05:07:51 Just to have reiterate what Ms. Coyle said, on May 9th

05:07:55 of this year, the Planning Commission did hear the proposed

05:07:59 amendment to the land development regulations for the

05:08:01 Westshore overlay district.

05:08:03 The Planning Commission heard this along with other

05:08:07 recommendations for changes to your land development

05:08:10 regulations, and they did find that the Westshore overlay is

05:08:14 consistent with your comprehensive plan.

05:08:17 As you know, the Westshore district is identified in your

05:08:20 comprehensive plan as one of Hillsborough County's major

05:08:24 employment centers.

05:08:24 And one of the City of Tampa's economic engines.

05:08:29 It is an area of your city that offers a good opportunity

05:08:32 for economic development and job creation.

05:08:37 The Westshore overlay district formerly known as the

05:08:40 Westshore commercial district overlay district where the

05:08:44 commercial has been omitted as a part of this process,

05:08:46 because we are looking for the future growth of this area to

05:08:49 really encourage more mixed use development and higher

05:08:53 density residential component.

05:08:55 The proposed changes of this overlay district will help in

05:08:59 two ways.




05:09:01 One, it will guide the future development of this area in

05:09:05 implementing your comprehensive plan and establishing a

05:09:09 distinct character for this area composed of high density

05:09:14 residential, and a mixture of land uses.

05:09:17 And this will make the pedestrian environment in this area

05:09:21 safer, more convenient, and more efficient and effective.

05:09:27 And secondly, it will create a very appeal business and

05:09:30 commercial and residential environment.

05:09:33 It will promote public health, safety, and the general

05:09:37 welfare for the City of Tampa.

05:09:39 And with that, again, the Planning Commission did find this

05:09:43 amendment consistent with your comprehensive plan.

05:09:45 Thank you, council.

05:09:54 >>RON ROTELLA: Westshore alliance.

05:09:57 And I am going to avail myself of modern technology.

05:10:03 Which is dangerous in my hands.

05:10:09 It's a good thing this button with the red light is not a

05:10:12 laser beam because you would all be in trouble.

05:10:15 [ Laughter ]

05:10:18 Our Westshore overlay district has been in existence since

05:10:23 2001.

05:10:24 What you have before you tonight are the proposed revisions

05:10:27 which we'll call the 2011 amendments.

05:10:35 I'm not going to repeat a lot of what Steve just so

05:10:40 eloquently said, but I will point out that the City of




05:10:42 Tampa's comprehensive plan, which is adopted by Tampa City

05:10:46 Council, designate Westshore as an area where the city wants

05:10:52 to direct you to growth, and you are promoting mixed use

05:10:57 density development.

05:10:58 That's our intent with the overlay district.

05:11:04 Before zoning codes, before all overlay district, I didn't

05:11:08 have to fabricate this shot.

05:11:11 I didn't go to another city.

05:11:13 Unfortunately, that's Kennedy Boulevard.

05:11:19 And what we would like Westshore to look like is, since our

05:11:25 2001 amendments, and that will be further enhanced in 2011.

05:11:29 This is what we want Westshore to look like.

05:11:33 And here are some of the recent projects.

05:11:40 So what our overlay district does is it takes the

05:11:47 comprehensive plan, and the overlay district implements the

05:11:54 comprehensive plan.

05:11:55 What I would like to point out is that from the business

05:12:00 district's perspective, and Marci Force is here from Tampa

05:12:09 International Airport, but I will tell you as a business

05:12:12 district we would never impose or propose any land

05:12:16 development regulations that in any way impeded the safe

05:12:21 operation of Tampa International Airport.

05:12:23 We kind of feel that that's the economic engine for the

05:12:27 Westshore business along with our interstate system.

05:12:34 The overlay district promotes quality development.




05:12:37 And here is a significant point, is it provides increased

05:12:43 protection to single-family residential neighborhoods

05:12:48 internal to and adjacent to the Westshore business district.

05:12:52 Could we get rid of those words?

05:12:58 [ Captioning moved to top of screen for the duration of this

05:12:58 PowerPoint presentation. ]

05:12:59 Thank you. (Laughter)

05:12:59 Thank you.

05:13:01 You know what?

05:13:06 It's better on top.

05:13:15 The City Council, you people, you made it very clear to me,

05:13:20 pretty much each one of you individually, and publicly, that

05:13:24 you wanted us to meet with the residential neighborhoods and

05:13:30 to the extent we could resolve any differences, come up with

05:13:33 some compromises, and I will tell you quite frankly and

05:13:39 candidly I never thought we would reach 100 percent

05:13:42 agreement.

05:13:43 I thought that we would be able to agree on most of the

05:13:46 major issues, and then we would appeal to City Council to

05:13:50 help resolve two or three of them.

05:13:52 And I'm really pleased that we do not have to do that.

05:13:58 What I would like to give you at this point -- and as I

05:14:11 understand it --

05:14:20 As I understand it, Margaret Vizzi -- I say Margaret before

05:14:40 we are very good friends.




05:14:41 We disagree professionally and respectfully but we are good

05:14:44 friends -- that she asked that this be read because she was

05:14:48 out of town tonight.

05:14:51 And what I think I would like to point out is if you look at

05:14:53 your screen for a moment, these are the neighborhoods that

05:14:59 are internal to and immediately adjacent to the Westshore

05:15:03 business district.

05:15:05 These are the neighborhoods that have the impact from

05:15:10 anything the Westshore alliance proposes as far as

05:15:14 development of the Westshore business district.

05:15:17 And as her communication says, I am really pleased, and

05:15:24 everybody here is, that the letter didn't end by saying "we

05:15:29 have no objections" because if you look at the letter, it

05:15:33 says it strongly encourages City Council to adopt our

05:15:38 commercial overlay district.

05:15:40 And if you look at the neighborhoods, Beach Park, Carver

05:15:43 City, Lincoln Gardens, the ones immediately affected, they

05:15:48 all attended that meeting where our overlay district was

05:15:53 presented and discussed, and it was unanimous that the

05:15:57 neighborhoods, not any neighborhoods, the neighborhoods that

05:16:02 you appoint, City Council appoints the representatives for

05:16:07 these neighborhoods, recommendations that you appoint --

05:16:12 yes, they are approved by City Council.

05:16:31 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

05:16:32 Just to clarify, the neighborhood improvement committee,




05:16:36 through the DRI appointed by City Council, your approval of

05:16:40 the DRI for how the money that comes from this neighborhood

05:16:43 improvement fund is spent, they are part of that committee.

05:16:50 >>MARY MULHERN: We didn't appoint the individual from that

05:16:54 committee.

05:16:56 Am I right?

05:16:56 >>JULIA COLE: I can't say off the top of my head.

05:17:05 >>RON ROTELLA: What I believe I said, and I think I am

05:17:07 accurate on this, is that the mayor recommend it is

05:17:10 appointments, and City Council approves.

05:17:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe you can remind me when we are

05:17:18 approving them next time because I don't recall doing it.

05:17:23 >>RON ROTELLA: What I would like to do is lobby.

05:17:26 I would like to get one or two people on there myself.

05:17:29 [ Laughter ]

05:17:30 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's what usually happens if we have

05:17:31 to approve it.

05:17:33 That's why I don't remember approving it.

05:17:35 I'm sorry, go ahead.

05:17:37 >>RON ROTELLA: Okay.

05:17:37 I hope there's no confusion on that.

05:17:43 The other thing I would like to do is give the letters of

05:17:54 support, since this was put together, additional analysis

05:18:00 that have supported, and I will just give it to the clerk.

05:18:03 I won't bother you with the paperwork.




05:18:05 But I would like to point out that we have endorsements from

05:18:07 the Tampa Bay Area Regional Transportation, from the

05:18:15 Metropolitan Planning Organization, from Building Office and

05:18:19 Management Association, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning

05:18:21 Council, The Urban Land Institute, James Moore.

05:18:31 And then I'm really pleased to say that although this is the

05:18:34 city limits, we do have two county commissioners whose

05:18:38 districts are part of Westshore, and that's Les Miller and

05:18:42 Sandy Murman, so both Sandy and Les have submitted their

05:18:50 strongly encouraging support of the adoption of this, as

05:18:55 well as approval by the full Board of County Commissioners

05:19:02 And then last but not least, there is a letter of

05:19:05 endorsement signed by Keith Norton, Rhea law and Bob

05:19:11 Atwerger so it's the strong recommendation it be approved by

05:19:19 the economic Development Corporation.

05:19:30 You know, in moving and discussing this just for a moment, I

05:19:55 would like to summarize why I think the neighborhoods

05:19:58 support the overlay district.

05:20:01 They concluded that the protections in the overlay district

05:20:08 are greater in these proposed amendments than they are

05:20:13 today.

05:20:13 We worked with them very hard, and I'm pleased to say that

05:20:20 we incorporated every one of their recommendations.

05:20:23 So we have got a business district, and businesses

05:20:28 represented here tonight, that support the proposed




05:20:32 amendment, and which is usually uncharacteristic in most of

05:20:37 these situations.

05:20:40 The other group, which are the neighborhoods, they both

05:20:44 support.

05:20:44 They support the proposed overlay district as well.

05:20:50 We went into some pretty detailed presentations.

05:20:53 I don't think we should do that again tonight.

05:20:56 And I've met with you individually.

05:20:58 We have given you copies of the revisions.

05:21:00 We discussed it.

05:21:03 Cathy is available to answer questions.

05:21:04 I am.

05:21:04 The only other thing that I will add is that you wanted us

05:21:11 to a sure you that not just these neighborhoods, but that

05:21:16 all of the neighborhoods, even outside the immediate

05:21:20 adjacent area were notified, and I give these to the city

05:21:25 clerk as well.

05:21:26 May 5th we sent all the neighborhood presidents the

05:21:31 correspondence with the overlay district.

05:21:32 We followed up again on June 15th with another mailing.

05:21:37 And then we e-mailed them all again on June 24th.

05:21:56 So I hope we followed council's desires here and really made

05:22:00 an extraordinary effort to notify, work with, and obviously

05:22:04 that's why I think we received their endorsement.

05:22:06 So that concludes my presentation other than to say that if




05:22:11 you look at -- and I've read it, probably closer than a lot

05:22:16 of people.

05:22:17 It's consistent with the mayor's plan, and encourage

05:22:24 economic expansion, and encourages urban in-fill, and it

05:22:28 does what the plan says in moving to more predictable zoning

05:22:34 and form-based zoning and design guidelines, so we feel that

05:22:40 our overlay district is consistent with the mayor's plan as

05:22:44 well.

05:22:47 So that concludes my presentation.

05:22:49 And then we have others here that are prepared to speak,

05:22:57 would like to address council.

05:23:00 We have got an awful lot of people here.

05:23:03 And I don't think that would be council's desire at this

05:23:06 point.

05:23:06 I know you have a 6:00 public hearing.

05:23:09 But I would ask those that are in the audience that have

05:23:13 taken the time to come down and appear before council, to

05:23:18 address council, if they would just stand up and show their

05:23:23 evidence of support

05:23:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Including me if I turn my microphone on.

05:23:42 At this point, if anyone has any questions for the

05:23:45 petitioner, this would really be the time to ask them before

05:23:48 we hear from the public, or if we have questions for land

05:23:54 development.

05:24:01 Anyone on council? No questions?




05:24:06 Sorry, Ron, I have questions.

05:24:14 >>RON ROTELLA: If I can't answer it, I will refer it to the

05:24:16 appropriate person.

05:24:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

05:24:18 My question has to do with -- the questions that I asked at

05:24:24 the last hearing.

05:24:26 So let me start by asking, my questions had to do with the

05:24:35 priority pedestrian streets that, the buffers, the setbacks

05:24:40 and the possibility -- because what we approved in our

05:24:47 comprehensive plan really was for all the things you are

05:24:49 talking about, which are great, which is a

05:24:53 pedestrian-friendly multimodal district.

05:24:56 And your first slide is great.

05:24:59 It shows very wide distance between the street and the

05:25:10 building.

05:25:12 But what we see here are very little setbacks.

05:25:19 So the reason I'm asking this now is because when I met with

05:25:23 staff, they told me that I understood that you, somehow

05:25:34 between the last time you were here and tonight, you had

05:25:37 gone back to leaving a greater distance, a bigger buffer,

05:25:47 and larger sidewalk from what was proposed the first time.

05:25:53 Now, I think I may have been wrong about that, and that's

05:25:59 what I want to clear up.

05:26:00 Has anything changed as far as that goes?

05:26:05 >>RON ROTELLA: You know what?




05:26:06 You have some graphics that you asked for that's in your

05:26:11 package that deals with the regional and the priority and

05:26:17 the residential streets.

05:26:18 I will tell you, there is not a change, but I'm going to let

05:26:25 Randy Coen, who chairs our master plan committee, respond to

05:26:30 your question directly.

05:26:31 I think I can, but I prefer to let the expert do it, if you

05:26:35 don't mind.

05:26:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thanks.

05:26:37 >> Randy Coen, for the record.

05:26:40 When we brought the overlay to you the first time for

05:26:44 transmittal, we had done some amendments to the setbacks for

05:26:48 buildings that allowed them to be closer to the street.

05:26:52 We have revised those so they are now no different than what

05:26:55 was already approved in the overlay, and we have provided,

05:26:58 in fact, buildings under several circumstances to be set

05:27:01 back even further from the right-of-way than they are today

05:27:05 under the current overlay.

05:27:06 So we removed any change that brought buildings closer to

05:27:10 the public right-of-way, and rights-of-way for the building

05:27:14 to be set back even further for the right-of-way and I

05:27:17 believe that addresses your concern at least to the extent

05:27:20 we have it.

05:27:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, that's what I thought.

05:27:22 >> Yes.




05:27:24 And the sidewalks remain the same.

05:27:26 We also included in the sidewalk language, and it's been

05:27:29 reviewed by the legal department, that the wider sidewalks

05:27:34 shall be provided even if they exceed the right-of-way.

05:27:36 In other words, if they are outside the right-of-way, the

05:27:38 wider sidewalks still have to be provided and before you

05:27:41 today.

05:27:42 >>MARY MULHERN: And you are encouraging wider sidewalks,

05:27:45 bonus densities?

05:27:46 >> Yes.

05:27:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonus amenities?

05:27:48 >> Yes.

05:27:49 Our wider sidewalks are required under the code, some

05:27:52 flexibilities for when they cannot be provided because of

05:27:55 physical difficulties, but, yes, the code requires wider

05:27:58 sidewalks than what's currently required in the code, or

05:28:01 currently required in the overlay as it goes to that.

05:28:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

05:28:05 So you remember this.

05:28:07 >> Yes, I do.

05:28:08 >>MARY MULHERN: We discussed this in council and in private

05:28:12 meetings.

05:28:12 >> Yes.

05:28:12 >>MARY MULHERN: So you have changed this?

05:28:14 >> Yes, we have made those changes.




05:28:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm very happy to hear that.

05:28:18 >> And they were very good suggestions, and we went back and

05:28:21 looked at them and I think worked very well.

05:28:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, that's great.

05:28:24 Thank you.

05:28:27 I'm really happy to hear that.

05:28:29 And I just think about when you look at those little tiny

05:28:32 sidewalks, when you think about people trying to walk, and

05:28:36 you think about the speed of the traffic --

05:28:41 >>RON ROTELLA: You expressed that at our last workshop.

05:28:43 We did make some changes.

05:28:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

05:28:46 >>RON ROTELLA: I apologize.

05:28:50 Sometimes when we rely on technology, you don't think, and I

05:28:54 was aware of the fact that we had the slide about being

05:28:57 consistent with Mayor Buckhorn's plan.

05:29:01 I forgot to say that the mayor has asked his chief of staff,

05:29:05 Santiago Corrada, to be present on his behalf.

05:29:09 So if you don't mind, I think Mr. Corrada would like to

05:29:12 address you for a moment.

05:29:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Good.

05:29:14 I have a question for him.

05:29:16 [ Laughter ]

05:29:18 Is this the mayor's new logo, the Buckhorn plan?

05:29:23 >> Good evening.




05:29:25 Thank you for providing me this opportunity to articulate

05:29:28 the mayor's support for the Westshore overlay amendment.

05:29:33 100 percent support.

05:29:34 It encourages the type of development we would like to see.

05:29:39 Westshore alliance has done what they needed to do to get

05:29:41 the neighborhood support and to align it with the mayor's

05:29:44 plan.

05:29:44 So on behalf of the mayor and the administration, I'm humbly

05:29:47 and respectfully requesting your support in approving the

05:29:50 Westshore overlay district.

05:29:52 Thank you forgiving me a moment.

05:30:05 >>MARY MULHERN: We have the opportunity for public.

05:30:10 Did you have questions before?

05:30:13 >>HARRY COHEN: No.

05:30:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone wishing to speak on this?

05:30:18 You have three minutes if you want to.

05:30:20 >> I move that we approve it.

05:30:29 >> Second.

05:30:34 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

05:30:36 Anyone opposed?

05:30:37 >> I move to approve the revisions.

05:30:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.

05:30:45 >> I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida

05:30:50 relating to the west shore Laver lay district to Tampa city

05:30:54 code of ordinances chapter 27 zoning amending 27-4636,




05:30:59 Westshore commercial overlay district, development standard,

05:31:02 repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict

05:31:05 therewith, providing for severability, providing an

05:31:08 effective date.

05:31:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Cohen, seconded

05:31:14 by Councilwoman Montelione.

05:31:16 All in favor?

05:31:19 Anyone opposed?

05:31:20 >> Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being absent.

05:31:24 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

05:31:27 9:30 a.m.

05:31:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

05:31:38 >>RON ROTELLA: Council members, thank you.

05:31:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Council, we could take up new business

05:31:44 before we break, if you would like.

05:31:50 Councilman Suarez, any new business?

05:31:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Well, I would like to say just one thing,

05:31:57 about when this transpired over the last couple of days

05:31:59 concerning Freedom High school and the work of the Tampa

05:32:01 Police Department.

05:32:03 I'm glad to see that we have such good and vigilant officers

05:32:07 and good and vigilant neighbors who were able to identify

05:32:11 that young man and bring him in before he could do anything.

05:32:14 I just want to applaud the work of the City of Tampa,

05:32:19 Hillsborough County sheriff's office, and anyone else that




05:32:21 helped on that particular case, because I believe that could

05:32:25 have been a catastrophic event for our city and for freedom

05:32:28 high school and for that neighborhood.

05:32:30 Thank you.

05:32:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Reddick?

05:32:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.

05:32:39 As we discussed earlier, this morning, briefly, I would like

05:32:45 to request the chair and chair pro tem, in a letter to the

05:32:52 Sports Authority requesting that they reconsider.

05:33:00 Tampa Port Authority.

05:33:08 Requesting of that they reconsider their decision to not

05:33:11 fund the $150,000 for the streetcar.

05:33:14 >> Second.

05:33:20 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

05:33:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's all.

05:33:25 >>MARY MULHERN: And, Mr. Shelby, if you could draft that

05:33:30 letter.

05:33:31 Thank you.

05:33:34 Anything else?

05:33:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's it.

05:33:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen?

05:33:38 >>HARRY COHEN: I want to follow up on Councilman Suarez'

05:33:43 commendation.

05:33:46 No, something different.

05:33:47 Commendation to our police, and also in this case fire




05:33:52 department, because last night, at the building where I

05:33:58 live, we had a fire.

05:33:59 And it was the first time since I have lived there in ten

05:34:04 years that an evacuation of the building was because of a

05:34:08 real fire, not a false alarm or contained emergency.

05:34:10 There was smoke billowing out of the lobby and there were

05:34:14 people being evacuated from the building.

05:34:16 There were 120 units, so there were a lot of people in

05:34:19 various stages of distress, in different stairwells

05:34:23 throughout the building.

05:34:25 The Tampa fire department and the Tampa Police Department

05:34:28 both arrived literally within moments of being called, and

05:34:33 from the minute they got there, they took right over in the

05:34:37 building and checked on every single individual that was

05:34:41 unable to vacate their apartment and spent three and a half

05:34:45 hours clearing smoke from the building until they determined

05:34:49 people could get back into their units, and in some cases

05:34:52 they escorted the people back to their units if they were

05:34:56 having difficulty.

05:34:57 And, you know, in this era where people are constantly

05:35:00 bemoaning the cost of government and questioning whether or

05:35:06 not the tax dollars that they pay actually are meaningful, I

05:35:10 just want to thank our first responders for being so

05:35:17 professional and doing such an excellent job when so many

05:35:21 people are in distress.




05:35:24 It's at moments like that that you really recognize just how

05:35:28 important these things are, because when you go to pick up

05:35:31 that phone to call, there's no time to waste.

05:35:36 And there were a lot of people last night that actually

05:35:40 asked me to mention something about this tonight, because

05:35:43 they were so appreciative.

05:35:45 So I want to take the opportunity to do that.

05:35:48 Also, on a lighter note, I want to take a moment to

05:35:51 recognize two groups of young men and women who we are very

05:35:58 proud of because they are representing our city this week.

05:36:02 The Palma Ceia west little league softball team won the

05:36:06 southeast regional tournament last week and are now

05:36:08 competing in the Junior League softball World Series in

05:36:12 Kirkland, Washington.

05:36:14 I believe that after tomorrow's game, the winner will go to

05:36:20 the championship game on Saturday, August 20th at

05:36:23 5 p.m., and it will be carried live on ESPN-2.

05:36:28 So best of luck to the ladies on that softball team.

05:36:31 Also, the Palma Ceia Bayshore Little League baseball team

05:36:35 has also won their southeast regional tournament last week

05:36:37 and are now competing in the semifinals on Friday to the

05:36:41 Junior League World Series.

05:36:43 And the finals will take place tomorrow evening at 8:00 p.m.

05:36:48 The winner will play the world championship game at 11 a.m.

05:36:51 on Saturday, which will also be televised on ESPN-2.




05:36:56 So if anybody is in this weekend, ESPN-2 is the place to be

05:37:00 if you want to see our local kids in action in their

05:37:02 respective tournament.

05:37:04 So we wish them good luck.

05:37:05 >>MARY MULHERN: And now?

05:37:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

05:37:15 New Tampa.

05:37:16 I as well have another athletic team that has done very well

05:37:20 for themselves, and I would like to make a motion that

05:37:23 council prepare a commendation for the New Tampa little

05:37:25 league at our evening session of council on Thursday,

05:37:28 September 8.

05:37:30 >> Second.

05:37:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

05:37:33 These boys had an amazing season and almost made their way

05:37:36 to the little league World Series in Williamsport,

05:37:39 Pennsylvania, although they came up a little bit short in

05:37:42 their final game last Friday night, these young men and

05:37:47 their coaches deserve a lot of recognition for their hard

05:37:49 work that they put into and the determination that they had

05:37:54 in this remarkable season, because we are really proud of

05:37:57 the huge accomplishment.

05:38:00 I think athletes is very important for young people, and

05:38:03 it's a wonderful thing.

05:38:05 I do respectfully ask that we postpone the commendation




05:38:09 ceremony until 7 p.m. to give the parents and children

05:38:11 enough time to get here for the meeting for their come from

05:38:19 the northern regions of our city.

05:38:22 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor of the commendation?

05:38:27 I have to say that watching Florida on that tournament last

05:38:31 week was great on TV, especially in that one game where the

05:38:34 Rays were doing so bad.

05:38:37 It was great.

05:38:38 To look at Tampa, then the little Tampa guys were doing

05:38:42 great.

05:38:42 All off this the Rays came back.

05:38:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And I do have one other motion for

05:38:47 presentation of commendation, again.

05:38:50 This way --

05:38:55 >> I knew you were going to give the commendation.

05:38:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A motion for a presentation for our next

05:39:02 meeting, September 8th at 9:00 a.m. to the officers,

05:39:06 detectives and those under the command of TPD district 2,

05:39:12 Newman, and the other analysis involved, and Chris Farkas

05:39:18 from freedom high school for their composure during the last

05:39:21 couple of days.

05:39:22 Principal Farkas is preparing opening a high school and open

05:39:25 house today, as a matter of fact, going on right now out at

05:39:29 freedom high school, and with television cameras still

05:39:32 outside parked in the parking lot.




05:39:34 So it's been a very stressful few days for them but TPD did

05:39:39 an awesome job, and the composure of principal Farkas on CNN

05:39:45 to a worldwide audience was commendable.

05:39:47 So we would like to bring them here.

05:39:50 I don't know what the principal's schedule if he can make it

05:39:52 but September 8th at 9:00 a.m.

05:39:56 >>THE CLERK: September 1st is the next regular meeting.

05:40:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: September 1st regular meeting.

05:40:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I forgot.

05:40:06 I have looked at the calendar and talked to the clerk

05:40:08 earlier about adding more to our calendar.

05:40:16 So that one is very important.

05:40:18 But if there's any way we could do it -- the next meeting

05:40:25 after that, what's the meeting you suggested when we should

05:40:30 do new business?

05:40:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, I want to point out, I

05:40:37 believe that meeting is the last of the month.

05:40:43 I don't know if you want to take away the --

05:40:47 >> Chief Castor is being consult board of director that.

05:40:50 My legislative aid is working with Chief Castor to work

05:40:54 those details out.

05:40:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Let's come back to this at the end of our

05:40:58 6:00 meeting just to the date.

05:41:01 And you can make your motion then.

05:41:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.




05:41:13 We are going to recess.

05:41:17 We'll take up that motion after our 6:00 meeting, at the end

05:41:23 of the 6:00 meeting.

05:41:26 So we are adjourned until then.

05:41:35 >>

05:41:44 >>

05:41:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Good evening.

06:02:10 Welcome to our 6:00 Tampa City Council meeting.

06:02:20 Roll call, please.

06:02:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

06:02:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

06:02:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

06:02:26 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

06:02:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

06:02:33 >>MARY MULHERN: If we could have a motion to open the

06:02:36 public hearings.

06:02:39 >> So moved.

06:02:40 >> Second.

06:02:40 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

06:02:45 We'll go to item number 2 on the agenda.

06:02:50 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:02:54 Item number 2 on the agenda, I believe I have been contacted

06:02:59 by Mr. Bentley concerning a continuance for this item.

06:03:03 The continuance request would be for the evening of October

06:03:06 13th.




06:03:07 They did renotice for this evening, giving that this was

06:03:13 taken a few months ago.

06:03:14 Mr. Bentley is here to speak to that request.

06:03:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Bentley?

06:03:20 >> Good evening, Madam Chairman.

06:03:24 Mark Bentley, 201 North Franklin, 33602.

06:03:28 I represent the applicant.

06:03:30 As you recall on June 23rd there was a 4-3 vote in favor

06:03:34 of my first reading.

06:03:36 Obviously two council members aren't in attendance.

06:03:40 So in fairness we are hoping for continuance until hopefully

06:03:44 we have a full board.

06:03:45 Also, we did renotice the hearing although that's not

06:03:48 typical as a result of last hearing.

