Tampa City Council
Thursday, October 22, 2009
6:00 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.
(City Council Meeting called to order by Chair Pro Tem
Gwen Miller.)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
>>JOSEPH CAETANO: Here.
06:10:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
06:10:19 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
06:10:34 I would like to go over a few items on the agenda, if
06:10:36 I may.
06:10:37 Item number 2, Z09-30, there's been a request for
06:10:42 continuance until January 28, 2010.
06:10:47 Waiting for correspondence from Mark Sullivan who is
06:10:52 the petitioner.
06:10:53 I believe they may be amending this application.
06:10:55 So in order to allow for adequate time that's being
06:10:59 updated.
06:11:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public here want to
06:11:03 speak on item number 2?
06:11:06 You can speak on the continuance.
06:11:07 Okay, get a motion.
06:11:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to continue to January
06:11:11 28th, the year 2010.
06:11:15 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
06:11:16 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
06:11:18 Opposed, Nay.
06:11:19 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Also item number 4, Z 09-35, there's
06:11:23 been a request for continuance to November 12th
06:11:26 from Gina Grimes, who is the authorized agent for the
06:11:28 petitioner.
06:11:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Open the public hearing.
06:11:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to open.
06:11:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
06:11:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public like to
06:11:36 speak on item 4, on the continuance?
06:11:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to continue to January 12 of
06:11:43 '09.
06:11:44 >> Repeat that.
06:11:51 >> The continuance will be November 12th.
06:11:54 >> No objection to that?
06:11:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, she asked.
06:11:59 Nobody stood up.
06:12:00 Well, do it again.
06:12:01 We are not in a rush.
06:12:04 Cardinals are out of the World Series.
06:12:07 [ Laughter ]
06:12:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
06:12:09 would like to speak on item number 4?
06:12:11 You can speak on the continuance only.
06:12:13 If you are for the continuance or against it.
06:12:16 >>> We are against it.
06:12:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well with, wait a minute, wait a
06:12:21 minute.
06:12:22 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to come to the mike.
06:12:26 >> Come to the mike.
06:12:29 State your name.
06:12:30 I'm trying to facilitate it here so it will be part of
06:12:32 the record.
06:12:35 >> I am Wesley white, represent the North Hyde Park
06:12:39 civic association.
06:12:42 The neighbors are here and present.
06:12:44 The Smith family.
06:12:45 We would not like to have this continued.
06:12:48 We would like it to be discussed here at this time.
06:12:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
06:12:54 Petitioner?
06:12:59 >>GINA GRIMES: Law firm of hill, ward and Henderson.
06:13:03 I just took over representation of this matter earlier
06:13:06 this week.
06:13:07 We submitted the affidavit from the property owner,
06:13:10 and it only came to our attention, I believe, on
06:13:13 Tuesday of this week that we had neighborhood
06:13:14 opposition.
06:13:15 The attorney that was handling it previously was
06:13:17 dealing -- with Mr. Robert Allen from the civic
06:13:21 association and until Tuesday we weren't aware there
06:13:23 was any specific opposition.
06:13:25 So the reason for the continuance is so we have an
06:13:27 opportunity to meet with the neighborhood and discuss
06:13:30 with them their concerns and see if we can address
06:13:32 them.
06:13:36 >>GWEN MILLER: What's the pleasure of council?
06:13:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, based on the facts that we
06:13:40 heard, they want to meet with individuals who feel --
06:13:45 well --
06:13:48 >>> After quick consultation, we will go with that.
06:13:52 Thank you very much.
06:13:53 Sorry.
06:13:55 >> Moving for November 12, 2009 to allow both parties
06:13:58 to meet and tray to settle this dispute.
06:14:00 >>> Right.
06:14:01 Thank you.
06:14:02 >>GWEN MILLER: At 6 p.m.
06:14:05 Did we have a second on that?
06:14:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
06:14:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
06:14:12 All in favor?
06:14:13 Opposed?
06:14:14 >> Everything else is ready to move forward this
06:14:18 evening.
06:14:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to introduce Julia
06:14:21 Cole, one of our city attorneys, and I believe --
06:14:28 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
06:14:30 I would like the opportunity to introduce to City
06:14:32 Council two law students from Stetson law school.
06:14:36 Rebecca Haworth and Kristin Bacardi here to observe
06:14:41 City Council and see what their local government
06:14:43 leaders are doing when they are in this form and
06:14:45 representing you all and to observe what y'all do.
06:14:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Welcome.
06:14:50 Welcome.
06:14:52 Are you ready for number one?