06:03:50 So we have renoticed twice and posted the property twice,

06:03:54 and tried to apprise the neighbors and civic association

06:03:57 that we would be requesting a continuance.

06:04:00 Thank you.

06:04:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

06:04:02 Is there anyone that wishes to speak on the continuance?

06:04:08 Seeing no one.

06:04:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to continue to October 18th.

06:04:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, what was the date?

06:04:17 The 13th is a night meeting?

06:04:20 October 13th, 6:00 p.m.?




06:04:22 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

06:04:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion for continuance made by Councilman

06:04:29 Reddick, seconded by Councilman Cohen.

06:04:32 All in favor?

06:04:33 Anyone opposed?

06:04:35 So October 13th at 6:00 p.m.

06:04:37 >>MARK BENTLEY: Thank you very much.

06:04:40 Have a good evening.

06:04:42 I appreciate it.

06:04:43 >>MARY MULHERN: We will move to item 3.

06:04:55 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

06:04:55 Do you want me to just go through the items we are actually

06:04:58 going to hear tonight?

06:04:59 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

06:05:00 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item 4 was a misnotice, cannot be heard.

06:05:12 >> Do we need to swear anyone that might want to speak on

06:05:15 this issue at this point or no?

06:05:18 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

06:05:19 I was getting ahead.

06:05:21 Ms. Feeley is going to go over the agenda and changes.

06:05:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I apologize.

06:05:27 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The only other item is item 9, V-11-30.

06:05:33 There was a request received by the applicant for a

06:05:38 continuance to September 8th so if you wouldn't mind

06:05:41 make act motion for that continuance.




06:05:48 All other items are ready to move forward.

06:05:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With the exception of item number 4 which

06:05:53 is to be removed from the agenda.

06:05:55 >> Yes.

06:05:56 We already removed of that.

06:05:59 It does not require any motion by council at this time.

06:06:01 >>MARY MULHERN: So would you like us to take number 9 and

06:06:06 address the continuance when it comes up?

06:06:12 >>ABBYE FEELEY: You can continue it now if you want to.

06:06:16 That way anybody who is going to speak on the matter since

06:06:19 it is going to be continued, they could go on.

06:06:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Then let's move to item number 9.

06:06:24 Is there anyone who wishes to speak on a continuance for

06:06:27 item number 9?

06:06:32 Seeing no one, do you have a motion to close?

06:06:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Can I ask staff a question?

06:06:39 What was the reason for the continuance request?

06:06:45 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I had a meeting with the applicant earlier

06:06:47 this week.

06:06:48 There were some items that were still needed to be addressed

06:06:54 when we had finally put together our final comments on the

06:06:56 staff report that was in-house, it was a lot of outstanding

06:07:00 items.

06:07:00 So instead of coming before City Council with all of those

06:07:04 items, they requested the continuance so that they could




06:07:06 clean up those items and have a better site plan to bring

06:07:10 before you that evening.

06:07:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Do we have a motion to close?

06:07:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A motion to continue?

06:07:22 I'm sorry.

06:07:22 >> Would it be proper for a motion to move to September

06:07:29 8th at 6 p.m.

06:07:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

06:07:34 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

06:07:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt but if could you

06:07:39 also, for the sake of the record, just to remove item 4, it

06:07:44 cannot be heard.

06:07:45 >> Move to have remove item 46 from the agenda.

06:07:52 >> Second.

06:07:53 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

06:07:55 Okay.

06:07:55 We will go back to item 3.

06:07:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And if we can, before then, Madam Chair, I

06:08:00 would ask that all written communications which have been

06:08:02 available for public inspection in City Council's office be

06:08:05 received and filed into the record at this time.

06:08:11 Mr. Clerk?

06:08:12 Do you have a motion to receive and file?

06:08:13 >> So moved.

06:08:14 >> Second.




06:08:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to receive and file.

06:08:16 All in favor?

06:08:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: One other point, council.

06:08:22 A reminder that any ex parte communication, if you have had

06:08:26 any, please disclose those prior to your vote.

06:08:29 You ladies and gentlemen, there is a sign-up sheet outside.

06:08:32 If you are respect tonight please make sure your name is on

06:08:35 that sign-up sheet.

06:08:36 Finally, Madam Chair, these are quasi-judicial.

06:08:40 We would ask witnesses who are going to speak tonight be

06:08:42 sworn.

06:08:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Will anyone who wishes to speak on any item

06:08:48 on the agenda tonight, please stand and be sworn in?

06:08:57 (Oath administered by Clerk)

06:09:05 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:09:09 Item number 3 on your agenda this evening is case V-11-140,

06:09:15 a special use request for place of religious assembly and a

06:09:18 daycare located at 4323 east Henry Avenue.

06:09:32 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

06:09:33 I have been sworn in.

06:09:35 Just a few things that I would like to describe to you this

06:09:38 evening pertaining to this project and its relationship to

06:09:41 the comprehensive plan.

06:09:43 First of all, the project is located within the university

06:09:47 planning area which is one of your five planning districts.




06:09:49 It is one of the three districts of the five districts

06:09:52 that's been identified as a district that offers the

06:09:54 opportunity for additional economic development

06:09:58 opportunities and job creation.

06:10:00 As relation to future land use categories, to give you a

06:10:04 little bit of context of the area, the site is located right

06:10:08 off the boundary between City of Tampa boundary and

06:10:11 The unincorporated Hillsborough County.

06:10:13 The land use category is residential 10, which allows for

06:10:17 these types of community serving uses which includes daycare

06:10:21 centers as well as churches.

06:10:23 So what you have is approximately a five-acre parcel of

06:10:26 land.

06:10:26 I will show you in context.

06:10:30 It's located just east of 56th street, as I said, just

06:10:33 south of Henry Avenue which happens to be the dividing line

06:10:35 in this particular part of the city or in the county that

06:10:39 separates the jurisdiction of the city -- municipalities of

06:10:42 the City of Tampa and the jurisdiction of unincorporated

06:10:45 Hillsborough County.

06:10:49 Here is a little bit more zoomed-in so you can see there is

06:10:52 a residential population in the area which is the character,

06:10:54 but of course this is a community serving use which does

06:10:57 allow consideration for this particular type of use in the

06:11:00 R-10 category.




06:11:01 Planning Commission staff finds the proposed request

06:11:04 consistent with the comprehensive plan.

06:11:05 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:11:19 This is a 5.32-acre site, currently vacant, and it's

06:11:25 surrounded by single-family residential as Tony mentioned on

06:11:28 the east and west, vacant property on the south.

06:11:31 This is school board property.

06:11:34 What they are proposing this evening is a two-phased

06:11:38 approach.

06:11:38 The first phase would be the construction of a single story

06:11:42 building, 9,726 square feet for 485-feet sanctuary, and

06:11:48 included they could have the daycare as an accessory use.

06:11:54 It would allow them to construct a second building on the

06:11:58 property dedicated just for the daycare.

06:12:00 And any accessory uses such as a fellowship hall.

06:12:05 The proposed building setbacks are 60.61 feet north, 484.21

06:12:14 feet south, 134.36 feet west, and 100.77 feet east.

06:12:21 The phase 2 setbacks will be consistent with the required

06:12:24 special use setbacks which is 20-foot north and 40-foot on

06:12:30 all other sides.

06:12:31 A total of 146 spaces are required and 147 are being

06:12:38 provided.

06:12:39 Elevations have been provided as well.

06:12:42 As you can see on pages 2 and 3 of your staff report, there

06:12:46 are some site plan modifications that are required.




06:12:49 In between first and second read being.

06:12:52 I have spoken to the applicant and their engineer and they

06:12:54 are amenable to make those changes.

06:12:56 There are two waivers being requested with this.

06:12:58 The first is to allow access to a local street, east Henry,

06:13:02 and that is the only access that they have, but that is one

06:13:04 of the special use criteria.

06:13:06 And the second is to allow grass parking and grass drive

06:13:13 aisles in the parking area located south of the building.

06:13:18 Lastly, I just want to clear up that there was a comment

06:13:21 made under the staff report of transportation discussing

06:13:25 some grass parking spaces to save some trees.

06:13:28 Those trees were deemed by parks and rec, and Mary Daniel

06:13:31 Bryson deemed to be hazardous trees and asked to be removed

06:13:37 so I would ask that you keep the site plan configuration of

06:13:40 those trees as they are.

06:13:41 Under special uses, they must meet chapter 13.

06:13:44 There are no chapter 13 waivers.

06:13:45 It's a very large site, heavily treed.

06:13:48 We have worked with the applicant to get things put in the

06:13:51 positions they need to be to allow for solid waste service

06:13:54 and not affect those tree canopies that are on-site.

06:13:58 Let me show you some pictures of where we are in the zoning

06:14:01 atlas, and then if you have any questions.

06:14:11 This is the zonal atlas sheet.




06:14:14 This is the property in green.

06:14:15 It's predominantly RS-50.

06:14:19 The PD over to the west.

06:14:20 And when you hit Hillsborough, there is some commercial

06:14:23 intensive.

06:14:23 The Hillsborough County, City of Tampa line is the center

06:14:28 line, Henry Avenue, so everything north up there is going to

06:14:31 be county.

06:14:36 There's an aerial of the site.

06:14:55 Some of pictures of the subject property.

06:15:09 Very large site.

06:15:11 5.32 acres.

06:15:22 This is the western boundary -- I'm sorry, this is the

06:15:26 eastern boundary, on Henry now moving east.

06:15:29 This is immediately adjacent to the property on the east.

06:15:37 The median on the west.

06:15:44 And then these are along the north.

06:15:51 These are along the north on Henry.

06:15:52 This is immediately to the north.

06:16:02 Staff is available if you have any questions.

06:16:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Feeley, can I ask just one question

06:16:13 about those grand trees?

06:16:15 The 36-inch and the 43-inch grand tree, are those the two

06:16:19 that you said they are hazardous?

06:16:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY: If you look on page 3 of your site plan,




06:16:31 that's the actual landscape plan that also has the tree

06:16:34 table, and at the bottom of the tree table, it does show

06:16:40 three grand to be removed, the 31-inch, 36-inch and 43-inch,

06:16:46 and that includes the two that are here, the 43-inch -- I

06:17:02 know that Mary Daniel Bryson and Dave Daniel ensured that

06:17:09 everything was laid out.

06:17:18 47-inch is also located on the site that is being retained,

06:17:24 another located on the east.

06:17:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you for pointing that out.

06:17:34 I was curious, yes.

06:17:36 But the tree people don't usually miss anything.

06:17:39 And as usual they didn't miss anything.

06:17:43 >> Code requires if you are over an ache theory you retain

06:17:47 50% so that's going to run with this special use.

06:17:49 You cannot get any waivers for that under a special use so

06:17:52 they will need to meet that and anything else we are going

06:17:54 to work out at the time of permitting related to that.

06:17:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

06:18:00 Petitioner?

06:18:03 Is the petitioner here on this?

06:18:05 >> I'm pastor Williams.

06:18:24 I'm the one that is the congregation requesting about this

06:18:30 be granted us to build us a place of worship and also a

06:18:36 daycare center.

06:18:38 Everything that has been presented pretty much represents




06:18:41 what I have to have say at this time.

06:18:42 This is our engineer which is also the one with, I guess,

06:18:47 the information that you might need for any questions you

06:18:49 might have of it.

06:18:50 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

06:18:52 >> I'm Kendall Phillips with LP engineering, 205 century

06:19:00 Boulevard in Bartow.

06:19:03 And I really have nothing to add.

06:19:07 Abbye has done a tremendous job.

06:19:08 I really appreciate her help through the process.

06:19:13 Yes, trees were a challenge, but I think we accomplished

06:19:18 everything that's mutually acceptable to both the church and

06:19:22 the city staff.

06:19:24 I'm just available to answer any technical questions that

06:19:27 you might have.

06:19:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone from the public who wishes

06:19:36 to speak on this?

06:19:44 Do have we have a motion?

06:19:45 >> Move to close the hearing.

06:19:47 Oh, sorry.

06:19:47 >>MARY MULHERN: You have an opportunity for rebuttal but

06:19:51 there's not really anything to rebut.

06:19:53 Ms. Feeley, did you want to --

06:19:56 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I did provide a revision sheet for you, and

06:20:06 just make sure.




06:20:10 Under the parks and recreation, I don't think I need to make

06:20:13 a modification.

06:20:13 I think I can work it out.

06:20:15 There was just a comment made in relation of utilities and

06:20:19 being within the protected radius of the trees.

06:20:23 I put a call of in to Kathy Beck.

06:20:26 Unfortunately I was unable to hook up with her.

06:20:29 But I think, also, we can take care of that.

06:20:32 We'll just add a note that it says to revise the plans, but

06:20:39 I think if I can just put on the record that they can add a

06:20:41 note, no utilities will be placed within the protective

06:20:45 radius of the trees.

06:20:46 I think that will take a visual depiction as well as a note

06:20:51 of the plan.

06:20:51 I didn't get a confirmation on that but I know it was

06:20:54 outstanding in my head.

06:20:55 So if I can just modify the revision sheet to add that note.

06:21:00 No utilities to be placed within the protective radius of

06:21:03 the trees, and if you will just motion as part of your

06:21:09 mocks.

06:21:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Petitioner agreed to all the revisions?

06:21:16 >> Had specific discussion about the utilities and plan to

06:21:25 show it on the revised plan.

06:21:26 >> They are going to take care of the utilities issues as

06:21:29 well.




06:21:29 And that will be added between first and second reading.

06:21:33 So if you can just include in your motion the revision sheet

06:21:35 with today's date for this case, I would appreciate it.

06:21:37 Thank you.

06:21:38 Will.

06:21:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: I move the ordinance.

06:21:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we have a motion to close?

06:21:44 Did we do that already?

06:21:45 All in favor?

06:21:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance presented for first

06:21:51 reading.

06:21:57 An ordinance approving a special use permit S-2 approving

06:22:02 place of religious assembly and daycare in an RS-50

06:22:05 residential single-family zoning district in the general

06:22:08 vicinity of 4323 east Henry Avenue in the city of Tampa,

06:22:11 Florida as more particularly described in section 1 hereof

06:22:14 providing an effective date.

06:22:16 And this includes the revision sheet and all additional

06:22:21 provisions that were attached therefore.

06:22:26 >> The modified revision sheets because the parks and rec

06:22:33 talks about the pipes to be modified, so it will be

06:22:36 modified.

06:22:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: To include the modified revisions.

06:22:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Suarez.

06:22:43 All in favor?




06:22:44 Anyone opposed?

06:22:45 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

06:22:49 absent.

06:22:49 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

06:22:52 9:30 a.m.

06:22:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

06:22:59 We move to item 4 has been removed.

06:23:02 We move to item number 5.

06:23:35 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:23:37 Item number 5 is case V-11-213, also a special use request.

06:23:42 The special use request before you tonight at 2315 Woodlawn

06:23:46 Avenue is for a daycare facility.

06:23:51 There is one waiver associated with the request, and that is

06:23:54 to allow access to a local street.

06:24:05 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

06:24:06 I have been sworn in.

06:24:11 The subject site is located within the central Tampa

06:24:14 planning district which is one of the three districts that

06:24:18 offers opportunities again for economic development and for

06:24:22 job creation.

06:24:25 I would like to show you a map of the future land use

06:24:27 category so that you can see the subject site does have a

06:24:31 future land use designation of residential 10, which is

06:24:34 again what we had with the prior residential 10 which does

06:24:38 allow community-serving uses you have such as churches and




06:24:42 daycares.

06:24:43 It has access to a local street.

06:24:45 As you can see it is proximate to Armenia Avenue which is

06:24:49 two ways right here in this particular segment of Armenia

06:24:53 Avenue.

06:24:53 Armenia Avenue is a commercial arterial road as classified

06:24:57 on your residential system for the City of Tampa.

06:25:00 The land use categories are community mixed use 35 along

06:25:03 this particular segment, and also this particular category

06:25:08 right here is residential 20 which allows multifamily

06:25:13 density.

06:25:13 This is the river garden apartments to the south, east of

06:25:16 this intersection.

06:25:20 There are residential homes adjacent to the site.

06:25:23 As you can see you do have a residential character which is

06:25:25 going to be familiar with most of the community-serving uses

06:25:29 as I have already explained to you in relationship to the

06:25:34 prior case that we had -- the church that you did have a

06:25:37 residential presence proximate to the particular use in

06:25:41 question.

06:25:41 You do have also a significant commercial component to the

06:25:44 west.

06:25:45 This is fiesta plaza, a strip center which does have

06:25:50 commercial uses and some fine restaurants in the area, too.

06:25:53 So we'll leave it at that.




06:25:57 We find it consistent the W the comprehensive plan.

06:25:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

06:26:08 This is not to construct a new daycare but to use an

06:26:13 existing residential structure as a daycare facility.

06:26:22 This site as Tony showed you is located just one zoning lot

06:26:25 east of North Armenia Avenue, surrounded by single-family

06:26:28 residential to the north, south and east.

06:26:30 Total number of students on the property would be controlled

06:26:32 by the state licensing.

06:26:39 I was just checking to see if I had that.

06:26:44 But basically what it does say on the site plan is the total

06:26:48 number of students will be controlled by what licensing

06:26:51 requires for the minimum area of students.

06:26:54 The plan proposes two employees and no business vehicle.

06:26:57 Therefore, a total of two parking spaces is required, a

06:27:00 total of three spaces are being provided.

06:27:02 The proposed building setbacks to the existing structure are

06:27:05 as follows.

06:27:07 40.5-foot north, 45 feet south, west 51 feet and east 54

06:27:13 feet.

06:27:14 Photos of the existing structure have been provided as

06:27:16 elevations.

06:27:18 There are a couple of comments on page 2 of the staff

06:27:21 report.

06:27:23 Transportation needs a note added that the gate on Woodlawn




06:27:27 Avenue will be kept for when the gate on Woodlawn Avenue

06:27:34 will be kept open and closed, and also a note that the

06:27:38 driveway shall be removed and curbs raised to City of Tampa

06:27:41 standard and specifications.

06:27:43 Note number 3 would need to be removed as they requested.

06:27:48 Secondly, there were some comments from parks and

06:27:50 recreation.

06:27:51 This, too, is a site with a lot of large trees.

06:27:55 They requested that changes be made for the grand tree

06:27:59 protection, and those changes as they requested were made,

06:28:02 so they just have a couple comments acknowledging that those

06:28:07 changes have been made, and also that they are going to

06:28:09 recommend the removal of the hazardous grand in the front at

06:28:15 the time of permitting so at the time they go in to change

06:28:17 occupancy on the property, that would be taken care of.

06:28:21 I can go ahead and show you some pictures.

06:28:28 I did also provide in the package to you two letters of

06:28:31 correspondence provided to Land Development Coordination.

06:28:40 This is the zoning atlas.

06:28:43 Armenia to the west.

06:28:44 Woodlawn to the south.

06:28:45 Ohio to the north.

06:28:46 As you will see immediately abutting this property is

06:28:49 commercial general.

06:28:51 All along Armenia, up until you get north of San Isabel.




06:28:56 It is a PD there.

06:28:58 The site of some sort of medical office.

06:29:00 There is one CN property, commercial neighborhood property,

06:29:03 that also interfaces with the subject that we are speaking

06:29:05 of tonight.

06:29:10 RM 24 located to the south.

06:29:14 An aerial of this property.

06:29:17 As you can see, probably hard to see.

06:29:25 The subject site.

06:29:29 This is to the west of the property at Armenia.

06:29:34 This to the east of the property.

06:29:36 This is at the corner of Armenia and Woodlawn, the southeast

06:29:39 corner.

06:29:40 And coming south on Woodlawn.

06:29:45 This would be the CN property.

06:29:49 And this would be the residential property that interfaces

06:29:54 to the south.

06:30:00 Special use criteria for daycare is located on page 4 of

06:30:09 your staff report, the first, in fact, pick-up and delivery

06:30:12 spaces available, and the standard Hillsborough been met,

06:30:15 and the second is that there is direct access to an arterial

06:30:18 or collector.

06:30:20 The only access on this property is on Woodlawn, and the

06:30:23 waiver has been requested for that, also.

06:30:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Feeley, could you put -- if you had it,




06:30:31 I think one of these was the picture of the subject property

06:30:35 back up so we could look at it?

06:30:37 >> This is something they will ask to be removed.

06:30:47 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's from Woodlawn?

06:30:53 >> Uh-huh.

06:30:54 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm trying to understand the median.

06:30:56 Is there a picture of the median with the big oak tree?

06:31:01 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I don't believe I have.

06:31:06 This is at the subject property looking south.

06:31:08 And this is the grass median, next to my vehicle.

06:31:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Do they have a driveway, the subject

06:31:21 property?

06:31:24 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.

06:31:25 Here is a picture of the median, Armenia.

06:31:28 >> And that's the driveway, the yellow?

06:31:32 >> No, that's the curve of the median.

06:31:36 >> And where is the house, on the other side of Amscot?

06:31:41 >> It's north.

06:31:42 North of Amscot.

06:31:43 But it's one lot in.

06:31:49 Here is from the south side, looking north.

06:31:54 This is the property next to the subject property.

06:31:58 >> Where is the median on that picture?

06:32:05 >> Here.

06:32:06 I'm on the north side of the median.




06:32:17 In their site plan you will see the access is going to be

06:32:39 off of Woodlawn with three spaces in the front.

06:32:46 And part of that is driven by the 20-inch, 30-inch and

06:32:52 39-inch oak trees that are located on the western portion of

06:32:56 the property.

06:33:07 There is an alley located to the west.

06:33:09 But there was no way you have a 40-inch oak, a 30-inch oak

06:33:15 and a 39-inch oak.

06:33:18 So they wanted a 20-foot protective radius.

06:33:22 Then you come down, a 65-inch here on the front, and there

06:33:26 is no way for us to maneuver in that area and access the

06:33:32 alley.

06:33:32 >>MARY MULHERN: So the parking spaces are on Woodlawn, but

06:33:37 they can pull into the alley to drop off.

06:33:45 They have to park at the daycare.

06:33:46 >> Right.

06:33:48 There's three spaces in the front, an ADA and two other

06:33:51 spaces.

06:33:51 >> And now Mel ANSI here.

06:34:05 Melanie and Mary worked very closely with the applicant to

06:34:09 try to come up with a way to get some parking there.

06:34:12 There is that vacant CG parcel, also that's located to the

06:34:18 west at Armenia, across the alley.

06:34:22 >> Good evening.

06:34:48 Thank you for the opportunity to present my plan.




06:34:53 It's a unique parcel.

06:34:54 >>Are would you put your name and address on the record?

06:34:57 >> Jamie Nieves, agent and part owner of the property.

06:35:05 My address is 4401 Riverview Avenue, Tampa, Florida, a block

06:35:10 and a half from this parcel.

06:35:11 >> Thank you.

06:35:20 >> JAIME NIEVES: My desire was to find a use being that

06:35:31 tenancy wasn't very successful.

06:35:33 It was a smaller home.

06:35:35 I found that what I needed to find was a use that was

06:35:39 desirable and needed by the community.

06:35:41 I looked at it, and I wanted something that had the least

06:35:44 impact on the parcel itself, having grandfathered trees, and

06:35:51 it has a median in the front, and as such I saw being that

06:35:54 the yard is substantial, and the medians provides an

06:35:58 excellent buffer for child safety, it would be something

06:36:05 that would have least impact on traffic, and address the

06:36:10 highest and best use without a zoning change.

06:36:13 Repeat, without zoning change.

06:36:15 And the answer that I found to answer all of these questions

06:36:19 was a neighborhood child care, which I found to be needed in

06:36:24 the area.

06:36:27 As to that need, I went to children and family department,

06:36:34 took my license, told them of my plans, the children and

06:36:45 families department were surprised of that there are no




06:36:51 substantial child care facilities, you know, just

06:36:53 family-type facilities, except for one on MLK which is

06:36:57 always booked.

06:36:59 So there was need in the area, and I worked hand in hand

06:37:03 with the children and family department.

06:37:06 They helped me design this.

06:37:07 They are the ones that put the amount of children, which

06:37:10 would be 22 children, and they are the ones that actually

06:37:14 inspired me and motivated me toward being that I'm also a

06:37:19 leader in the Spanish community, and pastor of the second

06:37:23 largest congregation in town as far as the Spanish

06:37:26 community.

06:37:29 I first required, of course, the advice and counseling of

06:37:32 licensing, and children and families, and I proceeded to

06:37:39 make the application for only a change of use.

06:37:44 Finally, I inquired this morning as to any public inquiry or

06:37:49 comments as to my project, and when I saw that there might

06:37:55 be a couple, I proceeded to basically just take a short walk

06:38:01 around the neighborhood for only about 30 minutes.

06:38:03 The results of that 30-minute walk around the neighborhood

06:38:06 was that I found actually, for lack of a better change,

06:38:13 every time I knocked on the door, every other person was

06:38:16 asking me when I was going to open, how much it was going to

06:38:19 be, they had children that needed.

06:38:22 I have a list here, in just 30 minutes, God's honest truth,




06:38:29 30 minutes I took, and all of these people signed, given

06:38:33 that they all have two or three sheets full.

06:38:36 So the neighborhood, and if you read, I believe I emailed it

06:38:42 to some of you, and they said, I believe according to what

06:38:45 they signed here, that this will add appeal to the property

06:38:49 values, that the median and the traffic for child safety,

06:38:55 and the granting of this change will have the effect of this

06:38:58 property, that enhance its curb appeal and neighborhood

06:39:05 appeal overall.

06:39:07 So that being said, I wanted to point out as to the property

06:39:14 itself, Amscot is here, R&S, the largest body shop in town

06:39:22 there, the people right across the street, and up and down

06:39:25 the street, they are they all signed on, every single

06:39:30 commercial owner, employer, and of course this will bring

06:39:33 employment to the community, also.

06:39:34 >> (off microphone).

06:39:55 >> I believe so, yes.

06:39:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez.

06:39:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I notice on here you are the agent but not

06:40:01 the owner, correct?

06:40:02 The land is owned by Mr --

06:40:06 >> Mr. GARAPAY and myself own the parcel to it but it's a

06:40:13 gentleman's agreement.

06:40:14 >> So he owns the parcel, the empty parcel that's facing --

06:40:18 >> Actually, I own that one and I'm the agent for this one,




06:40:21 and you will note on all the paperwork I'm signed as

06:40:24 sergeant.

06:40:24 >> I just want to make sure.

06:40:26 What I was curious about, I saw -- not petition but your

06:40:33 survey.

06:40:34 How many people along the block -- I saw a couple that are

06:40:38 along that same block of Woodlawn.

06:40:41 How many other people did you visit down there?

06:40:43 >> In my 30-minute walk every single person that was home

06:40:47 signed on.

06:40:48 >> So the reason why --

06:40:51 >> You will note that roughly half of these people are on

06:40:54 those two blocks.

06:40:56 It's only a two-block stretch from Armenia to Riverview.

06:41:01 And in my short walk, every single person on that street

06:41:06 signed on.

06:41:07 >> And how many children do you plan to have at the

06:41:12 facility?

06:41:13 >> After consulting with children and families, they set the

06:41:16 number at 20 to 22.

06:41:19 >> Okay.

06:41:21 20 to 22 with only two employees?

06:41:24 >> The number of employees that they would have -- the

06:41:30 employees that's going to be there, and that's typically for

06:41:32 that number of children, it's two.




06:41:35 Now, there's also -- one is a director, one is assistant,

06:41:44 and it's completely in compliance with children and families

06:41:46 and what they require.

06:41:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I thought it was a smaller ratio, but maybe

06:41:53 I'm incorrect about that and that's not what this hearing is

06:41:55 about anyway.

06:41:56 So you plan to have 22 maximum in the home.

06:42:00 >> That's what children and families -- they are the ones

06:42:03 that would license me and that's what I would have to have.

06:42:05 >> And the traffic pattern that you are looking at in order

06:42:08 to have people come and go, how would it be?

06:42:15 There is no access to the alley so it would all have to come

06:42:18 through Woodlawn, correct?

06:42:19 >> If I did, because it has a median, if you think it's a

06:42:24 child safety factor, the median -- I have seen traffic

06:42:27 sensors that don't have that median and they put one so you

06:42:31 have where it's safe for the children and they could be

06:42:35 dropped off there.

06:42:36 There isn't an alley there that's open to the public, if

06:42:41 that's what the alley is there for.

06:42:44 We haven't vacated the alley so the use of that alley is

06:42:47 open and everyone who wants -- that is there.

06:42:51 I'm not claim I'm using it or not using it.

06:42:54 I'm just pointing out it is a public alley

06:42:56 So, again, I talked to traffic in great detail and they are




06:43:05 very satisfied with this plan.

06:43:10 >> No questions right now.

06:43:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Any other questions by council for the

06:43:19 petitioner?

06:43:20 >> In closing I am going to be working 100 percent with

06:43:26 every suggestion that the city has.

06:43:28 What they have been pleased about, if I may say so myself,

06:43:32 is that I have wanted to make the least impact on any

06:43:35 changes whatsoever.

06:43:37 I want to maintain things.

06:43:43 Taking this tree down, that tree down.

06:43:44 The nature of the property is staying as is.

06:43:48 Every tree is -- as a matter of fact, they are the ones that

06:43:51 told me to take one tree down.

06:43:53 So in reality, I'm doing everything I can on my part to make

06:43:57 property that really has -- if you look at it, it I think

06:44:01 it's the highest and best use, and according to just a few

06:44:06 people I talked to this morning, very needed.

06:44:09 And children and family pointed out that it's needed, also.

06:44:15 >> Did you have an opportunity, since your note to us with

06:44:19 the list of people of that you talked to, you did see the

06:44:26 e-mails that we had received in opposition.

06:44:30 Did you have a chance to talk to -- there are only a few

06:44:34 people.

06:44:36 >> Right.




06:44:37 I came this morning to see if there was any opposition or

06:44:40 any comments, because I want to address it.

06:44:45 My whole goal from the beginning of this was to -- not make

06:44:50 any waves with the city.

06:44:51 We like to try to be find highest and best use and something

06:44:56 round peg, round hole.

06:44:58 And when I saw that there was a couple of comments, my goal

06:45:03 was to see, is that the opinion and sentiment of the

06:45:06 neighborhood?

06:45:07 >>MARY MULHERN: My question for you is if you were able to

06:45:09 be speak to the people that --

06:45:12 >> No, I just did that this morning.

06:45:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thank you.

06:45:15 And you will have an opportunity if we have anyone to hear

06:45:20 from the public.

06:45:21 Did you have a question, council?

06:45:24 Okay.

06:45:25 Thank you.

06:45:25 >> Thank you.

06:45:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone from the public who wishes

06:45:29 to speak on this petition?

06:45:40 And have you been sworn?

06:45:46 >> Yes.

06:45:46 >> You will have three minutes.

06:45:47 There's a timer there and it's going to beep when you still




06:45:51 have 30 seconds left to speak.

06:45:53 So you can keep speaking after that first beep.

06:45:56 Okay.

06:45:56 >> Can I start?

06:46:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, please.

06:46:15 >> Good evening, council, members, Madam Chair.

06:46:22 I have some things that might address your concerns for

06:46:26 median.

06:46:27 I'm Angela Cacciatore, West Woodlawn Avenue.

06:46:33 I'm one of the few families who does have younger children

06:46:36 in the neighborhood.

06:46:39 And when I first heard about this plan, I thought, that's

06:46:44 pretty curious.

06:46:45 And I went ahead and looked at the site plan.

06:46:50 I had medley gotten some questions.

06:46:53 Did it not look like something that had been well thought

06:46:55 out, mainly because if you look at page 2, at the bottom,

06:47:04 the driveway, in particular, to have been drop off and pick

06:47:13 up kids.

06:47:15 I can't speak for myself.

06:47:16 I ever never let my kids out of doors and go.

06:47:19 I have always talked to the teachers or the caregivers.

06:47:23 This particular driveway is curved, the opening access.

06:47:31 It appears extending that opening, I thought, okay, that's

06:47:39 nice.




06:47:42 However, the open and out still to the median.

06:47:46 If you look at the picture on page 3 of the top picture, you

06:47:50 see that that is only a one-car driveway.

06:47:53 And it shows the median there in the middle.

06:48:00 That particular portion driven on to get into the driveway.

06:48:06 However, if you are bringing children it doesn't sound like

06:48:12 a sound idea.

06:48:13 In order to pick up or drop off their child they would have

06:48:17 to basically drop off or go around seven different homes and

06:48:20 driveways.

06:48:23 To be go around the circle to access that driveway.

06:48:28 Some on Armenia.

06:48:30 If your walk had taken you at 7:30 on a school day would you

06:48:39 not only see the heavy amounts of traffic from Armenia to

06:48:42 avoid the traffic light and to hit the wells wood area, the

06:48:48 Tampa Catholic, people from McDonald use it as a shortcut.

06:48:55 The bottom picture, or the two X's on the bottom picture

06:49:00 show an open median.

06:49:02 The area view I pulled down should show you the traffic

06:49:05 pattern that they have to follow as well as the houses they

06:49:09 would have to drive.

06:49:12 The picture on page 5 shows you the heavily wooded area of

06:49:16 the median.

06:49:20 (Bell sounds)

06:49:26 Thank you.




06:49:29 She has part 2.

06:49:30 >> I thank you for this opportunity.

06:49:34 I'm Yvonne Gonzalez, 2312 West Woodlawn Avenue, 2310 West

06:49:41 Woodlawn Avenue.

06:49:43 Exhibit A shows that there are some special use but also

06:49:47 shows future use is R-10 which has some of us concerned.

06:49:52 Exhibit B says that the need promised for this change is the

06:49:57 need for daycare in Wellswood.

06:50:01 I have included the school board map area, that you can see

06:50:05 that the majority of children would fall into the public

06:50:09 school Tampa Bay elementary, and if you are looking at that

06:50:14 map, you see that we are not part of Woodlawn, we are 33607.

06:50:19 Woodlawn is -- excuse me, 33614.

06:50:23 I have included Mendon hall.

06:50:31 The public schools provide after-school care, the hope

06:50:34 program, $30 registration, $40 a week, for the students of

06:50:38 their school, for the parents to tan advantage of.

06:50:41 And this is K-5, pre-K-5 program.

06:50:48 I have also included four major child care centers in the

06:50:55 proximity of less than two miles, one is 2316 West Woodlawn

06:51:00 Avenue.

06:51:02 You can also see four major child care centers in proximity

06:51:07 in Wellswood to the Mendon hall area, and these are noted

06:51:14 and well established child care centers.

06:51:16 So in summary, I have to disagree with the petitioner.




06:51:20 He and Mr. dalagade made an investment, price versus

06:51:28 dropped, they want to recoup money.

06:51:31 That's his right.

06:51:33 We feel it's our right to retain our neighborhood as a

06:51:35 residential area.

06:51:36 Our residence starts at 2314 on one side of Woodlawn, on the

06:51:42 north side 2315.

06:51:44 If he walked the two blocks he said did he, the only

06:51:47 children that I am aware of are Mrs. Cacciatores on those

06:51:51 two blocks.

06:51:52 Now, assuming that he's thinking of clientele, mostly blue

06:51:59 collar workers, stay at home moms taking care of the younger

06:52:03 pre-K age group, so that children in the K-5 can take care

06:52:07 of the care there.

06:52:10 I have 25 second left.

06:52:12 The big oak trees in front of 214 that's jutting out into

06:52:16 the street and there's a utility pole right smack down the

06:52:19 street, so turning is going to be difficult, causing

06:52:24 backups, causing people to get impatient, jump onto the

06:52:29 median, take the kid out because nobody is going drop the

06:52:34 kid out of the car.

06:52:35 So for my point I'm opposed.

06:52:38 Thank you.

06:52:38 (Bell sounds)

06:52:42 >> Hi.




06:52:47 My name is Nancy Navarro, 2309 west Woodlawn.

06:52:55 For the past 21 years.

06:52:57 My home is located two lots down from this so-called

06:53:03 daycare.

06:53:05 The same side of the street, northwest.

06:53:08 I object to the rezoning of this property for the following

06:53:12 reasons.

06:53:13 The need for daycare at this site, I heard what Mr. N Pi

06:53:19 EVES has to say.

06:53:21 I object to his statement.

06:53:23 We are mostly of in that block elderly, and in most of the

06:53:28 surrounding blocks, the only young children in the Riverview

06:53:33 apartments, and those are school-age children.

06:53:38 There F there are daycare children, there's very few, and we

06:53:40 have plenty of daycare in the area

06:53:48 The other objection is the additional traffic.

06:53:52 This is the one lane, with adjacent to the proposed site.

06:53:59 More traffic would make it unsafe for me and other elderly

06:54:05 people that live in that block.

06:54:06 By the way, I saw Mr. Nieves this morning on my sidewalk.

06:54:11 He never stopped at any of the houses near this proposed

06:54:15 site.

06:54:16 So I don't know, he must have gone to the Riverside

06:54:22 apartments somewhere.

06:54:23 He's not a homeowner.




06:54:24 He lives there.

06:54:27 These are apartment houses.

06:54:28 And I have to question some of his statements.

06:54:33 I'm quite worried about the pollution that the additional

06:54:35 traffic would bring to the area.

06:54:37 We already have enough with the Armenia.

06:54:40 The corner lot, I have been fighting to get a vendor out of

06:54:48 there.

06:54:49 We have seen a lot of extra cars into that particular

06:54:52 adjacent to the proposed site.

06:54:56 We also have the Amscot which brings a lot of traffic, also.

06:55:00 I mean, we have a lot of pollution as it is.

06:55:04 I don't know where these babies are going to be breathing.

06:55:08 I really question Mr. Nieves' statement.

06:55:14 Thank you.

06:55:14 >> Good afternoon.

06:55:25 My name is Luis Noriega, and I reside at 2305 West Woodlawn

06:55:30 Avenue.

06:55:32 And I would like to question Mr. Nieves on three things.

06:55:39 Number one, I have never seen him or his list.

06:55:41 Where did he get all these names from?

06:55:44 Number two.

06:55:47 Woodlawn extends from Armenia to Howard.

06:55:52 It's where the divided section is at.

06:55:54 It does not go to Riverview.




06:55:57 That's another mistake he's made.

06:56:01 The traffic on Woodlawn is quite heavy because River Garden

06:56:07 Apartments, south and on Tampa Bay Boulevard.

06:56:13 You cannot make a left turn on Armenia to Tampa Bay

06:56:16 Boulevard.

06:56:17 So they come Woodlawn.

06:56:21 Tampa Catholic school lets out.

06:56:23 They come the other way on Woodlawn, because they don't want

06:56:26 to go to the section of Tampa Bay Boulevard and the river

06:56:32 garden apartments.

06:56:34 The traffic on Armenia Avenue is fantastic.

06:56:38 If you are there in the morning, and you try to get out of

06:56:41 our Woodlawn, you all know what I'm talking about. It's

06:56:45 bumper to bumper.

06:56:46 You have a traffic light on Martin Luther King and one on

06:56:49 Tampa Bay Boulevard.

06:56:51 When one of them starts, about that one is finished, this

06:56:55 one starts.

06:56:56 So you have to wait two traffics to make a left turn.

06:56:59 You can make a right turn if this light hear is stopped.

06:57:05 Other than that, in the evenings, about 5:00, you will have

06:57:11 nothing but traffic going north on Armenia Avenue and it

06:57:15 will be bumper to bumper from Hillsborough Avenue to Martin

06:57:18 Luther King Boulevard.

06:57:20 And if you ever travel at that time you will know what I am




06:57:23 talking about.

06:57:24 I travel that time quite often.

06:57:27 I have to take my grandson to baseball practice.

06:57:31 I'll tell you, I lose a lot of time on that road just

06:57:34 getting there.

06:57:36 To me, that's detrimental to any child in that area.

06:57:39 And I think it is not conducive to have a child care center

06:57:44 at that area.

06:57:48 Please consider us very seriously because it's very

06:57:51 important.

06:57:52 This situation has come up once before, to change the zoning

06:57:58 in this area, and it was City Councilman Michael Sierra that

06:58:02 brought it up, next to my house, which Mr. Nieves' property.

06:58:10 It was turned down at the time because I requested it.

06:58:12 I want that thing to be single-family dwelling only.

06:58:16 That's why I bought the property.

06:58:18 And that's where I want to die.

06:58:21 I have lived there since 1960.

06:58:23 I'm 83 years old.

06:58:26 I will be 84 next month.

06:58:29 There are all retired people in that neighborhood.

06:58:36 She's retired from school.

06:58:38 She's retired.

06:58:38 We are all retired.

06:58:39 Please consider this very seriously, because it will hurt my




06:58:47 well-being and may cost me to lose my home.

06:58:51 Thank you.

06:58:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Does anyone else wish to be speak on this?

06:59:00 Petitioner?

06:59:01 Rebuttal?

06:59:02 >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak again.

06:59:08 First of all, I want to thank the community for being so

06:59:11 concerned about a property in the neighborhood.

06:59:15 I am a realtor by trade.

06:59:24 On a volunteer basis.

06:59:25 I appreciate the concern of the neighborhood and want to do

06:59:27 as much as possible to make sure that the integrity of the

06:59:29 neighborhood that I live in, that I brought up my children

06:59:33 in, that I built two houses right there on the river on,

06:59:38 and, yes, Woodlawn extends from Armenia street and ends on

06:59:44 the river.

06:59:46 So I, too, have children in the area.

06:59:52 I want to point out that, yes, I was out thereby this

06:59:55 morning.

06:59:56 It was not my evil twin or an impression of myself.

07:00:00 It was myself that was walking out therein this morning.

07:00:02 I have signatures of the people immediately across the

07:00:06 street, immediately kitty corner from Amscot, medley across

07:00:13 Armenia, the auto body, immediately kitty corner on the

07:00:16 northeast corner, the insurance company, which, by the way,




07:00:21 is the woman of the year and owner of that building, and

07:00:25 very well-known in the area

07:00:30 As to the amount of school-age children, I don't know that

07:00:34 these families have made an audit of the area and have

07:00:37 documentation as to the amount of children.

07:00:39 I can only go by experience.

07:00:42 I brought up mine there.

07:00:44 I know that every other house I knocked on had children that

07:00:47 ran up to the door.

07:00:48 School-age children only.

07:00:51 That's kind of -- well, I will let you figure out that

07:00:55 statement.

07:00:55 Where there are school Aaron children, there are older

07:00:58 children, younger children, adults and elderly.

07:01:01 It's a very family-oriented neighborhood.

07:01:04 Now, there's 75 plus or minus apartments that are integral

07:01:09 to this community.

07:01:12 Us homeowners do not own that neighborhood.

07:01:16 There's a community thereby that lives, breathes and brings

07:01:19 up their families here.

07:01:20 They have every right to that neighborhood as much as I.

07:01:23 I am the third largest taxpayer in central Tampa as far as

07:01:27 my own home.

07:01:28 And I do not believe myself to have any more right than the

07:01:33 75 apartment dwellers that are there with their family and




07:01:37 children, whom like I said, gave warm fuzzies when I went

07:01:43 there and asked me when I would be opening up.

07:01:46 The other family, I had the same question as to, you know,

07:01:52 dropping off situation, and that's why I worked so

07:01:55 intensively with the traffic department on several visits

07:01:58 here, to make sure I had that exactly right.

07:02:01 And they and I came to an agreement where I basically

07:02:06 followed their lead and did exactly what they believe was

07:02:10 appropriate for the neighborhood.

07:02:13 Now, I appreciate the traffic concern.

07:02:17 And that's, I guess, the main point that was brought up.

07:02:20 I want to point this out.

07:02:21 The traffic thankfully would be the same exact family that

07:02:26 live in that neighborhood and go up and down that street to

07:02:31 date.

07:02:31 Instead of having to go another three or four blocks out,

07:02:35 they will be there.

07:02:40 When the neighbor mentioned half a mile, quarter mile,

07:02:44 that's substantial for someone that lives in the

07:02:46 neighborhood.

07:02:46 In the neighborhood they want to have their children within

07:02:49 a few blocks of themselves.

07:02:51 That's a tenth of a mile, two tenths of a mile.

07:02:54 When it gets beyond half a mile, then it's no longer as

07:02:58 comfortable.




07:02:59 So, again, I think the ultimate authority there is children

07:03:04 and family, and I have in my brief case there a full package

07:03:08 and documentation from them that they are working with me to

07:03:11 open this up here because of the need in Wellswood.

07:03:14 So I thank you.

07:03:17 Again, I thank the council, I thank the concerned neighbors.

07:03:21 All I can say is I will make sure that two or three years

07:03:24 from now they will be happy with the situation.

07:03:26 >> I have one question for you.

07:03:35 Then I want to ask Ms. Feeley a question after that.

07:03:38 I just want to make sure I'm hearing this correctly.

07:03:40 The drop-off will be on the sidewalk in front of the home,

07:03:43 correct?

07:03:43 In front of the property, correct?

07:03:45 >> The drop-off would be according to traffic.

07:03:48 They said that they could pull into the driveway and they

07:03:52 would not have to back out.

07:03:53 They could pull in and pull out front ways, all right?

07:03:58 >> Excuse me for a second.

07:04:01 It seemed like based on what -- and it was a little bit

07:04:04 confusing with the map, was you would probably pull in and

07:04:08 go around the building itself, correct?

07:04:11 >> No.

07:04:11 >> Come around there?

07:04:14 >> It would --




07:04:17 >> There isn't a driveway or anything.

07:04:20 >> There is --

07:04:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: But the question is, are we dropping off on

07:04:25 the sidewalk right outside of the fence there, primarily?

07:04:30 Or how --

07:04:33 >> They would be pulling in, dropping off their child, and

07:04:36 pulling out frontwards.

07:04:39 They would be expanded and that's the part that wasn't

07:04:42 understood by the neighborhood.

07:04:43 The apron is not going to be a single apron.

07:04:45 It is expanded to ingress and egress.

07:04:48 Apart from that, I will point out that there is a public

07:04:51 alley open to the public, and I or nobody can stop someone

07:04:56 from pulling into an alley.

07:04:58 It is perfectly legal.

07:04:59 And available.

07:05:00 >> I guess a follow-up question for me, are you planning on

07:05:04 directing people to use the alley?

07:05:06 >> No.

07:05:07 I'm just saying that it is there.

07:05:09 In other words, even if that were a concern, there's a

07:05:13 secondary availability.

07:05:16 So, in other words, what I am saying, if I was so limited

07:05:21 by, in this case, not only do we have something that has

07:05:26 been ostensibly looked at by traffic department and has been




07:05:31 deemed acceptable, not only do we have that, but we are also

07:05:34 basically a corner lot, if you include the driveway.

07:05:37 And it is available legally.

07:05:39 >> Okay, thank you.

07:05:43 >> And by the way, it has a full sidewalk.

07:05:45 So they would not be on a grass curb or anything.

07:05:48 If they would go in the alley, there's a full sidewalk that

07:05:51 they can walk to the property.

07:05:52 >> All right.

07:05:53 Thank you.

07:05:58 Ms. Feeley?

07:06:00 I'm sorry, I didn't see you.

07:06:03 >> Melanie Calloway, Transportation.

07:06:06 I first want to be clear that on the plan, we were very --

07:06:14 our hands were tied in transportation.

07:06:15 There are five grand trees on this lot that we had to work

07:06:20 around.

07:06:21 And they all have 20-foot radius, protected radius, and it's

07:06:24 very difficult.

07:06:25 I worked with our Parks Department because it's under

07:06:30 jurisdiction will Parks Department and we made this small

07:06:33 parking lot with three spaces.

07:06:37 That would allow them, people -- usually we require a

07:06:42 drop-off, pick-up.

07:06:44 But in this scenario there was nothing we could do to not




07:06:47 provide one on his site in a traditional drop-off pickup.

07:06:51 We had in other rare instances provided a parking lot to

07:06:56 have adequate parking to pull into the parking space, take

07:07:00 your child out, go back, and the next person come.

07:07:03 It was very difficult for us to do this, because there was

07:07:06 just no room to place all the grand trees and protected

07:07:11 trees.

07:07:12 Please, the trees are so nice.

07:07:13 So we did the best that we could.

07:07:15 >> I understand.

07:07:16 And I just wanted to make sure I was reading this clearly,

07:07:19 because it did seem like it was such a small spot in order

07:07:22 to be able to drop off and take up, and, you know, I believe

07:07:28 that's the nexus of what this case is about, which is what

07:07:31 the safety issues are, and traffic issues.

07:07:33 So I appreciate you clarifying that for me.

07:07:36 I appreciate the patience of council.

07:07:38 >>HARRY COHEN: I have a follow-up to this.

07:07:44 Just so I understand exactly what we are looking at.

07:07:48 There are going to be two employees and 20 to 22 children.

07:07:54 There's two parking spaces and a handicapped space.

07:07:57 >> That's correct.

07:07:59 >>HARRY COHEN: And there's also a driveway, that it looks

07:08:02 to me, it's questionable whether or not someone could

07:08:05 actually turn around in.




07:08:07 >> It meets our standards, yes.

07:08:10 It's a two-way driveway.

07:08:12 >> It's 9:00 in the morning and people are dropping off

07:08:15 their kids.

07:08:16 There are ten cars that are arriving at the same time.

07:08:21 What I'm looking at here, the cars, they are all going to be

07:08:25 lined up into the middle of the street, because there's no

07:08:27 place for them to go, unless they just drop their kids off

07:08:31 right onto the sidewalk.

07:08:32 >> According to code, they are required two parking spaces.

07:08:37 They are providing three.

07:08:39 The ADA counts as a third.

07:08:42 Like I told you, we had to work with the Parks Department.

07:08:48 On your plan it shows you the 20-foot radius for this

07:08:51 street, the 15-foot radius for this.

07:08:56 On this side here --

07:08:59 >>MIKE COHEN: I understand.

07:09:00 You were working within very tight constraints here.

07:09:02 I'm just wondering about what's going to actually happen

07:09:05 when people are dropped off, on this plan.

07:09:11 It just seems to me awfully tight.

07:09:15 And that's being very charitable.

07:09:17 >> It is not our conventional plan for any type of daycare,

07:09:28 an existing house on existing property with existing trees,

07:09:31 and we did the best of that we could on an existing site.




07:09:34 The site -- if the site didn't have trees we would have all

07:09:38 the room in the world to make it fit the way it was supposed

07:09:40 to fit.

07:09:40 But we had many constraints on this property.

07:09:43 We did the best we could to work with parks.

07:09:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Calloway, you might want to stay

07:09:54 there.

07:10:00 I see the large oak trees, especially the 65-inch oak.

07:10:03 That's tremendous.

07:10:04 However, the palm, 18-inch palm is not a protected tree.

07:10:10 >> That's correct.

07:10:12 >> That could be removed.

07:10:13 >> Yes, you are correct, it could be removed.

07:10:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Perhaps the solution to the ingress and

07:10:19 egress and what council is having a problem with -- and just

07:10:24 before I go there, I would like to explain to the

07:10:28 neighborhood is that the viability of the business, whether

07:10:33 or not there's enough children for this daycare to make

07:10:40 sense in the neighborhood, whether there's other daycares in

07:10:42 the area, cannot be considered by this council as a reason

07:10:45 to deny the application, because whether or not the business

07:10:48 is viable isn't up to us to decide.

07:10:51 We only have to look at the provisions of our code.

07:10:54 And the provisions of our code that all of us seem to be

07:10:57 looking at are the transportation, the parks, and the




07:11:01 natural resources portions.

07:11:03 Code.

07:11:04 So if we were to exactly --

07:11:13 >> Add the protective radius of that tree, basically.

07:11:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thank you.

07:11:18 See where that letter C is in that first parking space,

07:11:21 right there?

07:11:22 Okay.

07:11:22 So if someone were to pull in the driveway, that space

07:11:28 doesn't exist.

07:11:29 Make that a through-way out to the total number of that

07:11:32 second apron, they could come out there.

07:11:34 So, in essence, you would have a place to pull in, you would

07:11:37 have stacking for at least three or four cars, and then a

07:11:42 place to pull out on that second apron.

07:11:44 So you wouldn't have the stacking on the road.

07:11:47 You would have the stacking of the vehicles on the property

07:11:51 so that people could let their children out.

07:11:54 As one of the residents pointed out, maybe interact with the

07:11:58 teacher, see how everything is, and then move on.

07:12:02 Just so you know.

07:12:03 That will give two stacking spaces for two cars, and he

07:12:07 would also have to make improvements to the alley.

07:12:11 That can be expensive but not prohibitive.

07:12:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: We have asked people to do other things,




07:12:19 and if it is a good compromise between peace with his

07:12:23 neighbors and the safety of the children and the parents

07:12:26 dropping off their children, then, you know, it may be worth

07:12:30 the additional expense.

07:12:33 That's a suggestion that I could make that would maybe be a

07:12:36 compromise, that is a workable solution to the issue that we

07:12:40 are looking at.

07:12:40 >> The only thing, I had to get with the Parks Department,

07:12:45 because I have to make sure that they are okay with that.

07:12:49 It's not always just the protective radius like low-lying

07:12:53 limbs and a lot of things, but they have to look at the

07:12:57 trees.

07:12:57 So as long as they are okay with it, and we can look at

07:13:00 trying to design something.

07:13:04 Again, I hate to keep bringing up the economic

07:13:08 competitiveness committee that the mayor has convened.

07:13:12 We are looking to increase employment, to have areas within

07:13:17 the city that are walkable, if there are a lot of children

07:13:21 within the neighborhood whose parents are in the adjoining,

07:13:25 you know, or in the area, working at the Amscot or working

07:13:29 at a business along Armenia, they have already parked their

07:13:32 car, they can walk their children to this daycare.