06:14:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to open all the rest
06:15:04 of them that are going to be heard today.
06:15:05 Some are continued and some are not.
06:15:07 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
06:15:10 All in favor say Aye.
06:15:12 Opposed?
06:15:13 Anyone that's going to speak, would you please raise
06:15:14 your right hand to be sworn in?
06:15:17 If you are going to speak, please stand and raise your
06:15:20 right hand.
06:15:23 (Oath administered by Clerk)
06:15:27 >> I believe there are items that have been available
06:15:29 for public inspection in City Council's chambers.
06:15:33 Excuse me, their office.
06:15:34 I would like to have received and filed before action
06:15:36 is taken.
06:15:38 >> So moved.
06:15:40 >> Second.
06:15:40 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
06:15:43 Opposed, Nay.
06:15:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again in there's been any ex parte
06:15:46 communications between you and any member of the
06:15:48 public in regard to any of the petitions tonight,
06:15:50 please disclose the sum and substance and with whom it
06:15:53 occurred prior to taking any action.
06:15:55 Thank you.
06:15:57 >> Good evening.
06:16:00 Abbye Feeley, land development.
06:16:02 I have been sworn.
06:16:03 Item number is V 09-34 located at 3401 west Obispo
06:16:08 Avenue.
06:16:08 This petition was originally heard by council on
06:16:10 August 27th, and the petitioner requested a
06:16:13 continuance to consider the application to a PD.
06:16:18 The application as it stands, it has not been amended,
06:16:22 and the request remains as is.
06:16:23 I can briefly go back over what the request was and
06:16:28 give you some familiarity.
06:16:33 The request was from RM-16 to RM-18, residential
06:16:37 multifamily district.
06:16:38 It is the Euclidean zoning request, and therefore no
06:16:41 waivers are permitted.
06:16:52 Sorry.
06:16:55 This is the site shown here in yellow, Concordia to
06:16:59 the east.
06:17:03 The zoning atlas sheet shows the site here in green,
06:17:11 the whole corridor located along Concordia.
06:17:17 It's currently a multifamily zoning district.
06:17:31 There are some pockets of RM-18 around this area and
06:17:34 also residential single-family which is immediately
06:17:37 adjacent to the subject property.
06:17:39 I am going to show you some pictures.
06:17:48 This is the subject property.
06:17:58 This is Concordia, the side yard.
06:18:19 This is the rear of the property.
06:18:28 There is multifamily immediately to the north.
06:18:40 This is the side.
06:18:43 This is the elementary immediately across the street
06:18:45 to the east.
06:18:47 And then there is another duplex to the south
06:18:56 immediately adjacent to that.
06:18:59 It's also multifamily unit.
06:19:03 Staff is available for any questions.
06:19:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
06:19:24 >> Good evening.
06:19:28 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
06:19:29 Our recommendation is the same as it was before, Madam
06:19:31 Chairman.
06:19:32 Consistent.
06:19:33 Thank you.
06:19:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
06:19:34 >> Good evening.
06:19:41 This is my husband Ryan Maas.
06:19:45 I'm Becki Maas, petition to rezone our property at
06:19:48 3401 west Obispo from RM-16 to RM-18.
06:19:56 We wish to do this because we have a small cottage in
06:20:01 the back that we would like to rent out.
06:20:07 I have pictures here of the property.
06:20:10 This is the main house.
06:20:21 We purchased the home --
06:20:23 >> Give her the hand mike, please.
06:20:32 >>> This is the main house.
06:20:35 We purchased the property in 2004.
06:20:41 We made quite a few improvements to it over the years.
06:20:44 Recently, we just put a new roof, new gutters, had it
06:20:49 painted a year and a half ago.
06:20:55 We have improved the property considerably.
06:21:00 Here is the back cottage.
06:21:07 We also put a new roof, new gutters on the cottage
06:21:11 there.
06:21:15 That's from the backyard.
06:21:18 Facing, if you are standing in the middle of the yard,
06:21:20 looking straight at it.
06:21:27 This is my neighbor's -- our neighbor's home right
06:21:32 next door.
06:21:36 It's a single-family home.
06:21:39 Immediately behind us is a four-plex.
06:21:43 That's from our backyard.
06:21:48 And Abbye showed you pictures earlier of the two
06:21:56 properties immediately adjacent to us, two duplexes.
06:22:01 And then on the east side is Roosevelt elementary
06:22:07 school.
06:22:12 Here's the inside.
06:22:14 Here's a picture of the bathroom, bathroom sink.
06:22:24 Full size stackable washer and drier.
06:22:33 Here's the inside there.
06:22:35 A little kitchen area.
06:22:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Maas, let me stop you.
06:22:42 Mrs. Saul-Sena has a question.
06:22:44 >> I have of a question for Ms. Cole.
06:22:46 We have already had a complete first public hearing.
06:22:51 And my understanding was that we were coming back
06:22:53 today because the petitioner was going to amend the
06:22:56 petition to a PD.
06:22:58 We have in front of us what we had the first time, and
06:23:01 we are hearing the same information, and we have
06:23:04 already heard from the petitioner, we have already
06:23:07 heard from the neighborhood.
06:23:09 Wouldn't the appropriate thing for us to do at this
06:23:11 point be to vote?
06:23:15 Could you tell us what our stance is?
06:23:18 Because my memory serves pretty well in this.
06:23:22 We already had a complete first hearing.
06:23:24 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
06:23:26 The case before you previously you really did have an
06:23:29 entire hearing relating to this issue knew terms of
06:23:31 having the petitioner give their case, you had
06:23:34 opposition, et cetera.
06:23:36 I think the petitioner has a right to draft the issue
06:23:39 related to whether or not she became a PD or didn't
06:23:44 become a PD but if you don't want to hear additional
06:23:47 information, I think unless she has anything new to
06:23:49 add you can go ahead and end the repetition.
06:23:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That was my understanding, we had
06:23:57 basically finished hearing from everybody, and the
06:23:59 petitioner is going to come back to council with a PD.
06:24:04 >>JULIA COLE: Well, the vote was to allow the
06:24:06 opportunity to make that determination, continue on
06:24:08 that basis.
06:24:09 And so if that's the position of council and you want
06:24:12 to go ahead and say that this is really repetitious
06:24:15 information, you could go ahead and request for her to
06:24:18 wrap up on any of the outstanding issues, but you also
06:24:22 do need to allow an opportunity for the opposition to
06:24:26 have any additional comments on that issue.
06:24:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, then, in the future, you
06:24:32 need to be clear with us if we have closed the public
06:24:35 hearing or not, and -- I mean, I --
06:24:39 >>> Yes, you can close the public hearing.
06:24:41 >> And give everybody time that's spoken.
06:24:45 >>JULIA COLE: I agree and I apologize for not making
06:24:47 that statement.
06:24:49 I assumed that she was showing information as it
06:24:51 related to the PD.
06:24:52 But as the testimony got further down the line I
06:24:54 started to also realize that we may have run a little
06:24:57 far afield.
06:24:58 So if it's the will of City Council to ask the
06:25:01 petitioner to just indicate her position on the PD
06:25:04 issue, and the additional information, that would be
06:25:08 appropriate.
06:25:09 However, I think you do also need to hear from the
06:25:12 opposition as it relates to that issue.
06:25:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can.
06:25:16 Ms. Cole did raise the issue with me and my concern
06:25:18 was -- and council, Ms. Saul-Sena, you are absolutely
06:25:23 right with regard to your position.
06:25:25 This is a continued public hearing and you can ask
06:25:27 that the petitioner cut right to the chase as to the
06:25:30 issue why it was continued.
06:25:32 The fact that she is representing herself in
06:25:36 consultation with Ms. Cole, might allow her agent more
06:25:39 latitude but obviously you have the opportunity
06:25:42 understanding the issues and refreshing council's
06:25:44 recollection to ask her specifically what has changes
06:25:48 since her last presentation, what is the answer to the
06:25:51 reason for the continuance.
06:25:52 >>> I'm sorry, I do not recall saying that I was going
06:25:59 to do a PD.
06:26:01 Based on the fact that when Abbye and I discussed it
06:26:06 in our consult session, that had come up.
06:26:09 However, it is not cost effective at all in this
06:26:13 situation.
06:26:13 So that is why we did not choose that option.
06:26:19 And I believe we made it pretty clear at the last --
06:26:25 not to confuse things.
06:26:34 However, at the last hearing, I did not have pictures
06:26:36 of the inside of the cottage.
06:26:42 Okay.
06:26:45 Here is a picture of the closet area.
06:26:50 >>JULIA COLE: I think it's City Council's position
06:26:55 that all of the information relating to the Euclidean
06:26:58 zoning that is in front of you has been heard, and
06:27:02 that you don't need additional repetitious evidence, I
06:27:05 think it appropriate for us to go ahead and a end this
06:27:08 portion of the testimony and allow anybody else who
06:27:11 wishes to speak on that particular issue of the
06:27:13 conversion to the PD to speak, and then you can go
06:27:16 ahead and close the public hearing.