07:13:36 Is that considering the apartment complexes that maybe they

07:13:41 might be walking their children to the daycare rather than

07:13:43 driving?




07:13:44 So I would like to see maybe a compromise so that the

07:13:47 neighborhood is happy, and we can have a business that serve

07:13:52 it is community.

07:13:52 >>MARY MULHERN: I think what you are talking about,

07:13:56 probably going to hear from legal or land development,

07:14:00 asking for any kind of changes in the site plan.

07:14:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just a suggestion.

07:14:06 >>MARY MULHERN: No, I'm not saying it's a bad suggestion.

07:14:09 I'm saying that it would probably require continuance and

07:14:14 going back to first reading.

07:14:15 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

07:14:17 Given the nature of the conversation that we are having and

07:14:19 the process that we are in and some of the issues raising,

07:14:25 it's my recommendation to continue this, allow this

07:14:27 applicant to work with transportation and parks, and if the

07:14:31 applicant would then also per the suggestion of council, I'm

07:14:35 sure, have additional dialogue with these neighbors to be

07:14:37 see if thereby isn't some alternative to reach as it relates

07:14:41 to the access issue, so that we are not redrawing these in

07:14:44 the middle of the hearing, and ensuring that we are meeting

07:14:47 all code compliance.

07:14:48 I do want to remind council, this is not a planned

07:14:51 development rezoning.

07:14:52 This is actually a special use application, and there are

07:14:55 limitations on the types of things we can do have through




07:14:58 this process.

07:14:59 I just want to make sure that we are doing it in a way that

07:15:02 is supportable under the code.

07:15:04 Thank you.

07:15:04 >> We'll take those suggestions and get back with parks.

07:15:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we need to hear from the

07:15:12 petitioner, for one, if he's amenable or wants to ask for a

07:15:18 continuance.

07:15:19 And I would also like to point out to council that we

07:15:21 also -- it's not just about the recommendations of staff.

07:15:28 We have to make some decisions about the compatibility and

07:15:33 whether this use does meet our code and our comprehensive

07:15:39 plan, and that's up to us to make.

07:15:42 So just keep that in mind.

07:15:46 >> Okay.

07:15:50 Again this is the reason why I went to change of use rather

07:15:53 than zoning change and trying to do something commercial

07:15:55 there which I could have annexed the corner and did

07:15:57 something more intensive.

07:16:00 But being that I want to work with the neighborhood and I

07:16:02 live in the neighborhood, a block and a half away, then I

07:16:06 went with the lightest possible use, and something that's

07:16:10 desirable.

07:16:13 As to the changes, every single thing mentioned was drawn

07:16:18 up, agreed, and every possibility, the eight departments




07:16:24 around, and when one had an okay, the other had -- and this

07:16:29 is not a fluke of just a quick decision.

07:16:34 This is something that we took a lot of time.

07:16:36 And I want to point something out.

07:16:38 This has been vacant already for some time.

07:16:40 I know you don't consider economics but we are living in the

07:16:43 real world.

07:16:43 Economically, I can't just keep putting off and putting off.

07:16:46 I thought this was going to go up last month.

07:16:48 It came up last month.

07:16:50 Now we are looking for a continuance.

07:16:51 I see that I have, as a citizen, and like I said, taxpayer

07:16:56 in the area, have worked intensively hand in hand.

07:17:00 I couldn't do anything more to comply with the city.

07:17:02 I can't do anything more to work with the neighborhood.

07:17:05 I mean, what else can a citizen do?

07:17:09 And every department has approved it.

07:17:17 They have looked not for ten minutes but hours and hours

07:17:21 upon every matter that you are considering and have come up

07:17:23 with this plan.

07:17:27 So the dropping off factor, as far as law is concerned, if

07:17:31 we stick to the law, it's not even an issue because they

07:17:35 allow drop-off.

07:17:38 So we look at safety factors.

07:17:41 Well, isn't it wonderful that we just happen to have a




07:17:43 median so that there is a complete safety factor.

07:17:49 If it's holding up traffic, halleluiah that they are

07:17:53 stopping traffic and there is no other traffic for that

07:17:55 child to be concerned with safety.

07:17:57 So everything lends to it.

07:18:00 All of this work was reviewed and re-reviewed, and we came

07:18:04 to this conclusion that it's not part of the law.

07:18:07 It's not part of code to have the type of drop-off that's

07:18:10 being discussed now.

07:18:12 However, of course, we have children, I have children, we

07:18:14 want to talk about that.

07:18:15 We have talked about it and talked and talked.

07:18:19 And I can talk to the neighborhood.

07:18:24 And of course there's -- I think that I have complied as

07:18:32 much as I can.

07:18:33 >>MARY MULHERN: So Mr. Nieves, it sounds like would you

07:18:36 rather have us vote than have a continuance?

07:18:39 Is that what you are saying?

07:18:43 Do you want to continue it?

07:18:49 >> I mean, my heart says I live in the area and I would like

07:18:54 to be see this thing done.

07:18:56 I have talked to some neighbors.

07:18:57 I see it would be something great.

07:18:59 And I am now forced to make a decision that is, you know --

07:19:07 I didn't think it would be that complicated when I had so




07:19:10 much positivity from the different departments and from

07:19:17 children and families.

07:19:24 I mean, are there questions from the board that could be

07:19:30 posed to me that would affect -- that would give me -- that

07:19:35 I could clarify that would deflect the nay votes?

07:19:40 What would be comfortable in your mind?

07:19:42 >>MARY MULHERN: I think if you were willing to talk to

07:19:45 these neighbors who came here and work out some solutions --

07:19:49 >>JULIA COLE: If I could also make the record clear on what

07:19:52 I heard City Council raising, and the issues that are

07:19:55 remaining.

07:19:56 There were some issues that were raised relating to the

07:19:58 access to the site, as well as the drop-off area.

07:20:01 Way heard City Council asking are staff to discuss with some

07:20:07 options and some opportunities as it relates to the access

07:20:10 and the drop-off area, and that would be the mechanism and

07:20:15 the reason under which you would be -- this would be

07:20:20 continued, if the applicant is not comfortable or interested

07:20:23 in having -- appropriate for us to go ahead and vote.

07:20:28 And I just want to make that record clear.

07:20:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

07:20:34 Let's hear from the applicant, and then --

07:20:40 >> NIEVES: Well, I'm very, very, extremely displeased, but

07:20:49 I see that I have no other choice but to ask for a

07:20:52 continuance.




07:20:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione?

07:20:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And I wanted to point out something of

07:21:01 that this special use application is dependent on us

07:21:05 granting a waiver to access from a local street.

07:21:11 So for us, we could vote based on denying that waiver, and

07:21:18 then the whole thing would be a moot point.

07:21:22 So, you know, we do have that opportunity available to us.

07:21:29 So I understand your frustration.

07:21:31 I have stood where you stand.

07:21:35 I have brought, you know, as a private citizen, applications

07:21:38 before a different council, and had those frustrations.

07:21:44 There are issues with the way that our reviews take place,

07:21:49 and with the various department reviews.

07:21:52 So I feel for you.

07:21:56 But we have to look at how the code is written today and how

07:22:01 the code is written today, unfortunately, the departments

07:22:07 might have looked at it and given you encouragement.

07:22:10 But the fact is that you are asking for a waiver to a local

07:22:15 street.

07:22:16 >> The continuance will be to what date?

07:22:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, if it's possible -- and I

07:22:30 understand the difficulty he's talking about.

07:22:32 Is it possible that this continuance be expedited and within

07:22:36 30 days?

07:22:41 >>HARRY COHEN: September 8th is our next land use




07:22:43 meeting so it's less than a month.

07:22:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know.

07:22:47 Can we do that?

07:22:50 >> The normal, is there any way that council can see --

07:22:57 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

07:22:58 September 8th is our next night meeting.

07:23:02 That's only about two weeks away from where we are.

07:23:05 So we can try to make it that night.

07:23:10 It all depends how quickly we are able to work things out,

07:23:13 or try to work things out.

07:23:14 The next one would be October 13th after that.

07:23:21 September 8th would be your best shot.

07:23:23 >> And there's no limitation in terms of noticing the

07:23:26 neighborhood, anything like that?

07:23:28 >> There's in a required public notice, no.

07:23:30 Because you will make a motion at this hearing, whatever

07:23:33 that is, and it will go on the record.

07:23:34 >> Very well.

07:23:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I inquire?

07:23:39 Ms. Feeley, with what's being discussed, would it be a

07:23:43 burden upon the applicant to get a site plan in if the site

07:23:46 plan has to be changed?

07:23:47 >> Yes.

07:23:48 >> So if you do have September 8th, he's under the time

07:23:51 constraint -- how much in advance does to have provide the




07:23:55 site plan to you?

07:23:56 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I mean, it's going to be a substantial

07:23:59 deviation, so I would say at least two weeks prior to the

07:24:01 hearing.

07:24:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So conceivably with three weeks away he

07:24:05 would only have one week to prepare a site plan?

07:24:08 >>MARY MULHERN: I would suggest that you go for October,

07:24:10 because you will have more likelihood to be able to have

07:24:13 staff be able to help you with this, and for you to be able

07:24:17 to come up with some solutions that might allay the

07:24:22 questions of the neighborhood.

07:24:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Are we clear that the applicant is asking

07:24:34 for a continuance?

07:24:36 I was asking for a quick continuance and it quickly turned

07:24:39 out to be an extended continuance.

07:24:42 I mean, what is your answer, sir?

07:24:45 >> I would like to go to the September one.

07:24:48 I think that I will be 24-7 on this to make sure that it's

07:24:53 ready for that meeting.

07:24:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

07:25:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would like to move to continue it to

07:25:02 September 8th.

07:25:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there a second?

07:25:07 >> Second.

07:25:08 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?




07:25:09 Anyone opposed?

07:25:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And that's 6 p.m.?

07:25:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, sir.

07:25:15 September 8, 6:00 p.m.

07:25:19 Thank you.

07:25:30 We are going to take a short five-minute recess.

07:25:33 Be back at 7:30.

07:25:40

07:30:49

07:30:49 >>MARY MULHERN: We are back in session.

07:36:36 Item number 6.

07:36:39 Roll call.

07:36:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

07:36:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

07:36:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

07:36:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

07:36:49 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

07:36:55 Item number 6 is Z- 1-18 located at 9310 North Florida

07:36:59 Avenue, and the request this evening is for PD planned

07:37:03 development restaurant, drive-in window, to CI, commercial

07:37:06 intensive.

07:37:06 This is a Euclidean request before you this evening.

07:37:09 This site was previously rezoned in 2002 from commercial

07:37:17 intensive to PD for a restaurant with drive-in window, and

07:37:21 the site is unoccupied now and they are looking just to put




07:37:26 this back to CI, commercial intensive use.

07:37:39 >>TONY GARCIA: I have been sworn in.

07:37:43 The subject site is located within the university community

07:37:45 planning district.

07:37:51 The future land use categories for the area consists of

07:37:54 community commercial 35, which allows the proposed

07:37:57 commercial intensive zoning district, as you can see in the

07:38:01 red color on either side.

07:38:03 And this is residential 10, which you can tell what that is,

07:38:08 a residential component there.

07:38:09 This is community mixed use 75 here.

07:38:11 This is the northwest of the intersection of Busch Boulevard

07:38:16 and North Florida Avenue.

07:38:20 I would like to show you an area that gives you a little

07:38:23 greater context.

07:38:24 This is the site of the old Floriland mall, and down in the

07:38:28 southeast corner is there's a Home Depot down over here, and

07:38:34 there is a WalMart, neighborhood WalMart over here, and this

07:38:39 is a CVS, and of course a residential component over here,

07:38:43 and of course the interstate is just about a quarter mile

07:38:45 due east of this particular site.

07:38:49 Florida Avenue has historically been known as a major

07:38:52 north-south arterial within the City of Tampa, and will has

07:38:57 been home to a lot of commercial uses, of various

07:39:01 intensities.




07:39:01 This was, as Ms. Feeley correctly stated to you, was rezoned

07:39:05 for a PD use with a restaurant back in 2002.

07:39:11 I remember when we did that.

07:39:12 And now they are having to go back to a CI district, because

07:39:16 of the times they are trying to provide as many

07:39:17 opportunities for redevelopment of the site.

07:39:20 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request

07:39:23 consistent with the comprehensive plan.

07:39:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

07:39:35 I have been sworn.

07:39:37 This site is .98 of an acre, and as we both mentioned, it

07:39:43 was previously rezoned.

07:39:45 Let me show you some pictures from the zoning atlas.

07:39:48 The CI district requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square

07:39:52 feet, which this property does have, and will require

07:39:57 10-foot fence setback, and front corner and zero on all the

07:40:02 remaining sides.

07:40:03 It would be allowed in any of the uses.

07:40:06 What I did in your staff report was I provided you with the

07:40:09 use table, and I highlighted the CI category to show you

07:40:12 what would the permitted uses if it returned to its former

07:40:16 zoning which was CI.

07:40:27 CI along Floriland, CI north.

07:40:31 Of this property, CI immediately to the south of this

07:40:34 property, and a PD at the southwest corner, and CI and CG in




07:40:41 the area as well.

07:40:45 So in the aerial, and this 2002 zoning was B.A., before

07:40:59 Abbye.

07:41:01 And it was a drive-through window. It looked to me like it

07:41:04 used to be a Wendys.

07:41:06 Tony, can you confirm that?

07:41:08 It used to be a Wendy's?

07:41:10 Yes?

07:41:11 So there is a restaurant immediately to the north.

07:41:15 There is auto parts immediately to the south.

07:41:19 That's the cut-off, then travel south, this is the northern

07:41:25 facade of CVS, and the eastern facade of CVS, and this is

07:41:31 the rear of the subject property where the six-foot masonry

07:41:35 wall already existed, and immediately on the other side of

07:41:42 North Tampa Street.

07:41:44 This is a look back from north Tampa and HAMILER looking

07:41:56 back toward North Florida Avenue.

07:41:58 No waivers can be requested or approved under this

07:42:00 application, and staff found it consistent.

07:42:02 Thank you.

07:42:02 >> Good evening. My name is Hossein Yezden.

07:42:16 I am here on behalf of Bay View.

07:42:29 Bay View LLC and also the buyer of this property.

07:42:36 The reason I am rezoning this is because car lot and to do

07:42:42 so you have to have zoning CI.




07:42:46 And I'm hoping to get it.

07:42:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Does anyone from the public wish to speak

07:42:59 on this?

07:43:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Move to close the public hearing.

07:43:06 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

07:43:08 What's the pleasure of council?

07:43:18 Oh, sorry.

07:43:19 >> Move to open the public hearing.

07:43:21 >> Second.

07:43:22 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

07:43:24 Mrs. Montelione?

07:43:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE: This is -- I understand the request to

07:43:35 expand the uses of the property because it is very limited

07:43:38 right now, from the PD that was previously approved for the

07:43:44 restaurant.

07:43:47 Under commercial intensive, there are a lot of things

07:43:50 allowed.

07:43:52 And one of my concerns that I wasn't aware of until the

07:43:56 petitioner spoke was that the use is now going to be under

07:44:02 this, which is allowable under CI, for a car lot.

07:44:04 This is my district.

07:44:06 And this particular part of Florida Avenue, if you drive

07:44:12 down it, it's not a very -- how shall I say? -- attractive

07:44:20 stretch of roadway.

07:44:22 And I know that there is no overlay district, there is no




07:44:26 community plan, there is not anything that would guide some

07:44:30 of the things we discussed here earlier about being

07:44:33 pedestrian-friendly and having nice sidewalks and those kind

07:44:36 of things.

07:44:37 There are a lot of car businesses along Busch Boulevard that

07:44:43 concern me from a standpoint of code-related issues that we

07:44:52 have.

07:44:54 And I'm just concerned about what -- for the neighborhoods

07:45:01 that exist in this area, which is quite nice, the hills

07:45:05 neighborhood sits just to the west of here.

07:45:11 Wan fail-safes would there be for this car lot not to turn

07:45:18 into what you see along Busch Boulevard already?

07:45:27 It's anesthetics question, Ms. Feeley.

07:45:30 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

07:45:32 Change of use on this property to legally establish a car

07:45:35 lot would require -- is an intensification of use and would

07:45:40 require that certain things be met as far as the buffers

07:45:45 required adjacent to the right-of-way.

07:45:49 You know, I really can't elaborate.

07:45:54 When you go to Euclidean zoning district, you are asking for

07:45:57 all of those potential uses that would be permissible under

07:46:01 a commercial intensive zoning district.

07:46:03 Everything that this property interfaces with is CI.

07:46:09 So it's appropriate in terms that everything around it also

07:46:13 has the right to be any of those uses.




07:46:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Not everything, because there's CG to

07:46:20 the south and there is residential to the west.

07:46:24 The CI is directly across the street to the east.

07:46:29 >>ABBYE FEELEY: And immediately to the south, also.

07:46:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A little portion, yeah.

07:46:34 The tiny bit there.

07:46:36 >> So all of this property all the way north across, coming

07:46:41 around, with the exception of CVS which has a special use

07:46:47 for the drive-in part, and CI here.

07:46:54 It was Dr. I prior to the PD, and, unfortunately, that's

07:47:01 what happens sometimes when you go to a PD for a specified

07:47:06 use, is that you lose those rights of intensification that

07:47:09 you had prior, and then you have to come back.

07:47:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I understand.

07:47:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY: It's hard not to find it appropriate as it

07:47:17 was CI prior to the PD.

07:47:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And if I could have Mr. Garcia come up

07:47:31 and talk about the compatibility from a Planning Commission

07:47:35 standpoint.

07:47:36 Is there something you would like to clarify for me?

07:47:40 >>TONY GARCIA: Well, a couple of things I would like to add

07:47:41 on to what Ms. Feeley mention towed.

07:47:44 If you look at the future land use category and you look at

07:47:50 where the streets are, residential streets are in

07:47:53 relationship to the commercial uses, all commercial uses




07:47:57 really do front Florida correctly, as they should.

07:48:00 As far as the access points, I think you can more clearly

07:48:04 see whereby the use is now.

07:48:08 If I'm correct in my assertion in this and the way the code

07:48:12 works, if you are going to CI even though it's going to be

07:48:15 Euclidean it's going to be more stringent as far as a PD, I

07:48:18 would think, as far as access.

07:48:21 I don't think they are going to have any access to the

07:48:23 street.

07:48:23 It's going to have to be, I believe, since this abuts

07:48:27 residential, this is going to have to be a concrete wall if

07:48:29 it's not already a concrete wall.

07:48:31 So as far as your screening and your buffering from the

07:48:33 site, I think you are going to have a lot of protection

07:48:36 there is as it relates -- at the end of the day, it is what

07:48:40 it is as far as Florida Avenue has been there and it's been

07:48:44 characterized as a major commercial arterial road, since its

07:48:49 inception.

07:48:49 So as you can see, the uses of the structure go much farther

07:48:54 on the eastern side of Florida.

07:48:56 I would have to agree with Ms. Feeley, the only place

07:48:59 whereby we really see anything, egress point is really going

07:49:03 to be for this particular parcel here, bury don't think

07:49:06 that's going to be the case as far as any kind of impacts

07:49:09 from this parcel -- parcel should have been CI.




07:49:14 It's going to be more stringent.

07:49:16 As far as the use, you're right, it is what it is.

07:49:18 CI does allow open storage and does allow -- but in doing

07:49:22 that, for those potential uses, it's going to have to be

07:49:27 properly buffered and screened.

07:49:29 So that's going to -- that's a code enforcement issue then.

07:49:32 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

07:49:35 I also checked with Melanie, and unless solid waste would

07:49:38 need access to be Hamiler for pickup of the solid waste,

07:49:45 when they go change of occupancy on that property, they will

07:49:48 lose access on him Hamiler unless was necessary by solid

07:49:57 waste.

07:49:58 >> Thank you.

07:49:58 And it's why my desire would be to have some sort of design

07:50:03 guidelines and some sort of community plan in this area,

07:50:06 which I think we are going to move forward with, if anybody

07:50:10 has been following the USF innovation zone in the alliance

07:50:14 in the newspaper, this is precisely the area that concerns

07:50:19 some of the residents, and some of the businesses in the

07:50:22 area.

07:50:28 That's all.

07:50:28 Just wanted to make my concerns.

07:50:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Do we have a motion to close the public

07:50:33 hearing?

07:50:34 Wait, any other questions?




07:50:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No, I was going to go ahead and make the

07:50:39 motion.

07:50:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you want to give the petitioner an

07:50:42 opportunity.

07:50:42 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, yes.

07:50:43 Petitioner, do you want to respond to the questions?

07:50:49 >> Thank you again.

07:50:59 English is my second language, so I can't communicate with a

07:51:04 lot of folks.

07:51:06 After ten years hard working, I want to open my own business

07:51:13 over there.

07:51:22 The grass or the landscape, the building is in bad shape.

07:51:25 I am going to go there, and I am going to open up the

07:51:28 business, create a couple of jobs, and also take care of the

07:51:34 building.

07:51:35 I am going to make it nice and improve the building and the

07:51:38 neighborhood.

07:51:40 That's all.

07:51:40 Thank you so much.

07:51:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close the public hearing.

07:51:47 >> Second.

07:51:47 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

07:51:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Move to approve item number 7.

07:52:00 >> 6.

07:52:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 6.




07:52:03 I'm sorry.

07:52:05 This is an ordinance being presented for first reading

07:52:07 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

07:52:09 vicinity of 9310 North Florida Avenue in the city of Tampa,

07:52:13 Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from

07:52:16 zoning district classification PD, planned development,

07:52:19 restaurant, with drive-in window, to CI, commercial

07:52:22 intensive, providing an effective date.

07:52:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.

07:52:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion from Councilwoman Montelione,

07:52:29 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

07:52:30 All in favor?

07:52:32 Anyone opposed?

07:52:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

07:52:37 absent.

07:52:38 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

07:52:40 9:30 a.m.

07:52:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

07:52:46 Item number 7.

07:53:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

07:53:10 I have been sworn.

07:53:10 Item 7 is Z-11-24 located at 3922 west Powhatan Avenue.

07:53:16 The request this evening is from RS-50 residential

07:53:20 single-family to PD planned development for residential

07:53:23 single-family detached and semi detached.




07:53:27 There's one waiver being requested, and that is to reduce

07:53:31 parking from eight spaces to six spaces.

07:53:49 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

07:53:51 I have been sworn.

07:53:55 This site, believe it or not, is in the university planning

07:54:00 district.

07:54:02 >>MARY MULHERN: You had fun with this one, didn't you?

07:54:05 >>TONY GARCIA: This one had some moving parts to it.

07:54:07 But because it's an existing use that we basically had to

07:54:10 bring into conformance, and we had to do some -- do a lot of

07:54:15 creative counseling within the property owners to try to

07:54:18 bring it into conformance.

07:54:19 Ms. Feeley and I had several meetings with the property

07:54:25 owner and we came up with several -- this is also in the

07:54:32 university planning district. It kind of speaks volumes.

07:54:35 All the cases tonight are going to be either in the central

07:54:37 planning district or in the university planning district,

07:54:40 which is really fits right in with what we wanted to do with

07:54:44 the comprehensive plan, either in the Westshore district or

07:54:46 the central planning district or in the university district,

07:54:49 and that's what we have been getting since, I think, this

07:54:52 council has been -- as this body has been formed since the

07:54:55 last election, which is really kind of nice to have that

07:54:58 kind of continuity.

07:54:59 We just have a couple that have been in the north be or the




07:55:02 south of the planning district, so it seems like the

07:55:06 development has been moving right along the way I think we

07:55:09 would like to see.

07:55:10 I'm sure the mayor is going to be happy with that, too.

07:55:14 This piece of property is located in this over here, which

07:55:18 is why it's located in the university planning district,

07:55:21 which is right on the border of really the Westshore

07:55:24 planning district.

07:55:25 So several opportunities are there.

07:55:28 It's residential 10.

07:55:29 It's nestled within a little residential neighborhood.

07:55:32 And it's been there for quite awhile.

07:55:34 So the amount of land that's there is enough to meet the

07:55:39 density requirement.

07:55:41 The bay it's parceled out it's really not a standard amount

07:55:44 of property, the way a property should be platted for RS-50

07:55:49 lots, but it seems that what's there, that's conformed in a

07:55:55 funky kind of way, all right, for residential homes, because

07:55:59 they are there.

07:56:00 Okay.

07:56:00 So that's why you have to bring it into the PD.

07:56:03 What was that, Mr. Suarez?

07:56:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I said that S that planning term, Mr.

07:56:11 Garcia?

07:56:13 >>TONY GARCIA: I think that's a 70s term.




07:56:20 Like bifurcate, an engineering term.

07:56:27 Let me show you this one.

07:56:30 Here is Hillsborough Avenue.

07:56:32 And there is the line between the City of Tampa,

07:56:37 unincorporated Hillsborough County.

07:56:38 It sits right on the edge between the unincorporated

07:56:43 Hillsborough County and the City of Tampa.

07:56:45 This is another one on the boundary.

07:56:46 Here is Dale Mabry off to the east.

07:56:48 You can get a pretty good idea as to from the context as

07:56:51 expect where this is at.

07:56:52 All these commercial use as long Hillsborough Avenue that we

07:56:55 are very familiar with and again a major arterial road that

07:56:58 serves as a great commercial corridor to the City of Tampa.

07:57:01 And this little piece is nestled in.

07:57:04 So it wags a -- this neighborhood is a very interesting

07:57:07 eclectic kind of neighborhood.

07:57:09 But again we were able to do some creative counseling to

07:57:13 come up to a pretty good solution, we think.

07:57:15 So hope you will see that in accordance with the site plan.

07:57:20 Planning Commission staff found it consistent with the

07:57:25 comprehensive plan.

07:57:25 >> Funky.

07:57:29 We could talk a little about the funky configuration of this

07:57:34 property.




07:57:34 As Tony said, it is all existing.

07:57:36 Everything out there is existing.

07:57:37 I'll show you some pictures and pretty much the site plan is

07:57:40 a reflection of the existing condition.

07:57:43 There is no request before you this evening to expand any of

07:57:47 that, or create anything additional.

07:57:49 It is really to memorialize what's currently out there and

07:57:53 bring it out of nonconform status into -- to make it conform

07:57:59 under this PD.

07:58:06 There are two single-family detached structures and one

07:58:10 single-family semi detached which is typically known as a

07:58:12 duplex.

07:58:13 So we have two single-family structures in the front and

07:58:15 then in the back there's one duplex so it's a total of four

07:58:18 units which would require eight spaces, and they have six.

07:58:25 I went through each of those units.

07:58:27 There's also an accessory structure on the site including

07:58:31 647 square footwork shop, a 278 square foot bird cage, a 76

07:58:37 square foot aluminum shed and 275 square foot free standing

07:58:42 canopy.

07:58:43 The setbacks are 2ndand feet to the north, which is

07:58:47 typical RS-50.

07:58:52 Actually RS-50 is 20-foot.

07:58:54 Is 1.4 feet to the south.

07:58:56 7 feet to the east and west, which is typical RS-50 on the




07:59:01 size -- sides there.

07:59:04 The required parking.

07:59:05 Let me show you the site and then I will go over.

07:59:07 There are just a few outstanding comments from

07:59:10 transportation.

07:59:11 As Tony said, we did have been extensive meetings on this.

07:59:14 They came in for prior to formally submitting and this is

07:59:19 where we have got tone try to rectify the situation that's

07:59:22 out there on the property.

07:59:27 Again this evening we are close to the city limits.

07:59:30 Here is the property shown on Powhatan.

07:59:33 As you can see, not typical of areas.

07:59:37 We typically look at an RS-50.

07:59:40 This is a metes and bounds type, not a platted lot situation

07:59:45 going on there.

07:59:46 Church street.

07:59:48 Is to the east.

07:59:53 This is a dead-end.

07:59:54 It does not go all the way through.

07:59:56 And Dale Mabry.

08:00:00 C river garden.

08:00:01 Some CG.

08:00:08 The aerial.

08:00:10 I don't know if I need to do aerials anymore because Tony

08:00:13 does them now.




08:00:14 Here is a picture of the front structure from Powhatan

08:00:18 looking south.

08:00:20 Here is a picture of the second single-family structure.

08:00:23 Here is a picture of the single-family semi detached in the

08:00:28 back.

08:00:31 There's a long drive and the parking spaces located on the

08:00:36 east.

08:00:37 The property is to the north.

08:00:40 This property is immediately to the east.

08:00:44 This is a view from the parking area looking east.

08:00:53 And here is a picture of one of the accessory structures.

08:00:59 And this is to the west.

08:01:08 Did not provide a revision sheet for this application as

08:01:11 there is only one revision but it's being required by

08:01:15 transportation.

08:01:17 Let me first mention transportation does have an

08:01:19 inconsistent finding related to the reduction of the

08:01:21 parking.

08:01:22 It's more than 20 -- it's a 5-foot front reduction so

08:01:27 transportation is here to speak this evening about the eight

08:01:29 to six spaces.

08:01:30 The second and third comments on the staff report page 2 are

08:01:33 related to the sidewalks, that the sidewalks need to be

08:01:37 provided.

08:01:38 One was not shown.




08:01:40 Transportation is asking that a note be added that the site

08:01:45 will comply with 22-103 for sidewalks along Powhatan.

08:01:54 If it is not the applicant's intention to provide that at

08:01:57 this time, they may wish to ask you whether or not you would

08:02:00 find that it is impractical to provide that sidewalk, and

08:02:06 then they would be able to be pay a fee in lieu at the time

08:02:09 of permitting at $29 per linear foot for the provision of

08:02:13 that sidewalk along Powhatan.

08:02:16 So they could add a note of compliance now.

08:02:19 And that's the one revision that would need to be made to

08:02:21 the site plan in between first and second reading.

08:02:24 Other than that, staff found the request consistent and we

08:02:26 are available for any questions.

08:02:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Petitioner?

08:02:44 >> My name is Pedro Conde from Conde Engineering.

08:02:50 I have been sworn in.

08:02:51 Like Abbye say, we work hard with their department to

08:02:56 accomplish the site plan.

08:02:58 We are in agreement with the accommodations that

08:03:02 transportation is asking.

08:03:03 And the City of Tampa traffic also is asking.

08:03:07 I also have a letter from the neighbors supporting Miss

08:03:18 Diaz.

08:03:21 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

08:03:22 Any questions from council?




08:03:23 >> They are just going to put a note on for the sidewalk.

08:03:32 >> I do have a question.

08:03:35 I know you are trying to bring it into conformance, but why

08:03:42 did this come up?

08:03:44 How did this happen?

08:03:47 >> They were cited by code enforcement.

08:03:49 >> So you don't have plans?

08:03:51 Do you have plans for any changes on the site?

08:03:55 >> No.

08:03:56 They can't.

08:03:57 The PD is exactly what is out there.

08:03:59 No modifications.

08:04:00 >> This was brought to your attention by code enforcement.

08:04:09 Thank you.

08:04:09 Thank you.

08:04:11 Any questions?

08:04:16 >> Move to close the hearing.

08:04:17 >> Second.

08:04:18 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

08:04:25 >> The clerk reminded me -- did you ask the public be if

08:04:29 anybody wanted to speak?

08:04:32 Before you reopen, just see if there is anybody else.

08:04:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone wishing to speak on this?

08:04:38 Seeing no one.

08:04:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay.




08:04:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen.

08:04:44 >>HARRY COHEN: Madam Chair, I move an ordinance being

08:04:48 presented for first reading consideration, an ordinance

08:04:52 rezoning property in the general vicinity of 3922 west

08:04:57 Powhatan Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida, and more

08:05:00 particularly described in section 1 from zoning district

08:05:03 classification RS-50 residential single-family to PD planned

08:05:08 development, residential, single-family detached and semi

08:05:11 detached, providing an effective date.

08:05:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

08:05:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you adding the notes?

08:05:23 >>HARRY COHEN: Adding the one note that was mentioned from

08:05:25 the site plan.

08:05:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

08:05:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Cohen, seconded

08:05:30 by Councilman Reddick.

08:05:32 All in favor?

08:05:33 Anyone opposed?

08:05:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

08:05:37 absent.

08:05:38 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

08:05:40 9:30 a.m.

08:05:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 8.

08:06:00 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

08:06:01 Item number 8 on your agenda this evening is Z-11-29 located




08:06:06 at 1702 and 1720 West Kennedy, 108 and 112 south Packwood

08:06:13 Avenue and 111 South Rome, from PD development mixed use,

08:06:18 retail, office, restaurant, from residential multifamily to

08:06:21 PD, planned development, daycare, school, and office,

08:06:24 business professional, and medical.

08:06:34 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

08:06:35 I have been sworn.

08:06:45 This site is located within the central planning district,

08:06:50 one of the three of five that offers the most opportunity

08:06:52 for growth and economic development, job creation.

08:06:56 This site has a little bit of history on it.

08:07:01 It's located about two miles, I guess, out of the downtown

08:07:06 corridor due west on Kennedy Boulevard, off of Rome, and

08:07:10 Kennedy.

08:07:15 Over here for those of you that are familiar we've the zone

08:07:20 law firm, it's in this vicinity.

08:07:23 This is the site of the old Miller brewery, used to be there

08:07:26 many, many years ago.

08:07:27 This vacant piece of land right now, this has come back and

08:07:32 been resurrected a couple of times with a couple of reap

08:07:35 zonings in the past, one for an office use, with the

08:07:37 structured parking in the rear, and for a couple of other

08:07:40 commercial uses.

08:07:41 So this has been in front of this body in different

08:07:45 versions, I think, chairman, you will recall a couple of




08:07:51 them because I think a couple of them came up during the

08:07:53 last term in office.

08:07:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Refresh my memory.

08:07:57 [ Laughter ]

08:08:02 >>TONY GARCIA: Well, there were some before you but there

08:08:03 was one during your term.

08:08:05 I know there was.

08:08:06 But, anyway, the long and short of it, this is kind of

08:08:09 interesting.

08:08:12 This is community use 35, CMU 35, has urban mixed use 60.

08:08:22 As you can see when you transition away from the railroad

08:08:24 tracks on Willow, a little farther to the east, when you

08:08:27 come, start come this way west, away from the downtown, you

08:08:33 get past that, it's a little more of an industrial office

08:08:37 commercial, because you can see Cleveland is over here.

08:08:39 Right hear.

08:08:40 And you can see it transition as way and goes into this RM

08:08:47 20 which is like a little office and you have some town

08:08:50 homes.

08:08:50 There's some town homes over here.

08:08:52 As you can see there's a couple of town homes over here, so

08:08:54 the character kind of changes a little bit from this part

08:08:57 forward, you can see it based on the land use categories.

08:09:00 Then the new bucks and McDonald are a couple blocks east of

08:09:05 here so I know you all can remember the Starbuck's that's




08:09:08 there.

08:09:08 There's a McDonald's, of course.

08:09:10 Then the new TGH project we just did which is the Ferman

08:09:14 site is just a little more to the north and to the east of

08:09:17 here, maybe less than a quarter of a mile.

08:09:20 Really big project that we just did on the old Ferman site.

08:09:24 Just to give you some context.

08:09:28 Much better context to show you where this is at.

08:09:31 This is where that WalMart is now, and this is the only

08:09:35 Ferman site which is the project that you all did just to

08:09:38 give you some context.

08:09:39 So the site that Ms. Feeley told but is going to be for

08:09:42 daycare/schools, so community-serving use, so it's really

08:09:47 kind of unusual to see in these land use categories.

08:09:49 But again it is something that will be beneficial to the

08:09:53 surrounding neighborhoods.

08:09:54 She will probably tell but the surrounding neighborhoods and

08:09:56 how basically this could work as far as providing a service

08:10:01 to the citizens of the surrounding area.

08:10:04 Planning Commission staff found the proposed quarterback

08:10:06 based on the intensity and the numerous amounts of uses that

08:10:10 can be on this property, found it consistent with the

08:10:13 comprehensive plan.

08:10:13 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

08:10:30 Let me please first go through the waivers that are being




08:10:32 requested before you this evening.

08:10:34 One, the first was previously approved under 05-129 which

08:10:38 was the current zoning on the property which was to allow

08:10:42 access, commercial access to a local street.

08:10:48 The others before you this evening, the first is a section

08:10:52 13-161 waiver, a buffer waiver for vehicle use area, and I

08:10:56 can show you on the site plan where that is.

08:10:59 It's a very small portion located right next to the

08:11:01 dumpster.

08:11:02 It should be an 8-foot buffer with a 3-foot high hedge.

08:11:05 It's a little less than that.

08:11:07 I have it marked in red on my plan.

08:11:13 It's this area right here as required by code to be an

08:11:16 8-foot, and it's 5.42,

08:11:27 Waivers 3, 4, 5 and 6 are related to the Kennedy overlay,

08:11:32 and Mr. Mike Callahan is here with us this evening to

08:11:36 address some of his concerns related to one of these

08:11:41 waivers.

08:11:41 The first is to reduce the required minimum setback on south

08:11:45 Rome from 5-foot to 2.95 feet.

08:11:50 So actually want to go close area long south Rome and is to

08:11:53 increase the maximum setback on Packwood from 10-foot to

08:11:57 61.4 feet and you can see that's because the placement.

08:12:01 Building in relationship to the drive-through, the drop-off,

08:12:04 pick-up and how they have the traffic routing on-site, so




08:12:08 you are getting closer on Rome, you are getting further away

08:12:10 on Packwood because the queuing could not just be set at the

08:12:14 back of the building.

08:12:16 Next is to allow all existing utility lines within existing

08:12:19 right-of-ways to remain above ground.

08:12:21 That is one of the issues Mr. Callahan is going to speak to

08:12:25 you about this evening.

08:12:26 The next is to increase the maximum driveway spacing from

08:12:29 Kennedy Boulevard from 100 feet to 324 feet on Packwood and

08:12:35 from 100 feet to 329 feet on south Rome.

08:12:38 The last is to increase the maximum front adjacent to the

08:12:43 public streets, rights-of-way, from four feet to six feet

08:12:47 above the finished grade.

08:12:48 The applicant is requesting to rezone the property at the

08:12:52 address easy previously stated to construct a 22,724 square

08:12:58 foot multi-use building including daycare, schools, and

08:13:02 office, both business professional and medical.

08:13:05 The 2.23-acre site is currently vacant and commercial uses

08:13:09 to the north across Kennedy, retail and residential to the

08:13:13 west on south Packwood, office to the south and commercial

08:13:16 office and residential and school to the east on south Rome.

08:13:20 The property was previously rezoned in 2005 for a mixed use

08:13:24 development with 88,000 square feet of office, restaurant,

08:13:27 and retail, and 36 residential units.

08:13:30 So what's before you this evening is a quarter of what was




08:13:33 previously approved for that site, and no residential use.

08:13:37 So it was 88,000 and 36 residential.

08:13:42 Requested setbacks are 10-foot north on Kennedy Boulevard,

08:13:46 93.7 feet south, 61.1 feet west, and 2.9 feet on the east.

08:13:53 The maximum building height is proposed at 35 feet.

08:13:57 Required parking based on a maximum use configuration as

08:14:00 stated on the site plan would be 50 parking spaces, and a

08:14:03 total of 50 spaces are being provided.

08:14:06 Build being elevations have been provided.

08:14:11 Pages 2, 3, 4, 5, in the staff report have outstanding items

08:14:18 that need to be addressed on this site plan.

08:14:22 Some of them can be addressed between first and second

08:14:25 reading, and the ones that Mr. Callahan is going to speak to

08:14:29 you about, if the applicant would be willing, would also be

08:14:33 able to addressed.

08:14:35 The first, let me go through them briefly.

08:14:39 Mine, I just needed a waiver changed, and also the removal

08:14:46 of a waiver.

08:14:49 Mary had a couple items, and I did work with Mary on their

08:14:54 items on Pinellas 3 and 4 to get that taken care of.

08:14:58 The applicant has submitted a PDF and we have already

08:15:02 briefly looked at that PDF to ensure that these items have

08:15:05 been addressed.

08:15:06 So we have been working to address them since the staff

08:15:08 report was issued.




08:15:15 Lastly, transportation needed some additional information

08:15:19 added, and also a right-turn only sign to be placed under

08:15:22 the stop sign for the Kennedy Boulevard driveway, and

08:15:26 stormwater needed a note added for the flood zone, the

08:15:31 incorrect flood zones had been listed on the property.

08:15:36 Also, staff analysis is on page 6 and 7.

08:15:39 On the bottom of page 7 starts the Kennedy overlay and those

08:15:42 design criteria that are required by this project that Mr.

08:15:46 Callahan will speak to further.

08:15:49 Staff is available for any questions

08:15:50 >> Mike Callahan, had urban design.

08:16:01 I haven't had the pleasure yet of addressing council, so

08:16:05 it's good to see everyone tonight.

08:16:08 As your vanguard, I guess, for the Kennedy overlay design

08:16:11 standards, I'm here to briefly discuss the school, and one

08:16:17 of the waivers of that they have requested, it's an issue

08:16:20 that I think we need clear direction from you, from council,

08:16:23 because it affects all future development as we go forward

08:16:26 here along the Kennedy overlay.

08:16:29 And Kennedy Boulevard.

08:16:31 The requirement in section 27-468 specifically states this.

08:16:36 It states, all developments shall be required to place any

08:16:40 and all utility lines underground on the subject parcel, and

08:16:45 within the adjacent rights-of-way.

08:16:48 As no doubt you are aware the Kennedy overlay was




08:16:53 established by this board in 2006 on considerable discussion

08:16:56 and debate, if you will, and sets distinct building and

08:17:00 development standards for the corridor

08:17:02 One of the major concerns of the council was clearly this

08:17:05 issue, how we deal with the overhead utility lines along

08:17:09 Kennedy, and the desire to see them placed underground.

08:17:12 I think one of the best examples of what this does for the

08:17:18 Kennedy study is the Walker Brands building at Kennedy and

08:17:24 Fremont which is exactly adjacent to be this site.

08:17:34 You can see clearly it's a very clean, handsome front of the

08:17:38 building there.

08:17:41 The applicant has requested a waiver from the overlay

08:17:43 standards and they are asking that the utility lines along

08:17:46 Kennedy remain overhead.

08:17:49 We get -- this will be in front of the site there.

08:18:03 I just want to say this, though.

08:18:04 The applicant has been very cooperative through this whole

08:18:07 process.

08:18:08 When they first came in, we were a long way from the site

08:18:10 plan we have today.

08:18:12 They have a very good engineer.

08:18:15 I think we have done a good job as a team.

08:18:20 Council, I understand the applicant wants to -- does not

08:18:25 want to fund this requirement.

08:18:26 I'm sure it's in their minds a financial hardship.




08:18:32 But I ask you to consider three points on whether this

08:18:37 waiver should be granted.

08:18:39 One is there are more development applications come down the

08:18:42 pike.

08:18:43 I can tell you that right now.

08:18:44 We are talking with folks, and you will clearly set a future

08:18:49 precedence for any ability to clean up this spaghetti line

08:18:53 of utilities along Kennedy.

08:18:56 Our opportunity might be lost tonight in the future.

08:19:00 Secondly, consider the equity offing someone like Walker

08:19:04 Brands next door who has complied with this particular

08:19:08 standard in the overlay.

08:19:11 And then again others don't have to.

08:19:14 And then thirdly, I think we need to get, at least as an

08:19:21 option for you is to get some idea of what this hardship

08:19:24 costs.

08:19:25 I talked to Mr. Dick LaRosa who is going to present tonight,

08:19:33 is a very good engineer, but we need to have a basis for the

08:19:36 hardship.

08:19:37 Is it 1%, 10%, 20% of the development costs?

08:19:41 And I think it is at this point the only way really we can

08:19:44 get to some sort of objective decision.

08:19:46 I realize we are open for business, and this is a good

08:19:50 development.

08:19:50 We want this development.




08:19:51 But this is an issue and it's not going to go away.

08:19:56 And set precedent all along the corridor

08:20:03 Thank you

08:20:08 Fool.

08:20:10 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I forgot to show you the pictures of the

08:20:13 site.

08:20:13 I can quickly go over them and show you all the pictures

08:20:15 from all the sides.

08:20:17 I'm sorry, I just completely was an oversight on my part.

08:20:21 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to see them.

08:20:25 You can go quick.

08:20:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Okay.

08:20:27 I'm sorry.

08:20:28 >>MARY MULHERN: While you are sorting that, Mr. Callahan,

08:20:45 can I ask you a question?

08:20:49 The Walker building, they undergrounded.

08:20:53 What other buildings on Kennedy, what other new developments

08:20:57 or --

08:21:02 >> Well, Ms. Mulhern, there's not been a lot of development.

08:21:06 That's probably been the premier over the last four years.

08:21:11 The overlay has been established for five years.

08:21:14 That's probably the only one that -- I drive it every day.

08:21:18 There are -- and let me just say this, too.

08:21:21 The south side of Kennedy presents so many more obstacles on

08:21:27 the north side.




08:21:29 TGH when they came in for the hospital, very easy.

08:21:32 They only had one line along the front of the property.

08:21:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Are they undergrounding that?

08:21:38 >> The hospital.

08:21:40 The rehab hospital.

08:21:42 Much easier for them.

08:21:44 No problems.

08:21:44 >>MARY MULHERN: We approved, the last council, approved

08:21:50 another project on the south side, didn't we?

08:21:53 TGH?

08:22:01 The parking lot?

08:22:02 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.

08:22:06 Outside Grand Central and Kennedy, did you approve the reuse

08:22:09 of that, the reuse of that building.

08:22:13 >>MARY MULHERN: This is a surprise to me, this question

08:22:19 coming up, because I don't remember any discussion of that,

08:22:23 under that, of whether they should underground that.

08:22:26 And I know that there were problems that staff had with

08:22:30 that, but I don't remember that question coming up.

08:22:34 >> Well, it was a big concern for staff and we went round

08:22:39 and round with the applicant at that point.

08:22:43 It was council's pleasure that night not to deal with it.

08:22:50 >> I don't remember ever the issue come up.

08:22:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mike, Mr. Callahan --

08:23:06 >> That's okay.




08:23:08 >> It's a pleasure seeing you here.

08:23:09 >> It's good to see you all.

08:23:11 >> I have known Mr. Callahan for a long time and

08:23:14 tremendously respect his opinions.

08:23:15 Maybe I can get at the point from a different angle.

08:23:20 The Kennedy overlay district, how large of a district is

08:23:23 that?

08:23:25 >> In terms of miles?

08:23:26 It goes from Himes Avenue all the way to the CDB, to the

08:23:33 Kennedy bridge.

08:23:34 >> So turning it around --

08:23:36 >> Three or four miles.

08:23:37 >> A large area.

08:23:39 High density.

08:23:40 So lots of development, either currently or maybe

08:23:46 redevelopment opportunities.

08:23:47 How many waivers have been granted under the Kennedy overlay

08:23:50 district for undergrounding?

08:23:52 >> To my knowledge?

08:23:55 >> In five years.

08:23:56 >> I couldn't tell knew five years.

08:23:58 I have only been here for just at two years.

08:24:00 But to my knowledge, only one.

08:24:02 >> And I ask the same question --

08:24:06 >> Two that I know of.




08:24:08 >> Two?

08:24:10 And the point goes back to what I had brought up under the

08:24:16 previous application, was that when we have an overlay

08:24:19 district, we are planning for standards, and my concern --

08:24:24 and if I understand you correctly, this is what your concern

08:24:30 is as well, is that we would be undermining the efforts and

08:24:38 the reason for having overlay districts if we continue to

08:24:41 grant waivers for certain elements of that overlay district.

08:24:48 And we just passed an overlay district tonight with the

08:24:52 Westshore area, and people worked long and hard to put these

08:24:56 overlay districts in place to come up with a set of

08:24:59 standards.

08:24:59 So it's my concern, you know, that we wave those for

08:25:04 particular applications, and from what I understand during

08:25:09 the review that the applicant had not supplied us with any

08:25:12 documentation as to why the waiver was being requested.

08:25:14 >> Right.

08:25:17 They didn't want to do it.

08:25:18 But I trust that they will tonight.

08:25:21 >> Thank you.

08:25:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

08:25:29 >>ABBYE FEELEY: This is a picture of the site looking south

08:25:35 from the AAMCO transmission repair.

08:25:38 This is looking southwest.

08:25:41 And you can see that Walker Brands is three buildings over




08:25:46 from the subject property.

08:25:50 Another view.

08:25:52 This is -- I went down Packwood and made my way around the

08:26:01 site.

08:26:03 So this is looking toward downtown off of Packwood.

08:26:05 This is looking back toward Kennedy.

08:26:09 My picture came wherever the AAMCO looking south.

08:26:14 And this is a picture from Packwood looking directly north

08:26:18 back towards Kennedy.

08:26:20 This is the west side of Packwood.

08:26:24 This is behind the parking lot behind that use.

08:26:28 There are PDs for town homes along that area.

08:26:32 This is immediately behind the site.

08:26:42 Also, coming back, I came back up Rome.

08:26:47 This is on the Rome Avenue side.

08:26:49 This is at the intersection of Rome and Cleveland, the

08:26:54 karate school, and just next to that are these town homes.

08:27:01 This is on Rome looking west back toward the site.

08:27:06 This is from Rome looking north back toward the site.

08:27:13 And Rome, there's a small law office.

08:27:16 There is some vacant property there, and then there's a

08:27:22 cleaner at the -- at the corner of Rome and Kennedy.

08:27:28 This is also at the corner of Rome and Kennedy now looking

08:27:31 north across Kennedy.

08:27:36 And this is looking back at that cleaner, that intersection,




08:27:41 and Starbuck's and McDonald's are just down from there.

08:27:45 Thank you.

08:27:45 Pretty familiar.

08:27:47 There aren't many vacant spots on Kennedy.

08:27:50 We know the big ones and where the development is going to

08:27:53 recur.

08:27:54 I hope that is helpful.

08:27:56 I'm very sorry for overlooking that part of my presentation.

08:27:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

08:28:01 Petitioner?

08:28:01 >> My name is Dick La Rosa, 1095 east brand Boulevard.

08:28:17 I have been sworn.

08:28:18 We thank you for the opportunity tonight for this rezoning.

08:28:21 If I could, I would like to just pass out a handout with

08:28:26 just a couple of these exhibits we will be showing.

08:28:38 I'll start off basically with the history of the property.

08:28:48 I will go through that briefly.

08:28:50 As Abbye mentioned, it used to be the old Miller building,

08:28:57 primarily warehouse, mostly paved.

08:29:02 This is an aerial back from 2005.

08:29:06 The zoning that currently exists is a PD for a multitude of

08:29:10 office and other commercial uses, also some residential.

08:29:18 This is a copy of the plan.

08:29:19 You can see the access to both Rome and Packwood were

08:29:24 previously approved through the waiver process, through that




08:29:27 PD.

08:29:28 I have highlighted the perimeter of the building in blue

08:29:32 that acts as the parking garage that was in the center, part

08:29:35 of the structure as well.

08:29:38 I built pretty close to the property lines back there on the

08:29:41 southwest corner.

08:29:46 Some of the trees that we had issues with but we worked with

08:29:49 natural resources to resolved.

08:29:51 This is the current zoning that's there, 119,000-foot total

08:29:55 of building area, again was 88,000 square foot office.

08:29:58 Other use was 36 residential units.

08:30:03 And what you have, you have an elevation of what we are

08:30:05 proposing tonight.

08:30:16 That is primrose school.

08:30:18 It is a franchise.

08:30:19 This was presented in Atlanta to get approval before we came

08:30:22 to council.

08:30:24 You can see from the elevation, we have worked with staff to

08:30:29 meet the requirements of the building of the overlay

08:30:32 district, the openings.

08:30:33 We tied in the streetscape, walks into the site itself.

08:30:41 I'll jump to the site plan now.

08:30:44 This is a site plan currently proposed.

08:30:53 You can see that we are doing the sidewalk in the front.

08:30:59 We are also proposing to do a two-foot knee high wall.




08:31:04 We had a covered structure over here within 10 feet of the

08:31:09 property line.

08:31:10 We are going to have an entry with benches here in the

08:31:14 front, landscaping, and a pylon sign.

08:31:18 We have in this corner over here a park, what I call

08:31:21 primrose park, basically.

08:31:22 It will be planted with trees.

08:31:24 We will hope to work with the natural resources department.

08:31:28 We'll have a sidewalk through there, butterfly garden, a

08:31:31 fountain, some amenities for the students.

08:31:34 Some of the waivers that we have requested are in relation

08:31:36 to the driveway, and a separation from Kennedy.

08:31:41 Behind that was queuing for the drop-off.

08:31:44 As you get to the point of the north side, you get to the

08:31:48 double lane.

08:31:48 We do have parallel parking and angled parking throughout

08:31:52 the west side.

08:31:53 We are also going to work with the transportation department

08:31:55 to put parking along the right-of-way.

08:32:01 That is, of course, a bit of discretion.

08:32:05 We also talked to the town home develop area cross the

08:32:08 street about designating that residential which we have no

08:32:12 objection to, but again that's at the transportation

08:32:17 department's discretion.

08:32:18 In the back we'll have angled parking for staff.




08:32:20 What we have done, we have agreed to put a lot of pervious

08:32:25 pavement to protect the trees.

08:32:27 That was one of the final changes we made with natural

08:32:29 resources was to add four-foot pervious paving here.

08:32:33 We reduced the drive aisle on the south side to get a little

08:32:36 more space along the south property line as well.

08:32:43 In this project, one of the things we hope to do is check in

08:32:46 to LEED certification.

08:32:51 That's something, the developers looking to be do.

08:33:01 Some of the other waivers -- and I guess the main issue, or

08:33:04 one of the main issues, I guess, with the waiver request is

08:33:07 the underground utilities.

08:33:13 Let me get a photo.

08:33:18 And again, I certainly understand why the requirement is in

08:33:25 there.

08:33:26 To say that it's, you know, applied fairly across the

08:33:30 properties on Kennedy, I don't think, is an accurate

08:33:33 statement.

08:33:33 If we were on the north side of Kennedy, not a problem.

08:33:36 We would put those utilities underground.

08:33:40 Being on the south side, you can see it's a lot of service,

08:33:44 not only TECO, there's Verizon, there's Bright House,

08:33:49 there's possibly some traffic signal lines.

08:33:52 I have had discussions with Tim Linenkugle -- I probably

08:34:01 butchered his name.




08:34:02 I apologize if you are watching.

08:34:03 I spoke with him at great length to find out how we go about

08:34:07 doing this.

08:34:08 Some of the issues he brought up, one was, he spoke with his

08:34:12 boss about this project.

08:34:13 He is a design technician with TECO.

08:34:15 I'm not an electrical engineer so I had to rely on

08:34:18 discussion was him.

08:34:19 I tried to discuss it with be electron and he wouldn't touch

08:34:23 the subject.

08:34:23 He date indicated the lines would have to go on private

08:34:26 property, within a 157, possibly 20-foot easement.

08:34:29 No buildings or structures would be allowed to go in that

08:34:33 easement.

08:34:34 Than in and of itself conflicts with the Kennedy overlay

08:34:38 requirements which requires your building to be within five

08:34:40 to ten feet.

08:34:42 He indicated that -- if you could see on the image over

08:34:47 here, there are a number of services that cross to the other

08:34:51 side of the road, three of them, I believe.

08:34:57 Kennedy being a State Road, we would have to directional

08:34:59 drill East Kennedy Boulevard, we would have to bypass gas

08:35:03 lines, water lines, storm lines, storm sewer lines, all that

08:35:06 work would have to be coordinated with TECO.

08:35:08 We would have to coordinate the work again with FDOT, Bright




08:35:12 House, Verizon.

08:35:16 He went on to say that he would have to install switch

08:35:20 gears, which are very expensive, transformers, transformer

08:35:24 pads, these would all have to go within the easement.

08:35:28 What scared me wags he said the cost could get astronomical.

08:35:31 He couldn't come to a cost for me because it would take

08:35:35 meetings with possibly the city, the D.O.T., with Bright

08:35:37 House, Verizon, and everybody would have to basically meet

08:35:41 to get the design set, where do they set a pole at the

08:35:48 corner on our side of Rome, or on the other side of Rome?

08:35:52 Do they set it across Packwood?

08:35:53 There's just a lot of unknowns.

08:35:55 Without that information, the only number co-throw out was

08:35:58 at least $100,000.

08:36:00 And that's just from TECO.

08:36:03 I haven't approached Bright House.

08:36:04 I haven't approached Verizon.

08:36:06 Once I hear that number, I know than this is basically the

08:36:09 jobs fair, the 40 people that would be working here at the

08:36:12 facility, the rest of my contract is gone.

08:36:16 That's the reason we have the request.

08:36:18 N there.

08:36:18 It's not because we don't want to do it.

08:36:20 We would love to it.

08:36:22 It's just financially not viable for a private




08:36:24 owner-operator of a school to do it.

08:36:28 I know TGH down the street was granted the waiver.

08:36:32 Granted they are on the south side of the road.

08:36:34 I'm sure the cost would have been enormous. If this plot

08:36:36 was on the north side we wouldn't have this waiver at all.

08:36:38 We would certainly do it.

08:36:39 People on the south side of Kennedy Boulevard are going to

08:36:41 be penalized heavily because of this requirement in an

08:36:45 overlay district.

08:36:46 Again I understand why it's in there.

08:36:47 We would be willing to put a 10-foot utility easement across

08:36:52 the front of our property with the caveat that our wall and

08:36:54 our sign could be remain in it.

08:36:57 We would even be willing to talk to TECO, Verizon, about

08:37:00 possibly putting in future conduit, if we could figure out

08:37:03 what size they would need.

08:37:05 But to build across to pay these private companies to put it

08:37:10 underground is just something for our project that would

08:37:12 just kill it.

08:37:13 Again, it's not something we can go get a price to do.

08:37:17 TECO tells us what it is, and it is what it is.

08:37:20 We can't get it cheaper than what they say.

08:37:22 We can't bid it out.

08:37:24 So we have our hands tied so we are basically at your mercy

08:37:29 here to get relief for this project.




08:37:31 We think we have a great project.

08:37:32 We have talked to the neighbors about it.

08:37:34 It will create a number of jobs.

08:37:37 40 teachers.

08:37:39 There's some space in there if we want to lease a little

08:37:42 bit, would want to do a nice park in the front.

08:37:47 We tried to work with staff as best we can to make this

08:37:49 project work.

08:37:50 This is the one thing I think that is going to unfortunately

08:37:53 fall to you tonight.

08:37:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. La Rosa, let me ask you a couple of

08:38:07 quick questions.

08:38:07 This is a great rendering, by the way.

08:38:10 I like the building.

08:38:11 It's beautiful.

08:38:12 Why aren't there any overlines there?

08:38:16 >> This was done by -- that was done by Mr. Rakki's daughter

08:38:20 who is a graduate student.

08:38:22 Actually, she graduated from UF, getting ready to go to

08:38:25 Berkeley.

08:38:26 So she's been doing that on her own time.

08:38:35 She's working off her tuition.

08:38:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The reason I ask is because when we do these

08:38:43 renderings and we look at these plans, the obvious reason we

08:38:47 don't put them in the way is because it doesn't look as




08:38:50 good.

08:38:50 You know, that's a pretty basic answer.

08:38:55 And, you know, I understand -- and this is a very tough

08:39:00 decision for us, because I think not only the school -- it

08:39:05 looks like a great facility, by the way, the way you have it

08:39:07 planned out.

08:39:08 It looks terrific.

08:39:11 When you were going through the process, did you not know

08:39:13 about the overlay district, or were there not any -- was

08:39:17 there no knowledge offing to put underground lines?

08:39:20 >> We knew about the overlay district.

08:39:23 Reading the rule, it initially talks about putting all

08:39:26 on-site underground which we have no problem doing.

08:39:28 But then the last line, which is thrown in there, any

08:39:32 utility lines overhead in the adjacent right-of-way, you

08:39:36 have to place underground.

08:39:37 And it's a very short line which equates to a huge, huge

08:39:42 burden on the property to the south.

08:39:46 Knowing that, knowing if waivers had been granted to TGH for

08:39:50 this same, we proceeded to move forward.

08:39:52 That, though, I went ahead and did the due diligence and

08:39:56 talked with TECO about it.

08:39:57 And I asked him if he spoke with his boss if this had come

08:40:03 up before.

08:40:04 He did not know.




08:40:05 He knew of one project, they had discuss board of director

08:40:07 doing it but the project fell through.

08:40:08 And when I asked him if he had talked to the city about this

08:40:11 requirement about having to put it in an easement or private

08:40:14 property, again being a technician, talking to his boss was

08:40:17 not aware of any discussions.

08:40:19 Again, having to put it on private property, conflicting

08:40:26 with the overlay districts it seems like there may need to

08:40:30 be some discussion on what TECO actually requires.

08:40:34 Again, it is a State Road as well.

08:40:36 That may have something to do with it, not putting their

08:40:39 lines underground on a State Road.

08:40:41 So D.O.T. has jurisdiction.

08:40:43 Whether or not.

08:40:44 So there's just a lot of unknowns about being able to agree

08:40:47 to do this.

08:40:50 We have so many different -- this requirement makes us talk

08:40:54 to TECO, Verizon, Bright House, FDOT.

08:40:58 There's just a lot of hands in the pot.

08:41:01 Everybody, it's going to be months and months and months

08:41:03 before I figure we could get a price, and I'm 99% sure it's

08:41:09 not economically feasible.

08:41:10 >> Mr. Callahan, may I ask you a question?

08:41:13 Because this was zoned BS, before Suarez.

08:41:17 So I need to learn a little bit.




08:41:20 In terms of some of the things that Mr. La Rosa was talking

08:41:27 about, I want to make sure that we understand this clearly.

08:41:31 When we put together the overlay district, how much effort

08:41:33 do we put into what the true -- not only the true cost, and

08:41:38 that's nebulous, had I know that, because there's no way you

08:41:40 can put air true cost necessarily.

08:41:42 But was there any discussion in terms of, as he mentioned,

08:41:48 all the different players that are involved in order to put

08:41:52 lines underground and having a really an easier way or at

08:41:57 least a known way on how to get something like this done?

08:42:01 Because I am in total agreement.

08:42:04 I tried to make the point with him that it does look better

08:42:07 when we have underground lines.

08:42:08 I think everybody agrees to that.

08:42:10 And to be honest with you, it's safer with a school right

08:42:12 there to have underground lines.

08:42:13 But if it's going to be so exorbitant, it's going to be very

08:42:17 difficult even in the overlay district to be able to have

08:42:20 developers come in here and be able to do development.

08:42:23 So my question is, do you know that answer?

08:42:27 What was the discussion on that?

08:42:29 >> Unfortunately, I was not here in 2006, but I know that

08:42:32 that there was a lot of discussion.

08:42:33 >> So before you, too, huh?

08:42:35 >> Before me, B.C.




08:42:38 But what I would say is that there's a lot of unknowns here,

08:42:43 Mr. La Rosa, a lot of 10, 15-foot easements.

08:42:48 That's a lot of new stuff.

08:42:49 I haven't heard that.

08:42:51 I think all I'm asking is can we get a little more objective

08:42:54 about this?

08:42:55 This whole discussion really hasn't come to a head until

08:42:58 tonight.

08:42:58 We told them about this.

08:43:02 And it's kind of been on the back burner, and then all of a

08:43:05 sudden it really -- but the fact of the matter is, you know,

08:43:10 if it is, you know, how did Walker Brands get theirs

08:43:15 underground in a 10-foot setback?

08:43:18 They had the same issues.

08:43:19 I don't know.

08:43:20 I don't know.

08:43:21 And so I think we need a little time to get a lot more

08:43:26 clarity on this issue.

08:43:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Well, you are providing information for

08:43:30 something that we actually can't do in this particular

08:43:34 format.

08:43:34 So in this scenario, we only have a couple choices, which is

08:43:39 we either deny -- excuse me, not approve the waiver for his

08:43:48 project, or approve it, or ask for a continuance.

08:43:51 There's really not much more that we can do.




08:43:55 And I think Ms. Cole is going to say I said something wrong.

08:43:58 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

08:43:59 Not wrong.

08:44:00 I just wanted to clarify where you are at.

08:44:01 >> That's lawyer-speak for wrong.

08:44:05 >>JULIA COLE: Really, this is an application which includes

08:44:09 a waiver so you wouldn't be denying the waiver, you would

08:44:13 just be denying the zoning on the information you have been

08:44:15 provided.

08:44:15 Obviously you would have a right to have approve it with the

08:44:18 waiver, or you can see if the petitioner would like to

08:44:23 continue.

08:44:23 I will tell you I have a level of concern, though, with the

08:44:26 testimony that was just given to you, that staff has not had

08:44:30 an opportunity to consider.

08:44:31 Whenever you make your land use decisions when you are

08:44:34 making a decision to grant the waiver or place a condition

08:44:37 on a plan, which really in essence this would be like akin

08:44:41 to a condition of approval, there has to be a nexus between

08:44:47 what it is you are being asked to approve and the costs

08:44:51 associated with the development, as well as whether or not

08:44:56 there's going to have to be some kind of private property

08:44:59 right that's given up.

08:45:00 It's what everything this gentleman is saying is correct,

08:45:03 and there's an obligation of a 20-foot easement or 10-foot




08:45:07 easement or something to that extent from a legal

08:45:11 perspective, we may have to give you some advice and make a

08:45:14 different decision.

08:45:14 But the problem at this point, staff has not had the benefit

08:45:17 of that information.

08:45:18 And while this gentleman has said he has had conversations

08:45:22 with TECO -- and I'm not questioning his veracity -- I'm

08:45:25 just saying we don't have all that information.

08:45:27 So my recommendation at this point is for us to continue

08:45:31 that.

08:45:31 I understand the applicant may have some issues with that.

08:45:34 But in all candor and fairness, he's raised an issue that

08:45:38 nobody has had a chance to have us objectively look at,

08:45:41 because, as I said, if in fact everything is correct in

08:45:45 terms of the cost, in terms of the giving up of some

08:45:47 property rights here, the legal department really should

08:45:49 have the opportunity to look at whether or not in this

08:45:51 instance we can actually make a nexus between the obligation

08:45:57 to underground and this application, and we may actually

08:46:00 have to reconsider that entire portion of the Kennedy

08:46:03 overlay as to whether or not it's sustainable.

08:46:06 So these are very heavy questions coming from this one

08:46:09 particular application.

08:46:10 I would like to hear if petitioner has any comments as to

08:46:14 what I have just said.




08:46:15 But I do have a level of concern as to where we are on this

08:46:18 procedurally.

08:46:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.

08:46:26 >> Well, I would suggest, if you will bear with me, I think

08:46:34 that based on both body language and some other things that

08:46:37 maybe we could hear from petitioner, because it may be

08:46:40 something that we can continue based on some of the

08:46:42 information that Ms. Cole has been presenting to us.

08:46:47 If there is some legal issues have been brought up that we

08:46:52 haven't had both knowledge about or ability to make a

08:46:54 decision --

08:46:55 >> I think if we get all the questions out, and then

08:46:58 petitioner --

08:46:59 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, Councilman.

08:47:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Either way, that's fine.

08:47:04 That's fine.

08:47:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Then he only has to stand up and answer

08:47:09 once.

08:47:11 There's a clarification that I have requested, a part of

08:47:15 what Ms. Cole I think already brought up.

08:47:17 But the clarification would be on whose property the

08:47:22 undergrounds would be.

08:47:24 I thought initially we were talking about undergrounding in

08:47:27 the right-of-way, and then I heard undergrounding on the

08:47:31 petitioner's property with the granting of an easement.




08:47:36 So there is a bit of -- well --

08:47:40 >> I tend to agree with Mr. La Rosa on that.

08:47:43 I believe that the undergrounding would have to be on

08:47:45 private property.

08:47:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It would have to be on private property?

08:47:50 >> I believe so.

08:47:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And if -- well, that changes things a

08:47:55 little, doesn't it?

08:47:57 Because from what I understand -- and we would not be able

08:48:03 to require anyone to underground on private property because

08:48:08 that would be tantamount to a taking?

08:48:14 >> Well, we have a building setback.

08:48:17 So I think that would also be what the building setback is

08:48:21 intended for, to some degree.

08:48:23 So I can't specifically answer.

08:48:28 >> So that's a legal question that really has to be

08:48:31 explored.

08:48:34 However, there was some concession, I think, heard on behalf

08:48:40 of the petitioner where they were willing to grant an

08:48:43 easement to bury conduit, put the conduit in, and then at

08:48:50 some point in time, if there was a road project per se,

08:48:57 Kennedy Boulevard was being widened, expanded, improved,

08:49:01 D.O.T. was going to be tearing up the road anyway, that

08:49:05 would be the time, because the road is going to be torn up,

08:49:08 you wouldn't have been to do the directional drilling,




08:49:11 because maybe at some future date bury those lines because

08:49:16 the conduit would already be underground.

08:49:19 So that seemed like a good compromise to be me.

08:49:25 The other point I have for the petitioner, and -- Ms. Cole

08:49:30 stepped out -- but when we are talking about TECO

08:49:33 engineering, I'm not sure if things change because it's been

08:49:37 awhile since I have done this.

08:49:39 But from what I used to do, it wasn't within city limits and

08:49:47 unincorporated Hillsborough County.

08:49:49 TECO would supply a cost estimate based on the linear foot,

08:49:53 based on the amount of line that they would have to lay,

08:49:59 whether it's transmission, whether it was supply lines, and

08:50:03 so forth.

08:50:05 Bright House and Verizon, same thing.

08:50:07 They would supply a cost estimate for what it may be for

08:50:12 burying those lines.

08:50:14 And they don't do that for free.

08:50:19 As I remember, they charged for that service.

08:50:22 But we could -- they do provide that in writing.

08:50:28 So that there would be a firm cost estimate to say if it was

08:50:33 100,000 or 300,000, or, you know, what the cost was going to

08:50:37 be, and then could you look at what percentage of the

08:50:39 project on a cost analysis basis that would be.

08:50:43 So we are asking for -- we are talking about one particular

08:50:49 waiver, a lot here at the undergrounding but I just want to




08:50:54 remind my fellow members of council we are talking about

08:50:56 waivers to an overlay district. We are talking about three

08:50:59 waivers to the overlay district, not just the one.

08:51:01 The one is the most obvious aesthetically, but the waiver

08:51:06 number 4 and number 5 are also waivers to that overlay

08:51:09 district.

08:51:12 So if we are going to talk about do we deviate from an

08:51:16 overlay or do we not deviate from an overlay, that would be

08:51:19 three things we would be deviating.

08:51:22 Thank you.

08:51:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen.

08:51:25 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, I find myself in agreement with much

08:51:30 of what my colleagues have been saying up here.

08:51:33 But I have an additional point I would just like to make.

08:51:39 I'm not philosophically against granting a waiver if there's

08:51:47 an economic hardship that has been demonstrated.

08:51:50 But what concerns me about this is that the next time

08:51:52 someone comes up on the south side of Kennedy Boulevard, we

08:51:56 better have very, very specific standards by which we are

08:52:00 going to measure these cases.

08:52:03 We can't do them ad hoc on a one by one basis and just sort

08:52:08 of throw a ball up in the air.

08:52:11 We ought to figure out what the standard ought to be.

08:52:16 And if the standard in the overlay is too stringent, then it

08:52:20 needs to be revisited.




08:52:22 If there's going to be a waiver, there needs to be criteria

08:52:24 by which we grant it.

08:52:26 And that's just my feeling.

08:52:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I have to say that we are missing our

08:52:41 petitioner and our attorney.

08:52:44 >> And our attorney.

08:52:46 >>MARY MULHERN: So I'll speak to the people who are here.

08:52:50 This should not -- if this petition is coming in front of

08:52:57 us, and we are expected to make decisions about this, we

08:53:02 don't have any of the information we need.

08:53:04 Not only not from the petitioner do we not have an estimate.

08:53:08 Cost of undergrounding, I don't know, it's not clear tore me

08:53:13 that there is even a way for the petitioner to figure out

08:53:21 how to get that information.

08:53:29 When you are talking about undergrounding, you are not just

08:53:32 talking about TECO and FDOT and Bright House and Verizon.

08:53:36 You are talking about the City of Tampa, and what we require

08:53:39 people to do.

08:53:40 So for this to come here, and for us not to know what's

08:53:45 expected of this petitioner, we have no idea here tonight.

08:53:51 What this person was supposed to do.

08:53:54 According to the overlay.

08:53:57 We don't even know -- you didn't even tell us until, I

08:54:01 guess, we did here that it's supposed to be on private

08:54:05 property, the underground.




08:54:06 Is it?

08:54:07 We don't even know that.

08:54:08 Okay.

08:54:09 We don't know if we have conflicting regulations or

08:54:15 guidelines in this overlay district where you have to have a

08:54:18 setback that requires you to be too close to the street to

08:54:24 be even have the room to underground.

08:54:28 I mean, I agree that this petitioner needs to, you know, if

08:54:36 they are asking for a waiver, they should be able to give us

08:54:38 the estimate.

08:54:39 But, on the other hand, we don't even know what we are

08:54:43 asking people to give us.

08:54:44 Tonight, I have no idea.

08:54:47 So we do need a continuance.

08:54:51 And a lot of people need to do a lot of homework and let us

08:54:54 know what we are asking for here.

08:54:56 >>JULIA COLE: Legal.

08:55:03 >>MARY MULHERN: What we are being asked to decide.

08:55:07 And we shouldn't have been -- all of us should not have been

08:55:11 here tonight with so little information.

08:55:12 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

08:55:14 The way the Kennedy overlay is written for undergrounding

08:55:17 actually is a little different than some other overlays.

08:55:20 But in this instance it's an obligation of a property owner

08:55:25 coming through on a development project within the Kennedy




08:55:29 overlay.

08:55:29 There is nothing in the code from what I understand that

08:55:31 obligates that undergrounding to occur on private property,

08:55:35 or within the public right-of-way.

08:55:38 And frankly, I wasn't even aware of that difference until

08:55:41 the issue came up tonight because I have never actually

08:55:44 heard that issue come up in this way, and I think what staff

08:55:47 is tell you is that they didn't have a good understanding of

08:55:50 the basis of the waiver, and there's nothing in your code

08:55:52 that obligates somebody to come forward and give that to

08:55:55 staff.

08:55:55 They make their presentation to you.

08:55:57 All that being said, I do have legal concern for any

08:56:02 obligation which would require a property owner to give up a

08:56:06 private property right during the course of a land use

08:56:10 decision-making process.

08:56:11 So from my perspective, this is the first time I heard that

08:56:15 this is something that could be required to be done by TECO

08:56:17 on private property.

08:56:22 I think that is problematic. If that were the case, if I

08:56:24 knew right now sitting here today it was the case, that this

08:56:28 would be an obligation of TECO, because I have seen in the

08:56:30 writing, I would be advising you to grant the waiver.

08:56:33 Because I think that that would be problematic.

08:56:36 And should go back then and revisit the code and make it




08:56:40 very clear that it is something that is obligated to be done

08:56:42 within the public right-of-way.

08:56:44 Similar to how you have your sidewalk code.

08:56:46 Sidewalks have to be built on -- within right-of-way, not on

08:56:50 private property.

08:56:52 However, we are in the middle of the hearing tonight.

08:56:54 You have some folks that would potentially lake to move

08:56:57 forward and have the right to have their application heard

08:57:00 today on this issue.

08:57:03 Because it is part of a rezoning.

08:57:05 And we can give you the waiver criteria to talk about.

08:57:08 But right now, you either have been to vote this application

08:57:11 up or down with the waiver that's been requested.

08:57:14 I have requested the applicant if they would agree to the

08:57:17 following conditional waiver, so they can move forward

08:57:21 tonight and have been a little more time to figure out

08:57:24 exactly what TECO is requiring.

08:57:27 That may be up to council to agree to this.

08:57:29 But what I am suggesting is that we go ahead and put a note

08:57:33 on the site plan to have between first and second reading,

08:57:37 because if the waiver is granted, if TECO requires this

08:57:43 applicant, this property owner to place the underground

08:57:45 utilities within their private property, therefore if it's

08:57:48 something that can be done within the right-of-way, they

08:57:51 would not be granted the waiver, it is something that they




08:57:53 have to do within private property, then the waiver would be

08:57:58 granted.

08:57:58 That are would a allow memorandum them to move forward

08:58:02 during first and seconding.

08:58:04 During this time I have asked the applicant to present

08:58:08 something from TECO, not supposition, but something from

08:58:10 TECO indicating that is the only way they will allow this

08:58:13 undergrounding to occur, and at second reading I will get up

08:58:16 and say that is not something that you can legally require

08:58:19 them to do.

08:58:23 At this point it's the only way I can see this moving

08:58:25 forward because the truth is, whale a continuance is

08:58:29 probably a very good idea, if this applicant doesn't want to

08:58:31 agree to a continuance, then you are faced with either

08:58:34 granting the waiver and approving this application, or

08:58:38 denying this application on the basis that I have a level of

08:58:44 concern about.

08:58:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have to say that none of this is a

08:58:49 surprise.

08:58:50 Everyone has been working on this for months.

08:58:53 So for it to come to us as if our own staff and legal

08:59:00 department don't even know how to tell us what we are making

08:59:03 a decision based on, and we are going to be agreeing to

08:59:07 conditional waivers, we don't even know what -- I mean --

08:59:13 >>JULIA COLE: I think staff has stated they were never




08:59:16 given any information or evidence from this applicant as to

08:59:19 why they were requesting the waiver.

08:59:21 If they had had that information -- and there's nothing that

08:59:23 obligates them to do that.

08:59:24 So since they didn't have that level of information, I

08:59:28 certainly didn't have that level of information.

08:59:31 That is, unfortunately, a process, sometimes dealing

08:59:35 request --

08:59:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, at some point, staff must have told

08:59:38 the applicant that this was a waiver they were asking for.

08:59:44 >> And they testified to that at the beginning.

08:59:46 >>MARY MULHERN: It's obvious to everyone that it's about

08:59:50 the cost.

08:59:50 I'm not saying that they shouldn't have an estimate.

08:59:53 But be if e-all right.

08:59:57 What's the pleasure of council?

08:59:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Madam Chair?

09:00:05 Mr. LaRosa, you heard what Ms. Cole said concerning the

09:00:11 conditional waiver.

09:00:14 Do you agree to that?

09:00:15 And will you be will to go forward based on those

09:00:18 conditions?

09:00:19 >> Yeah, we'll agree to it.

09:00:21 Again, that was putting the lines on private property was a

09:00:24 thing I asked several times, because I didn't expect that




09:00:28 requirement.

09:00:29 But apparently -- and again I am not an electrical engineer.

09:00:34 Transformers are going to be necessary.

09:00:36 And when you go underground they are pad mounted.

09:00:39 I don't recall seeing any pad mounted transform areas long

09:00:42 Kennedy Boulevard in the D.O.T. right-of-way.

09:00:44 So I was inclined to believe what I was being told.

09:00:47 I would agree, yes, to this waiver.

09:00:51 This is the way it was described.

09:00:53 >> On a conditional --

09:00:56 On a conditional waiver.

09:00:57 It would give me the opportunity to go back and confirm with

09:00:59 TECO what he told me, confirm it in writing, bring it back

09:01:02 to council.

09:01:03 >> And just on the record, to make sure we clean up the

09:01:05 record, you are not going to ask for a continuance, unless

09:01:09 you do get that conditional waiver.

09:01:10 Is that correct?

09:01:14 Or is that afternoon question I can ask?

09:01:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe he's not asking for a

09:01:19 continuance.

09:01:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Because he does have that option, I guess.

09:01:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You understand ow could ask for a

09:01:24 continuance tonight.

09:01:25 >> We would prefer to proceed with the conditional waiver




09:01:27 and in the meantime between the second reading we will get

09:01:32 verification from TECO to come address the issue about the

09:01:36 cost estimate, again going to TECO, talking to them about

09:01:39 cost.

09:01:39 It wasn't clear what the city code specifically requires.

09:01:44 Are we allowed to have poles on the northeast corners of our

09:01:48 property and go underground from there?

09:01:51 Or do we have to go across Rome and Packwood and set poles

09:01:54 on the opposite side there?

09:01:58 To accomplish this task, underground, it's going to take a

09:02:03 meeting with City of Tampa to find out exactly what the code

09:02:05 means because they say right-of-way adjacent to your

09:02:07 property.

09:02:08 Does that mean the full width of the property or just the

09:02:11 half right-of-way?

09:02:12 It doesn't clarify.

09:02:14 It's also again not clear to can be we have poles on the --

09:02:18 and again, TECO, when I spoke with Tim he couldn't give me a

09:02:22 straight answer.

09:02:23 He said we are going to have to have meetings with all the

09:02:25 parties involved.

09:02:25 I can't give you a number.

09:02:29 It's a daunting task.

09:02:31 I apologize.

09:02:32 >> I defer to you.




09:02:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess I am in shock, Mrs. Feeley and

09:02:43 Mrs. Cole, and Mr. Callahan that this didn't come up to what

09:02:48 you just raids.

09:02:50 Maybe the fact they've done this for a living makes it a

09:02:53 little bit difficult for me to consider that no one on your

09:02:58 staff, not the owner, not anyone on our staff, ever talked

09:03:02 about the conditions of the Kennedy overlay and where those

09:03:06 poles might have to be, and what undergrounding, where it

09:03:10 might go, and it just boggles my mind that this never came

09:03:15 up.

09:03:16 >> I understand.

09:03:17 And I'll describe it to you this way.

09:03:19 I approach it as our waiver to the access to local roads.

09:03:21 I have asked for that.

09:03:22 And it's asked for quite commonly and granted quite

09:03:26 commonly.

09:03:26 This request has --

09:03:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's not the same.

09:03:30 You can't equate that to a local road.

09:03:34 >> Well, this has been granted down Kennedy Boulevard a

09:03:37 couple of times.

09:03:38 And looking at the lines, I knew just from deal with TECO on

09:03:42 other projects the cost was going to be --

09:03:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I mean, taking all of that out, my

09:03:47 astonishment is that no one talked about where these lines




09:03:51 had to be if the option for, like you said, the corner

09:03:57 poles, undergrounding -- I mean, that none of that came up

09:04:05 just is completely astonishing, that it wasn't a conscious

09:04:09 decision of someone to say, well, we are just going to ask

09:04:12 for the waiver and see how it flies.

09:04:14 So obviously that will be the least expensive of the

09:04:17 options.

09:04:21 So that's a concern I have, because Councilwoman Mulhern is

09:04:28 right.

09:04:28 I mean, we have to sit here and up or down something that we

09:04:34 don't know, that we can't really discuss.

09:04:39 And we can't flush out.

09:04:42 And that's whereby we trust our applicant, their

09:04:45 representatives and our staff to do during the weeks and

09:04:48 months lead being up to getting here.

09:04:49 So that would be setting a precedent for me, because if we

09:04:53 allow petitioners to come forth and we allow our staff to

09:04:58 continue to bring things to us that haven't been fully

09:05:01 vetted, we are going to sit here for hours and hours trying

09:05:04 to figure out now, today, what's right and what's wrong and

09:05:08 what's grantable and what's not, what's legal, what isn't.

09:05:11 So that's a concern that we would be setting that precedent

09:05:14 that we are having a full-on discussion of planning a

09:05:19 project out at a council meeting.

09:05:21 So that disturbs me.




09:05:23 The other thing is that if we do grant the waiver as

09:05:27 discussed by Ms. Cole as a conditional waiver, what I would

09:05:32 ask is what you offered during your initial -- your

09:05:37 presentation that you grant a utility easement, that you

09:05:44 plan for the conduit to be underground, and place that

09:05:47 conduit underground, and that in the future, should the

09:05:51 opportunity arise when there's a massive redevelopment of

09:05:56 Kennedy Boulevard, that the structure is there.

09:06:03 So that we can eventually have Kennedy Boulevard be the

09:06:07 aesthetic -- meet the aesthetic guidelines of that overlay.

09:06:13 So that's something.

09:06:15 And you mentioned having the sign in the easement.

09:06:18 As far as I understand, nothing is allowed within a utility

09:06:20 easement.

09:06:22 You can put it there if you like, but if TECO or Verizon or

09:06:25 somebody has to access it and they pull up that sign, it is

09:06:28 up to the property owner to replace that sign.

09:06:31 So there isn't anything allowed.

09:06:33 We can't grant you the ability to put something in the

09:06:36 utility easement because it's not legally possible to do.

09:06:39 Anyway, that's my piece.

09:06:41 >> Can I offer just a moment of clarity, if possible?

09:06:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Could we hear from the rest?

09:06:53 >> First of all, harkening back to TGH.

09:06:57 TGH did come in with a detailed cost of TECO.




09:07:01 That was a part of their application.

09:07:06 That night was clouded, if you remember, Mrs. Mulhern, about

09:07:10 the fence, a round the property.

09:07:12 So it got pushed off to the side.

09:07:14 Nonetheless, thereby was an opinion of cost from teak on

09:07:24 that.

09:07:24 And this is too complex, there's too many lines up here, we

09:07:29 want a waiver.

09:07:29 And nobody goes and really analyzes the cost for doing that.

09:07:33 And that's all we have asked.

09:07:34 It says specifically in the code, required to replace any

09:07:40 and all utility lines that's cable communications,

09:07:42 et cetera, underground on the subject parcel, and within the

09:07:45 adjacent rights-of-way.

09:07:47 So it's clear it's both

09:07:49 So the onus is not on us to figure out what that cost is.

09:07:54 And I think at this point they just say we are not doing it

09:07:57 because it's going to cost too much, and we want to wait.

09:07:59 And that's what happens.

09:08:00 And so I'm sorry, this has taken so much time.

09:08:04 I really apologize.

09:08:05 I wish it was more clarity to the process.

09:08:10 But it's going to come up again.

09:08:12 And as Mr. Cohen said, it's come up again soon.

09:08:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen.




09:08:20 >>HARRY COHEN: I just want to say first of all that I think

09:08:23 what we are all clearly so -- I don't want to the speak for

09:08:27 everyone else, but I know that what is so difficult about

09:08:30 this is that I very much want to support this project.

09:08:34 It's an excellent addition to Kennedy Boulevard.

09:08:36 It's a beautiful school.

09:08:38 It's going to create jobs in construction and jobs at the

09:08:41 school.

09:08:43 But at the end of the day, we just have so many unanswered

09:08:46 questions here.

09:08:47 So if we do go ahead with this conditional waiver, I just

09:08:51 want to say on the record that there is going to have to be

09:08:53 a lot of work done between now and the second reading to get

09:08:57 us to where we are going to be comfortable signing off at

09:09:01 the end of the day.

09:09:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, and that's a very good point,

09:09:08 Councilman Cohen, that I was hoping to be able to bring to

09:09:12 council, and you have done so, is that this is a first

09:09:15 reading, and really what you do tonight is pass it for the

09:09:19 purpose of bringing it to a second reading and the adoption

09:09:22 public hearing, which is under your code another full public

09:09:25 hearing.

09:09:26 You can take additional evidence.

09:09:27 And based upon the competent, substantial evidence, if it is

09:09:31 something that you had not heard the first reading and you




09:09:38 give it significant weight, it might be able to change your

09:09:41 decision legally supportable and legally sustainable.

09:09:45 So you are correct in saying that there is that opportunity

09:09:48 for additional information, additional evidence, be brought

09:09:52 forth in the adoption public hearing.

09:09:53 >> I was going to move to close the public hearing unless

09:09:59 you had something else.

09:10:00 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to point out something about

09:10:06 this discussion.

09:10:11 Yes, we will have a second hearing if this passes tonight,

09:10:15 which brings us the reality that we have only talked about

09:10:19 one of the waivers tonight.

09:10:22 We haven't even heard from the public.

09:10:25 I don't know if there's anyone else here who wants to speak

09:10:28 on this.

09:10:29 And I think Mr. Callahan, thank you for researching that

09:10:35 about what happened with the TGH property, but you're right,

09:10:42 the cloud that night was about the walls.

09:10:44 So we spent all this time focusing on one piece that the

09:10:51 staff decided was important, and we didn't even -- yeah, I

09:10:57 do not remember talking about that at all.

09:10:59 It doesn't mean we didn't.

09:11:00 But I think there was a waiver there that just -- I don't

09:11:05 remember any discussion.

09:11:06 I don't even know this F council even considered that, the




09:11:11 undergrounding cost even though apparently TGH had done the

09:11:15 research and presented that, which I think this applicant

09:11:18 needs to do, too.

09:11:20 But I'm just saying, we are asked to make these decisions on

09:11:23 this overlay.

09:11:26 And we need to hear the full picture and have staff really

09:11:31 give us those recommendations and I feel like what happened

09:11:36 was staff makes some decisions about what's important and

09:11:42 what's not.

09:11:43 And it's our job to apply the code and these overlay

09:11:49 districts evenly.

09:11:50 And to make those decisions about things.

09:11:52 So, you know, the clouds are partly created by what we

09:11:57 are -- the information we are given here tonight.

09:12:05 I think we need to hear from the public, if anyone else

09:12:13 wishes to speak on this.

09:12:16 For or against.

09:12:19 Okay.

09:12:23 Petitioner, I think you had your rebuttal.

09:12:27 Do you want to speak?

09:12:29 >> I'm Richard Radtke, 105 south Bradford Avenue.

09:12:45 My wife and I are going to build a school.

09:12:50 And say the same thing as Mr. Callahan, I feel a little

09:12:56 blind-sided here because this has not been an issue.

09:12:59 We discussed it.




09:13:00 It was kind of like passed over, waived just like Tampa

09:13:04 General Hospital.

09:13:05 So it was never a serious enough issue to get some of the

09:13:10 information you want.

09:13:11 I feel it's a little unfair to ask a private business to

09:13:14 fund the infrastructure for a public utility, number one.

09:13:19 Number two, to take our land.

09:13:21 Number three, to only require 50% of the citizens to pay for

09:13:26 it, where the other 50% on the north side get off scot-free.

09:13:31 It's pretty unfair.

09:13:32 You know, if the overlay district wants to acquire something

09:13:36 like that, maybe the City of Tampa should consider a deal

09:13:38 with TECO where they will do it for so much a foot, and

09:13:41 everybody that does development pays into a fund whether

09:13:45 they are on the north side or south side of Kennedy pay into

09:13:48 a fund, you know, so much per foot of frontage.

09:13:52 It's got to be a fairer formula than just requiring 50% of

09:13:55 the citizens to pay for private business infrastructure.

09:13:58 Be and like I said I'm just a little blind-sided because we

09:14:04 could have been prepared if Mr. Callahan raised it as this

09:14:10 important an issue.

09:14:11 We have cooperated, moved stuff, moved the buildings, moved

09:14:15 driveways, dumpsters, planted trees.

09:14:18 We moved a lot of stuff and agreed to a lot of stuff to get

09:14:22 this project built.




09:14:22 And time is of the essence.

09:14:29 We are an education child care facility and we followed the

09:14:34 Hillsborough County school system calendar.

09:14:37 We would like to be open for August of 2012.

09:14:40 And in order to do that, I need to get under construction

09:14:45 here by November.

09:14:48 And it's critical.

09:14:51 We are on short time right now.

09:14:54 And I will go with the conditional waiver, and we have

09:14:58 agreed to that.

09:15:01 If TECO requires it, be if TECO requires it then we will

09:15:07 tray to see if we are going to continue with the project.

09:15:10 I don't know what else to say.

09:15:12 I appreciate your trying to help us November project along.

09:15:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.

09:15:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. RADTKE your engineer hat made the

09:15:27 statement about placing the conduit underground and placing

09:15:30 the easement but you are the property owner, you are the

09:15:33 developer.

09:15:33 I want to hear from you whether or not that's something that

09:15:37 you would do and make sure that you and Mr. Lab Rosa are on

09:15:43 the same page.

09:15:44 >> It's like running the bank of 4-H conduit, running a bank

09:15:50 down the front, a monument sign goes there, if it's going to

09:15:53 be on our private property, we still agree to do it at our




09:15:56 cost, just running some blank conduits, and we still want to

09:16:01 have our monument signs.

09:16:03 >> That's not up to us.

09:16:06 I mean --

09:16:07 >> We could sit down with TECO or something.

09:16:10 >> Well, yeah.

09:16:14 Whether or not you put a sign there, that's between you and

09:16:17 TECO and Verizon and the rest of them in the utility

09:16:21 easement agreement.

09:16:24 I just want to make sure.

09:16:25 We work a very fine line.

09:16:27 I mean, I'm with Councilman Cohen.

09:16:29 I would really love to see this project happen.

09:16:32 It's a beautiful project.

09:16:33 It will be a great addition to Kennedy.

09:16:36 The construction jobs -- I have difficulty speaking as

09:16:41 eloquently as he does.

09:16:42 But I do want to be see this happen.

09:16:45 And we are in a difficult position, at least I can speak for

09:16:49 myself.

09:16:49 I am in a really difficult position because on the one hand,

09:16:52 I'm working with the development community on streamlining

09:16:58 our code and making things better for folks like you to

09:17:02 bring projects forward and make the process more transparent

09:17:06 and very, very, you know, clear about what the city expects




09:17:11 developers to do.

09:17:14 On the other hand, I'm also charged with preserving the code

09:17:18 as it stands today.

09:17:23 There may be considerations for amending the Kennedy

09:17:27 overlay, to take into some of the considerations that are

09:17:31 being developed here today.

09:17:34 And I'll bring this up to the economic competitiveness

09:17:37 committee, but there are some things that happened several

09:17:40 years ago that we need to reexamine.

09:17:43 But I don't have that luxury.

09:17:45 Today, I have the code that HIV to work with.

09:17:47 And it is what it is.

09:17:49 I do like your -- after this is all over because I am not

09:17:54 allowed to talk to you until after the second reading.

09:17:57 But I would like to talk to you at some point about your

09:18:00 idea for that undergrounding fund.

09:18:02 I mean, that's something maybe that we can look at, to be

09:18:07 equitable and fair to all the property owners.

09:18:12 >> We have already signed an agreement with them to give

09:18:15 them an easement across -- because there's an alley that's

09:18:22 vacated but the City Council retains easement rights in the

09:18:26 alley even though they vacated it.

09:18:28 So in order to get Verizon to release this project, you

09:18:34 know, we have already signed an agreement with them for a

09:18:40 mutually agreed upon easement, not specified yet where it's




09:18:45 going to be but mutually agreed upon, now, something like

09:18:47 that is acceptable.

09:18:53 So we got that done for the alley.

09:18:55 But a sign in front as well, I guess.

09:19:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Where is the alley that you are --

09:19:03 >> There's an old alley.

09:19:06 >> What street?

09:19:11 Oh, in the middle of the property, through the middle of the

09:19:14 property.

09:19:14 >> Yes, behind.

09:19:17 >>MARY MULHERN: I had one question.

09:19:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The easement that's vacated is right

09:19:25 there.

09:19:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I did have one question.

09:19:27 Because I looked -- what jumped out at me before we got in

09:19:33 the whole discussion about the undergrounding utilities, is

09:19:42 this almost zero setback on Rome.

09:19:47 You are asking for a waiver for that.

09:19:49 And I'm not sure why.

09:19:54 >> It's the building configuration, and the -- originally it

09:20:02 had shifted over a little bit, but because of the setback

09:20:07 requirements on the Packwood sign, plus parking, problems

09:20:09 with the driveway width requirement, it forced the

09:20:12 building -- the minimum is five, I think.

09:20:15 We are only asking to go down just a little below three.




09:20:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.

09:20:19 I think is that part of the Kennedy overlay, these setbacks?

09:20:28 >> Yeah, adjacent, three, supposed to be five feet.

09:20:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I agree with the rest of council that

09:20:42 bee need to look at this overlay.

09:20:44 I have been here for four years, and it was adopted before I

09:20:50 was here, so we have an overlay district that no one makes

09:20:59 these decisions at this point, or not too many were

09:21:02 posterior of, although, Ms. Feeley, maybe you were here when

09:21:05 we came up with it.

09:21:07 But I always want to ask Linda Saul-Sena when she was here,

09:21:12 and she's not around anymore.

09:21:13 So it's definitely worth looking at.

09:21:15 Any other questions?

09:21:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Did we close the public hearing already?

09:21:25 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

09:21:29 What's the pleasure of council?

09:21:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Madam Chair, I would like to move items

09:21:35 number 8.

09:21:46 I would like to move an ordinance being presented for first

09:21:48 reading consideration, ordinance rezoning property in the

09:21:51 general vicinity of 1702 and 1720 West Kennedy Boulevard,

09:21:55 108 and 112 south Packwood Avenue and 111 south Rome Avenue

09:22:00 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly

09:22:01 described in section 1 from zoning district classification




09:22:04 PD planned development, mixed use, office retail,

09:22:08 restaurant, residential, multifamily, to PD, planned

09:22:11 development, daycare, school, office, business/professional

09:22:15 and medical, providing an effective date, along with the

09:22:19 list of conditions that were presented.

09:22:23 The revision sheet dated August 18th, 2011.

09:22:26 Also adding to the conditional -- the conditional way of

09:22:34 granting of the waiver as requested on the site plan, after

09:22:38 clarification from our legal department, as well as a note

09:22:44 on the site plan to be added between first and second

09:22:47 reading for the granting of a utility easement with

09:22:52 undergrounding of conduit as testified to by the owner and

09:22:57 the applicant for future undergrounding of utilities.

09:23:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could just clarify.

09:23:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I clarified it with Mr. Radtke because I

09:23:15 wanted to make sure Mr. Radtke was on board with laying

09:23:18 the -- granting a utility easement if required by the

09:23:24 undergrounding after consulting with TECO, Verizon, and

09:23:28 whoever else, but I want to make sure that Mr. Radtke was on

09:23:31 board with laying the conduit in that utility easement.

09:23:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like Ms. Cole, though, to -- is

09:23:46 that okay, that motion?

09:23:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question with regard to revision

09:23:51 sheet, I don't believe there -- was there a revision sheet?

09:23:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.




09:23:55 Very long revision sheet that we barely talked about.

09:24:04 We have it.

09:24:05 >> There you go.

09:24:07 >> Second.

09:24:20 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

09:24:23 Anyone opposed?

09:24:24 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

09:24:30 absent.

09:24:31 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

09:24:36 9:30 a.m.

09:24:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 10.

09:25:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

09:25:05 Item number 10 is Z-1131 located at 612 North Dale Mabry

09:25:10 highway.

09:25:10 The request this evening is from PD planned development for

09:25:13 a restaurant to PD planned development for a restaurant.

09:25:17 This is the Perkins on Dale Mabry, just north of Kennedy

09:25:20 Boulevard.

09:25:21 The request that is before you tonight is for an expansion

09:25:26 of an existing building, and that may exceed the 5% which is

09:25:32 allowable administratively.

09:25:33 That's why this request is back before you tonight.

09:25:49 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

09:25:50 I have been sworn.

09:25:51 Three things.




09:25:52 It's in the central planning district so again tonight

09:25:54 central planning district, university district.

09:26:02 RU 100 is the land use along this segment of south Dale

09:26:06 Mabry.

09:26:07 This is R 20.

09:26:08 This is R 10.

09:26:09 For context sake, hear is the site.

09:26:14 It's right adjacent to Carrabba's, directly to the north and

09:26:18 this is the parking lot that goes all the way back to Church

09:26:21 on south Dale Mabry.

09:26:23 Cypress is just to the north, to give you some context as to

09:26:26 where this is at.

09:26:28 As already stated, it's basically going to be retained, just

09:26:32 a modification of the site.

09:26:33 So it's really a substantial change that's going to require

09:26:38 PD so it's more of a technical thing.

09:26:40 It's really not going to modify the existing use

09:26:42 significantly at all, but according to the code it does.

09:26:45 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request

09:26:47 consistent with the comprehensive plan.

09:26:49 Thank you.

09:27:04 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

09:27:04 This site was previously rezoned in 2000 for a restaurant

09:27:08 use.

09:27:09 That was the Perkins.




09:27:10 The site plan for the PD for the Perkins restricted the

09:27:13 building to 5,791 square feet.

09:27:16 The new tenant, which is to expand the building more than

09:27:20 the allowable 5% which can be done administratively.

09:27:23 That is why this request is back before you tonight to grant

09:27:27 that additional square footage.

09:27:29 The parking area, all of that is going to remain exactly as

09:27:34 it is configured today.

09:27:35 And I will show you the actual part of the building that

09:27:37 they are looking to expand.

09:27:39 If you will look at the bottom of page one of your staff

09:27:42 report there are two new waivers being requested tonight and

09:27:44 that has to deal with the signage.

09:27:46 The Perkins sign that is out there under the new sign code

09:27:50 would not be allowed.

09:27:51 It has additional signage.

09:27:55 Greater area than what is allowed under current code.

09:27:58 That is why there are two waivers there to keep the sign

09:28:01 area, which is 114 square feet.

09:28:08 And to reduce the setbacks.

09:28:10 And I'll show you some pictures of that area.

09:28:16 So you will see waivers 1 through 4 on the staff report were

09:28:19 previously approved under the Perkins request, and the two

09:28:22 new ones that are being requested this evening have to do

09:28:25 with the signage.




09:28:31 Here is the site.

09:28:32 Dale Mabry to the east.

09:28:33 Cass to the north

09:28:35 As you can see, Tony mentioned parking for this restaurant,

09:28:40 Carrabba's to the north.

09:28:42 Their parking goes all the way back to church street.

09:28:49 Zoning.

09:28:50 You will see the PD here.

09:28:52 There's PG immediately to the south.

09:28:55 CI to the north.

09:28:56 CG.

09:28:59 All the way to -- a major Dale Mabry corridor there.

09:29:14 Here is a shall view from Dale Mabry looking west

09:29:19 Here is the northern facade.

09:29:21 The square footage we are really talking about is the area

09:29:24 in here.

09:29:25 They are seeking to bring that part of the building out.

09:29:27 And that combined with what's existing there today exceeds

09:29:30 the 5%.

09:29:32 This is the property to the south.

09:29:36 This is a rear view.

09:29:38 The subject property.

09:29:42 Some of the parking area.

09:29:43 This is at the back wall of the property area looking toward

09:29:47 Dale Mabry.




09:29:49 Carrabba's.

09:29:50 The north.

09:29:53 Blinds to Go is across the street.

09:29:55 This is the restaurant to the south.

09:30:00 They have parking in the front as well as parking in the

09:30:03 rear.

09:30:07 Here is a view of the Carrabba's and the Carrabba's sign

09:30:12 that was nonconform at this time works not be permitted

09:30:16 under the sign code today.

09:30:18 That again is the area I discussed with you.

09:30:22 This is immediately to the west.

09:30:32 Back at Dale Mabry to the south there.

09:30:34 I think you all are familiar.

09:30:37 This is the subject parking lot that goes with the county's

09:30:41 restaurant there, and then the Parkins parking lot south

09:30:44 behind that.

09:30:51 That area there, the parking lot comes back.

09:30:56 There's an existing concrete masonry wall there with

09:31:00 shrubbery.

09:31:00 >>HARRY COHEN: Could you show us a photograph of the

09:31:05 existing sign that's going to be grandfathered in?

09:31:07 >> No, because it's not there anymore.

09:31:12 The Perkins sign, the casing for the Perkins sign has been

09:31:14 removed.

09:31:15 And I am not sure if Mr. Powell can speak to that.




09:31:28 They are going to have the facing, the new copy area put

09:31:33 together for that.

09:31:34 But the pick tier that I showed you, it's not there, and I

09:31:39 was just out there last week.

09:31:40 But what they are asking for is a sign of that size.

09:31:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you understand that?

09:31:48 I don't understand that.

09:31:48 Is the pole still there?

09:31:53 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes. The casing is not.

09:31:56 And the casing that encompasses is not either.

09:31:59 >> So we are being asked to grandfather in a sign that

09:32:02 doesn't exist anymore?

09:32:05 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Well, permit a sign of that size to be

09:32:07 replaced in that location.

09:32:10 Because, one, they couldn't meet the setback because the

09:32:13 building is there.

09:32:14 So they can't set back the pole where the building is

09:32:17 because the building has already been built.

09:32:19 It's an existing condition.

09:32:20 >>HARRY COHEN: That's one way.

09:32:22 That's two separate issues.

09:32:24 The sign and the setback.

09:32:27 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Right.

09:32:27 The second is the size of the sign area.

09:32:29 And what they are asking for is an equivalent of what's out




09:32:33 there.

09:32:33 But I will let Mr --

09:32:35 >> An equivalent of what used to be there.

09:32:39 >> What used to be there.

09:32:40 >>MARY MULHERN: They are separate waivers.

09:32:46 >> My name is Timothy Powell.

09:33:07 I have not been sworn.

09:33:08 (Oath administered by Clerk)

09:33:10 >> My name is Timothy H. Powell, president, P.O. Box 1016

09:33:23 Tampa Florida 33601, the applicant for restaurant group LLC,

09:33:29 Terrence Terenzi, president.

09:33:33 The zoning is being applied for the existing planned

09:33:37 development, restaurant and parking locality located at the

09:33:40 southwest corner of west Dale Mabry and west Cass Street in

09:33:43 the Westshore area.

09:33:44 The previously approved plan development was for a Perkins

09:33:47 restaurant which has already been mentioned which has been

09:33:49 vacated for the past several years and a has been somewhat

09:33:52 of an eyesore.

09:33:54 My client with several years of corporate restaurant

09:33:58 experience has been able to purchase the site and will be

09:34:00 submitting the permitting for a comprehensive exterior and

09:34:04 interior architectural overhaul of the property, if

09:34:06 approved.

09:34:07 The existing property structure will be converted to a high




09:34:11 quality restaurant similar to the format.

09:34:13 Group's existing Grill 116 restaurant located on North Dale

09:34:17 Mabry in the Carrollwood area, which has been in existence

09:34:21 for several years.

09:34:24 As staff noted the PD is being required due to the minor

09:34:27 expansion of the structure.

09:34:28 It's actually there's an insert on Cass Street that's being

09:34:31 filled in, and there's also an insert on North Dale Mabry.

09:34:34 They are both setbacks on the property and they are really

09:34:37 in essence fill those inserts in.

09:34:40 Which then exceeded the allowable 5% threshold.

09:34:44 I will say that I have been handling city and county zoning

09:34:47 cases for close to 40 years now.

09:34:50 In fact Mrs. Saul-Sena and I were Planning Commissioners in

09:34:56 the early 60s which not only dates me but dates here

09:35:05 She and I actually worked together.

09:35:06 And I want to be compliment staff on what I consider

09:35:13 cooperative effort especially on the part of Mrs. Feeley to

09:35:16 work with my client.

09:35:17 Timing has been important to my client to ensure that we

09:35:21 will be able to achieve the necessary approvals in time to

09:35:24 have this restaurant remodeled and open to the preliminary

09:35:27 December functions related to the upcoming Republican

09:35:30 convention.

09:35:31 Whenever problems were defined, they there was cooperation




09:35:35 between my client and staff to have define a solution in

09:35:38 order for the rezoning to stay on schedule.

09:35:41 That said, the minor transportation and drainage division

09:35:44 revisions as mentioned, and in the handout by Ms. Feeley,

09:35:51 will be made, and that will be made between the first and

09:35:54 second hearing assuming that we achieve the approval

09:35:57 tonight, are agreeable to my client.

09:36:00 About the sign.

09:36:02 We were able to figure out based on the drawings of the

09:36:06 existing facility that were originally approved of the size

09:36:10 of the sign.

09:36:11 So, therefore, we are just simply wanting to duplicate what

09:36:14 was approved before and what was there before it was taken

09:36:19 down in order to be able, for whatever reason, probably

09:36:22 because when Perkins, either they wanted down or my client

09:36:31 wanted down, whatever, the upper structure, the pole is

09:36:34 still there, et cetera.

09:36:36 And like Ms. Feeley said, we don't really have much of a

09:36:41 choice. If we trade to meet the actual setbacks of the

09:36:44 current sign code, it would run into the building, a size

09:36:50 that would be -- that you could see coming down Dale Mabry.

09:36:54 As a professional planner, both on my part and my staff's

09:36:58 opined the same thing is a sign that would be compatible

09:37:02 with that particular segment of Dale Mabry, incompatible

09:37:06 with the specifically with the Carrabba's sign that's new to




09:37:10 the north of us.

09:37:11 It's not out of character at all in size for what's already

09:37:14 in that particular segment.

09:37:18 As noted by staff, the petition does comply with chapter

09:37:22 27-321 criteria for planned development, and based on the

09:37:26 city's review and this presentation, respectfully request

09:37:28 City Council's approval of Z-11-361.

09:37:32 And I'm available to address any questions that you may

09:37:34 have.

09:37:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Of no questions? Councilman Cohen?

09:37:41 >>ABBYE FEELEY: If I may correct myself for a moment.

09:37:49 If I said they are looking to a nonconform sign, what they

09:37:53 did do was they looked at, like Mr. Powell said, the size of

09:37:57 the sign that was out there, the size of that sign would not

09:37:59 be permissible under today's code.

09:38:03 So seeing that it was part of that fabric, I guess they

09:38:06 requested a waiver.

09:38:07 This waiver would allow them a sign of that equivalent size.

09:38:10 But it so if I can just correct that.

09:38:15 It's a waiver to have a new sign of that size.

09:38:18 >> But it wouldn't is vest the nonconforming sign?

09:38:27 >> No, because the sign is gone.

09:38:28 >> The new sign would be nonconform, and that would then --

09:38:32 >> Not if you grant the waiver.

09:38:33 If you grant the waiver, the new sign is allowable.




09:38:37 It's not an issue of conform or nonconforming.

09:38:40 And I improperly stated that.

09:38:43 It's a question of they are requesting this waiver for a

09:38:47 sign of that size.

09:38:52 Let's play it out the other way.

09:38:53 Had they chosen not to make these improvements to this

09:38:55 restaurant and leave it exactly in the same footprint and go

09:38:58 in there, they could change out that Perkins casing and they

09:39:02 could put in whatever it is.

09:39:07 It's Grill 116.

09:39:09 They could put grill is 16 in that same exact oval.

09:39:12 They can change copy for copy.

09:39:14 >> You're right.

09:39:15 But once the oval doesn't exist anymore, because it's been

09:39:19 removed --

09:39:19 >> Right.

09:39:20 >>HARRY COHEN: What was envisioned by the people that

09:39:24 passed the last sign ordinance was new signs would be

09:39:28 smaller.

09:39:29 >> Absolutely.

09:39:30 >>HARRY COHEN: So I guess what I'm having difficulty with

09:39:33 is we have been through these before, and when new signs get

09:39:43 built, they are supposed to be smaller than the signs that

09:39:46 they are replacing.

09:39:48 So what you are asking for us is to make an exception to




09:39:51 that rule.

09:39:52 >> Yes, the applicant is asking -- yes.

09:39:57 And the way it was explained to me was the justification was

09:40:00 on the existing signage, they estimated that that was the

09:40:03 square footage, and that was where the waiver was generated

09:40:06 from for that equivalent square footage so it wouldn't be

09:40:10 out of character with what was previously there.

09:40:12 >> Well, I find characterizing it as an existing sign to be

09:40:22 confusing since it's not actually there.

09:40:24 >> And I'm not sure when it was removed.

09:40:31 Because when I first visited the site, it was there.

09:40:34 So --

09:40:36 >>HARRY COHEN: Correct me if I am wrong, but the purpose of

09:40:39 doing something like this would generally be the sign is

09:40:43 still there, we don't want to create an economic hardship on

09:40:46 the new business, so we are going to allow them to just

09:40:51 replace that mistake.

09:40:52 But once the sign has already come down, that justification

09:40:55 is gone.

09:40:56 So I'm having difficulty with the idea of allowing

09:41:01 something, a sign that's larger than what is permissible

09:41:05 under the new sign guidelines.

09:41:07 >> And the pole is there because --

09:41:13 >> I understand the issue.

09:41:15 I have no issue with that.




09:41:16 >> Just one thing, a quick question.

09:41:22 Whether the sign is there or not there doesn't really

09:41:24 matter, I guess, so much, because it's just based on where

09:41:29 they place the sign, correct, also?

09:41:32 Because they can put a smaller sign on where it's at, but

09:41:36 it's still -- and maybe I am wrong about this -- still not

09:41:40 conform, correct?

09:41:43 >>ABBYE FEELEY: There's two waivers.

09:41:45 One is the setback.

09:41:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.

09:41:47 We still have to waive that.

09:41:50 >>ABBYE FEELEY: That setback, yes.

09:41:51 Yes.

09:41:52 If you chose they should meet code which is 50 feet of sign

09:41:55 space, that's maximum, then it would just be the waiver for

09:41:59 the setback, and we would ask the second waiver be stricken

09:42:04 between first and second reading and removed from the site

09:42:06 plan.

09:42:07 Thank you.

09:42:07 >> And thank you for calling me "sir." I don't get that

09:42:10 very often.

09:42:11 Mr. Powell, one question.

09:42:12 Obviously, that sign, whatever you are going to do, it's not

09:42:15 going to be same shape as Perkins was, it sounds like.

09:42:19 And so, you know, obviously, whatever happened to the




09:42:24 casing, you know, they are going to measure it and figure

09:42:27 out, you know, getting a new casing is what they are doing,

09:42:29 would be my guess.

09:42:31 >> Perkins, if I recall correctly, had a unique oval shape

09:42:38 to it.

09:42:38 >> And there may be some copyright like the shape of signs

09:42:42 and -- anyway, that's all I had to say.

09:42:45 >> I wonder if you can copyright --

09:42:49 >> You can't copyright.

09:42:51 Believe it or not, you can copyright quite a bit of that.

09:42:55 So, yeah, exactly.

09:42:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Feeley, can we have the picture back

09:43:06 of the site where it shows the Carrabba's sign?

09:43:11 Maybe?

09:43:29 Thanks so much.

09:43:30 And the site of the Grill 116 would be across the street?

09:43:40 I think there's another one that shows the site and the

09:43:43 Carrabba's in the background.

09:43:48 While we have Carrabba's up there, it's so close, in your

09:43:54 best sometimes, what's the size of that sign?

09:43:56 Be

09:44:02 All I know is 114 square feet is approximately the same size

09:44:05 or maybe a little bit bigger than my office.

09:44:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I mean, 7 by 20 is 114 square feet.

09:44:19 >> I guess we are talking about the aesthetics of the sign




09:44:35 code and going back to the same concept we put things in

09:44:38 place for a reason, and if we continually grant variances or

09:44:41 waivers to those, we continually grant waivers to them, then

09:44:46 why have the design code in place at all?

09:44:51 So the fact that there are two waivers, I would be inclined

09:44:59 to support waiver number 5, because there's in a other place

09:45:02 for that sign to go, but maybe I would not be so -- I

09:45:08 shouldn't say maybe.

09:45:09 I would not be so inclined to support waiver number 6 from

09:45:13 50 to 114 square feet.

09:45:15 I mean, it seems that the 114 was asked for because that was

09:45:20 what was there, and not based on a design concept that your

09:45:25 client has for his own sign.

09:45:28 It may be is 14 square feet.

09:45:30 It may be less, because quite frankly, your client's sign

09:45:36 hasn't been done.

09:45:37 >> I think we need to move forward.

09:45:43 Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this?

09:45:46 >> I just want to say, because I was here when we passed the

09:45:52 new sign code, and I was here after we had request after

09:46:00 request.

09:46:02 As soon as it passed for waivers, many of which were

09:46:04 granted, but I have been happy that this council -- and I

09:46:12 think Ms. Cole who is sitting over there worked for years on

09:46:15 the sign code, and would be happy to council actually like




09:46:27 to honor the work and the intent of that code.

09:46:30 As businesses change, and as new development happens, then

09:46:34 we are going to reduce the visual clutter.

09:46:36 So I wouldn't support -- I would support the existence of

09:46:51 the pole is one foot from the right-of-way, and from the

09:46:57 street now?

09:46:58 Is that right?

09:46:59 You asked for a waiver from 13 feet to one foot?

09:47:07 We do need to see that picture of the pole again.

09:47:11 Is that from --

09:47:18 >> The casing extended over the pole to where the evenly of

09:47:20 the casing was.

09:47:22 That was one foot from the property line.

09:47:26 >>MARY MULHERN: So if they don't -- if we are not granting

09:47:29 them the area, increase in area, why do they need the

09:47:35 setback waiver?

09:47:38 >> Because the pole is still not set back properly to

09:47:41 where -- because the height of the sign.

09:47:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.

09:47:46 Well, I don't see -- no, we are talking about -- setback?

09:47:52 We are talking about setback and height and area.

09:47:56 So I'm trying to understand the setback.

09:48:04 So you are talking about the casing of the sign's face that

09:48:09 extends -- so it doesn't exist anymore.

09:48:15 So I think I also feel like there's a pole there, and the




09:48:21 size of the pole could be reduced, and I wouldn't be

09:48:24 surprised if they are going to put a new -- they are

09:48:28 planning to put a new pole or new support in any way?

09:48:32 When you look at that Carrabba's, they have a giant monument

09:48:36 for --

09:48:39 >> I'm sorry, I didn't hear the first part of your sentence.

09:48:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you going to keep -- are you

09:48:45 planning -- were you hoping to keep that existing pole?

09:48:49 >> Yes, ma'am.

09:48:49 >> A metal pole.

09:48:51 Okay.

09:48:53 Thank you.

09:48:55 I'm not inclined to give them any waivers because they can

09:48:57 reduce the height of the pole.

09:48:59 When they reduce -- or maybe --

09:49:02 >> Well, the problem is if you reduce the height of the pole

09:49:05 to a certain degree you are going to create a clearance

09:49:07 problem.

09:49:08 If you bring it down, I think based on whereof the pole is,

09:49:13 we would bring it down, you couldn't put a sign on top of

09:49:17 the pole because then it would be too low.

09:49:23 Meaning because of the setback.

09:49:24 In other words, where the pole is --

09:49:26 >> Is that because of the addition you are putting onto the

09:49:29 building?




09:49:29 >> Well, yeah, in other words, the sign -- yeah.

09:49:36 It would be down --

09:49:37 >> But you assumed you were going to get the waiver of the

09:49:40 sign?

09:49:40 >> No.

09:49:41 What we would be willing to do is if in fact -- the more I

09:49:50 have been sitting here looking at the Carrabas sign, with

09:49:54 the 50 square feet is the sign code, per face?

09:50:01 So the 50 square feet is the requirement.

09:50:07 We have spent a lot of time talking about this before.

09:50:12 That have been we would go ahead and comply with the face

09:50:15 signs of the sign ordinance, which was for the 50 square

09:50:20 feet limit.

09:50:21 For each face.

09:50:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we need to hear from legal and

09:50:28 from -- it seems there's a big debate going on.

09:50:41 I'm just saying I'm not inclined to grant any of these

09:50:44 waivers for the sign.

09:50:46 Councilman Suarez?

09:50:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was going to say, Mr. Powell, I was going

09:50:53 to make one mention then.

09:50:55 If we if you were going to remove that condition concerning

09:50:59 the 114 square foot to make it 50 square foot on the sign

09:51:03 face -- were you going to still keep the height for the

09:51:08 pole, though?




09:51:12 I assume so but I just want to make sure that was correct.

09:51:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: May I ask Mr. Shelby to make a

09:51:45 clarification?

09:51:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council does not have -- if a petitioner

09:51:50 wishes, based on council's sentiment, that it wishes to

09:51:56 voluntarily strike waivers, the petitioner can choose to do

09:52:01 so.

09:52:01 Council is in no position to approve something saying, I'll

09:52:05 approve this and we'll strike this waiver.

09:52:08 This is a petition that's being presented to you with these

09:52:11 waivers.

09:52:12 Council's option is to vote it up or down.

09:52:15 And remind council that the reason this petition is here is

09:52:19 because it could not have been granted administratively

09:52:21 because of the square footage by which it oversteps that.

09:52:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby, is this not a first reading?

09:52:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.

09:52:32 >>MARY MULHERN: What happened on our last hearing?

09:52:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: In what sense?

09:52:39 I'm sorry.

09:52:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Where we adjusted what -- we granted some

09:52:46 waivers, not others, and changed some of the waiver

09:52:49 requests.

09:52:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council did not.

09:52:54 The petitioner did.




09:52:54 >>HARRY COHEN: I think everyone is making their feelings

09:53:05 clear to allow the petitioner an opportunity to consider

09:53:09 whether or not to continue to request --

09:53:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Cohen, for explaining that.

09:53:16 >> At this point I think there's more meeting over there

09:53:19 than there is up here.

09:53:20 >> Being familiar with what Mr. Shelby said before, yes, we

09:53:27 are the ones that are supposed to volunteer on certain

09:53:29 things.

09:53:29 And I totally agree with that.

09:53:32 What I would be willing to do on behalf of the applicant is

09:53:35 to go ahead and follow the sentiment of the council, though

09:53:42 I'm not sure I have a consensus of the total sentiment.

09:53:45 I have heard a couple of opinions.

09:53:47 But what we would do, we do not want to make this such a

09:53:51 controversial issue.

09:53:53 We would definitely reduce the size of the sign down to the

09:53:58 sign ordinance size, the 50 square feet.

09:54:01 The only thing -- and if you would please grant me the thing

09:54:06 of working the pole location and the height between the

09:54:09 first and second reading, we will do that and resolve that

09:54:13 particular issue.

09:54:15 I had thought that all the details were on the site plan,

09:54:17 and apparently they were not, as to the exact size,

09:54:22 location.




09:54:22 I know we talked about if it's a certain height, and then a

09:54:26 certain setback has to be achieved off of the right-of-way,

09:54:29 and if you don't -- if you bring it up to a certain height,

09:54:33 and then we were trying to put the size of the sign there,

09:54:36 then we would reach a setback problem.

09:54:40 If I could resolve that particular issue between the first

09:54:42 and second reading and come back to you, real rising that we

09:54:46 would be at risk for the fact that you could deny based on

09:54:50 the new information, yes.

09:54:51 But what I am trying to say is we will move to resolve the

09:54:57 issue and coming to as much compliance as possible but on

09:55:00 the face size, we will be okay.

09:55:02 We will comply we've the city's face size limitation of 50

09:55:05 square feet per face.

09:55:07 I just have been to figure out the pole that's sitting there

09:55:10 now, which is going back to Mr. Cohen's thing of we have an

09:55:13 existing pole there, and to take that down and relocate it,

09:55:19 et cetera, we had assumed that we could keep that particular

09:55:24 thing there.

09:55:25 At the same time, we will also look at that.

09:55:26 >> Thank you, Mr. Powell, for your clarity on that H.we

09:55:31 appreciate that after this night.

09:55:33 >> And I'm sorry this came up to be somewhat confusing.

09:55:37 We were actually first told that there might be a comment

09:55:40 from an adjoining property owner, i.e., Carrabba's, which I




09:55:45 found somewhat hypocritical but that's beside the point.

09:55:49 And that's the only thing we paid any attention to. I did

09:55:52 not realize about the council's concern about wanting to

09:55:56 come into compliance, and Ms. Mulhern, we will definitely

09:56:00 try to address that particular issue.

09:56:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

09:56:08 Madam Chairman, move to close the public hearing.

09:56:10 >> Second.

09:56:10 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

09:56:13 Okay.

09:56:13 >> Move an ordinance on first reading rezoning property in

09:56:25 the general vicinity of 612 North Dale Mabry highway in the

09:56:28 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in

09:56:30 section 1 from zoning district classifications PD, planned

09:56:35 development, restaurant, to PD, planned development,

09:56:38 restaurant, providing an effective date.

09:56:40 And with the conditions provided by petitioner onto the site

09:56:45 plan, and by conditions by Ms. Feeley.

09:56:49 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Just for the record, the revision sheet

09:56:53 that we had, plus the removal of the waiver for the

09:56:57 additional square footage.

09:57:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me amend my motion to include the

09:57:04 revision sheet dated August 18th, 2001.

09:57:08 What was that second part, Mrs. Feeley?

09:57:11 >>ABBYE FEELEY: For the removal of the waiver --




09:57:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: For the sign face.

09:57:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Removal of waiver number 6 from the site

09:57:21 plan.

09:57:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.

09:57:36 >> Second.

09:57:37 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm concerned about -- we are not clear on

09:57:41 waiver number 5 still.

09:57:42 >> If I may, Madam Chair, I believe that the petition her

09:57:47 said that he was going to try between first and second

09:57:50 reading to get the sign in compliance based on whatever the

09:57:53 setbacks might be.

09:57:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Can that be part of the motion?

09:57:57 It can't really, can it?

09:57:59 Because it's not specific?

09:58:04 >>ABBYE FEELEY: That's really the problem.

09:58:05 And I know your public hearing is closed on this item right

09:58:08 now.

09:58:13 When all these waivers were created they were created on the

09:58:15 parameters of that other sign.

09:58:17 So now for me to say, oh, you need the height or doesn't

09:58:20 need the height, I can't compute that rate now because I

09:58:22 have no reference for that computation.

09:58:24 So we are going to do our best.

09:58:26 We are going to look at putting the 50 square feet up there

09:58:29 and see where we are, and if something happens and we have




09:58:32 to go back to first reading or second reading, we'll just do

09:58:35 our best to try to rectify it properly per the direction of

09:58:39 council.

09:58:39 >> I assume my motion would stand as is?

09:58:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

09:58:45 Sorry.

09:58:45 >> Second.

09:58:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry.

09:58:48 Councilman Suarez, seconded by Councilman Montelione.

09:58:53 All in favor?

09:58:54 Opposed?

09:58:55 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

09:58:58 absent.

09:58:59 Second reading will be on September 1st at 9:30 a.m.

09:59:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 11.

09:59:18 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item number 11 on your agenda this evening

09:59:21 is Z- 1-32 located at 3244 temple street.

09:59:27 The request this evening is a Euclidean request from an

09:59:30 RM-16 residential multifamily to a CG commercial general

09:59:36 zoning district.

09:59:37 There are no waivers.

09:59:38 This is the Euclidean request.

09:59:41 Site must meet all codes.

09:59:49 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

09:59:52 You are all going to sleep really good tonight.




09:59:55 This particular project is located on the eastern edge of

09:59:58 the central Tampa district located in this general vicinity.

10:00:02 It's located just north of the interstate, land use category

10:00:07 CMU-35 which allows the Euclidean request of general

10:00:10 commercial which is CG.

10:00:12 This is residential 20, residential 10.

10:00:14 Here is 50th street.

10:00:15 Here are some community 35.

10:00:19 Let me show you to scale.

10:00:22 This is that auction lot just north of the interstate.

10:00:27 You are just north of the interstate and 50th street.

10:00:30 We have done a couple of smaller projects over here to the

10:00:33 south.

10:00:34 We did a strip center, historically speaking, farther south,

10:00:40 in closer proximity where we did convert to CG about six

10:00:46 years ago.

10:00:47 I think we did a rezoning five or six years ago.

10:00:49 So that has been done.

10:00:53 What's interesting to know, there is a residential presence

10:00:55 here.

10:00:55 The CG is again going to be much more stringent as far as

10:01:00 buffering and screening for whatever use is going to be

10:01:02 placed on this corner.

10:01:03 It is at a T-intersection, not a regular four-way

10:01:07 intersection so you are going to have the opportunity for




10:01:09 putting CG here.

10:01:10 There's not a lot of existing uses.

10:01:12 There are some scattered CG uses or commercial uses and low

10:01:17 density office uses around 50th street, but 50th

10:01:20 street is also a major arterial road, classified in your

10:01:23 city's reclassification system.

10:01:26 Staff found the request consistent with the comprehensive

10:01:29 plan.

10:01:29 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The request is from an RM-16 p multifamily

10:01:40 zoning district to CG commercial general. There are no

10:01:43 waivers.

10:01:43 This is a 100-by-107-foot lot, so it's just about a quarter

10:01:49 of an acre and located at the southeast corner of north

10:01:53 50th and 20th Avenue.

10:01:54 Property is surrounded by vacant property to the north,

10:01:57 commercial uses to the south, residential to the east, and

10:02:00 commercial and residential uses to the west.

10:02:03 This segment of 40th is a divided -- Tony showed you,

10:02:10 and I-4 is just to the south, it's even very difficult for

10:02:18 me to stop and get some pictures of the other uses.

10:02:20 This is an insurance office, and another uses, the subject

10:02:24 we are talking about here, multifamily, residential along

10:02:30 temple street.

10:02:35 This is a picture of the property looking south from

10:02:38 28th.




10:02:42 This is another picture from that intersection, more toward

10:02:49 the intersection looking west.

10:02:52 This picture is from temple street looking west.

10:02:56 Another piece.

10:03:00 A hair salon, photographer there, frontage.

10:03:05 This is the northeast corner.

10:03:10 This is the southeast corner of temple and 28th

10:03:13 This is a look out from 28th looking south on 50th.

10:03:19 This is immediately to the east.

10:03:23 This is located south on temple.

10:03:28 This is looking back north of 50th

10:03:39 Here are some pictures of the structures, of the elevations.

10:03:50 Staff found this request consistent.

10:03:52 It does meet the CG commercial general zoning district

10:03:55 parameters, 10,000 square foot lot, minimum width, 75 feet.

10:03:59 Setbacks, 10-foot fence side, rear and corner.

10:04:03 I provided you with a use table on painful 5 of your staff

10:04:06 report that shows you all allowable uses within the CG

10:04:09 district.

10:04:10 Staff is available if you have any questions.

10:04:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Petitioner?

10:04:23 >> My name is Tom tran, and I'm not -- I have not been

10:04:36 sworn.

10:04:36 (Oath administered by Clerk)

10:04:46 I do. I am the owner, the residential, and up and down




10:04:55 50th street, commercial.

10:04:57 So this year we decided to change to CG, like a neighborhood

10:05:11 contained of thing, and in a changes in the building or

10:05:15 anything.

10:05:19 It's like a commercial CG with no change.

10:05:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:05:29 Any questions?

10:05:32 Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this?

10:05:37 >> Good evening.

10:05:39 I'm Dan Gordon.

10:05:40 I haven't been sworn in.

10:05:41 (Oath administered by Clerk).

10:05:49 >> I'm the tenant there at the property, portrait, wedding,

10:05:56 special events.

10:05:58 My wife is not here.

10:06:00 She's a hair stylist.

10:06:01 And we are wanting to put our business there.

10:06:04 I was under the impression it was already zoned for

10:06:06 commercial.

10:06:06 But that's what we are here to do.

10:06:08 And if you will allow us that, we would certainly appreciate

10:06:13 it.

10:06:13 Thank you.

10:06:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:06:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Madam Chair, move to close.




10:06:21 >> Second.

10:06:22 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

10:06:24 What's the pleasure of council?

10:06:25 >> I move an ordinance for first reading rezoning property

10:06:32 in the general vicinity of 3422 temple street in the city of

10:06:36 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

10:06:39 from zoning district classifications RM-16 residential,

10:06:44 multifamily, to CG, commercial general, providing an

10:06:47 effective date.

10:06:47 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

10:06:53 Any opposed?

10:06:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Capin being

10:06:57 absent.

10:06:57 Second reading and adoption will be on September 1st at

10:07:00 9:30 a.m.

10:07:07 >> Move to receive and file.

10:07:08 >> Second.

10:07:09 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

10:07:18 We will start over here.

10:07:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

10:07:22 I made a motion this morning this died for lack of a second

10:07:29 because we were talking about a date

10:07:32 So the date has been cleared up, and I am making a motion

10:07:36 for a presentation with recognition of the officers,

10:07:42 detectives, those understood the command of Tampa Police




10:07:44 Department district 2, Major Newman and other agencies

10:07:48 involved, inviting Chief Castor and principal Farkas of

10:07:55 freedom high school on September 1st at 9:00 a.m. for a

10:07:58 commendation.

10:07:59 >> Second.

10:08:00 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

10:08:03 Anything else?

10:08:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I actually have one piece of new

10:08:09 business.

10:08:14 I am going to pass the gavel to Councilman Cohen.

10:08:17 I need to amend a motion that I made on May 19th

10:08:20 regarding scheduling of the historic preservation workshop

10:08:23 for September 15th.

10:08:26 I would like to include a presentation from the AIA,

10:08:30 American institute of architects, and ask Dennis Fernandez

10:08:35 of our historic preservation department to coordinate that

10:08:38 invitation.

10:08:41 >> Second: We have a motion by Councilwoman Mulhern,

10:08:46 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

10:08:48 All in favor?

10:08:49 >>MARY MULHERN: And then one other thing related to the

10:08:51 same item on the agenda.

10:08:58 We have both workshop and the FLBE, WMBE workshop scheduled

10:09:03 for 9 a.m.

10:09:05 I would like to ask that the historic preservation workshop




10:09:13 be first on that agenda.

10:09:18 Because of the schedule of the AIA.

10:09:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.

10:09:23 >> Motion by Councilwoman Mulhern, second by Councilwoman

10:09:27 Montelione.

10:09:28 All in favor?

10:09:28 Opposed?

10:09:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say, add something to

10:09:35 Councilwoman Montelione, and earlier Councilman Suarez

10:09:39 making the motion for Tampa Police Department and thanking

10:09:44 them and also to thank the community for coming forward and

10:09:49 assisting.

10:09:52 It was a very important and brave thing that they did and

10:09:56 contracted the Tampa Police Department, and I wanted them to

10:09:59 know how much we appreciate that.

10:10:13 I would like to present a commendation to Councilman

10:10:16 Reddick -- [ Laughter ]

10:10:26 For consideration.

10:10:27 We will do that some date.

10:10:30 Did we get a second to that?

10:10:33 [ Laughter ]

10:10:34 >> No.

10:10:35 I have new business.

10:10:35 I am going to bring a dissertation about the Constitution,

10:10:38 the history of it in this country right now.




10:10:40 I'm just kidding.

10:10:41 I am ready to adjourn, Madam Chair.

10:10:43

10:10:55



DISCLAIMER:

This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of third
party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.