06:27:21 >>GWEN MILLER: So that concludes your presentation.
06:27:24 We are going to hear from the public and then come
06:27:26 back to you.
06:27:26 >>> All right.
06:27:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
06:27:29 wants to speak on item number 1?
06:27:31 Come up and speak now.
06:27:40 >>> I'm secretary of the Palma Ceia neighborhood
06:27:43 association.
06:27:44 And we had a neighborhood meeting on the 13th and
06:27:50 allowed the Maases to give a presentation on this
06:27:53 issue.
06:27:54 We all listened to it.
06:27:55 Then they asked the room and all the people at the
06:27:59 neighborhood association meeting voted no.
06:28:01 We went through extensive -- the association --
06:28:06 extensive with the Planning Commission to get the
06:28:09 lower density in our area, and this just goes
06:28:14 completely against what we worked three years to get
06:28:17 in Palma Ceia.
06:28:19 It's a very small lot near a very busy elementary
06:28:24 school, lots of parking issues, and lots of traffic.
06:28:28 And we just recommended no.
06:28:31 I have my letter, and the secretary of the
06:28:33 neighborhood association.
06:28:37 >>JULIA COLE: What I heard from City Council is they
06:28:42 wanted to limit this continued public hearing only to
06:28:44 the issue of the appropriateness of moving this to a
06:28:48 PD.
06:28:50 The petitioner made a decision not to do that.
06:28:52 She gave you on the information as to why she didn't
06:28:54 do that.
06:28:55 But I would also say that you need to then limit all
06:28:57 the other folks to that issue as well.
06:29:00 We have to open this up to everybody to discuss all
06:29:02 the issues, or not.
06:29:04 So I would just ask that if that's the will of council
06:29:07 that people who wish to testify at this moment in
06:29:10 opposition are testifying only to the issue of the
06:29:14 appropriateness of moving this to a PD.
06:29:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That doesn't make sense because if
06:29:20 she doesn't want a PD then how can they speak to it?
06:29:23 It's the petitioner's choice what they want to ask
06:29:25 for.
06:29:25 >>JULIA COLE: I understand that, but what I'm saying
06:29:28 is if this continuance was limited to the only dealing
06:29:31 with the issue of moving this to the PD, then we have
06:29:34 to let everybody have a say.
06:29:36 So if it's not going to be for that and you want to
06:29:38 open the entire public record for additional
06:29:40 information --
06:29:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then we'll go back to the
06:29:44 beginning and let you go back.
06:29:47 >>JULIA COLE: Let her continue then her testimony, and
06:29:50 we can go ahead.
06:29:51 Thank you.
06:29:56 >>GWEN MILLER: We are not going to hear the whole
06:29:58 thing.
06:29:58 Where you stopped at, Ms. Maas, where you stopped at.
06:30:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Come to the microphone.
06:30:31 >>> Next I wanted to discuss the character of the
06:30:34 neighborhood.
06:30:34 The neighborhood has mixed uses.
06:30:38 Single-family.
06:30:39 Duplex.
06:30:40 Triplexes.
06:30:43 I just took a couple shots here of some of the
06:30:47 properties in the neighborhood.
06:30:49 That was a duplex.
06:30:50 Another duplex.
06:30:54 I believe this one is a duplex on the corner.
06:30:57 Yes, it is.
06:30:59 A contemporary style duplex.
06:31:04 There's one more.
06:31:08 A larger apartment building.
06:31:15 This is either a duplex or triplex.
06:31:20 The older style, Spanish style quad.
06:31:27 A duplex.
06:31:37 Here is another home that is a duplex on the front --
06:31:44 maybe this is just a single-family but they do have a
06:31:47 garage apartment.
06:31:54 Here is an apartment building.
06:32:02 Here is the back.
06:32:02 And that shows a garage apartment.
06:32:09 Another duplex.
06:32:10 This is on Obispo.
06:32:13 Here is the home with the garage apartment.
06:32:17 One more duplex.
06:32:22 Four-plex.
06:32:27 I just wanted to show everybody the mixed use of the
06:32:34 area.
06:32:35 There are beautiful single-family homes, duplexes,
06:32:38 triplexes and quads.
06:32:46 Here is our property right here.
06:32:48 Here is the school.
06:32:51 We are on the corner of Concordia and Obispo.
06:32:55 Concordia is a nice wide street, about four cars wide.
06:32:59 Obispo is a narrower street.
06:33:06 You see all that highlighted here.
06:33:08 That's all RM-16.
06:33:09 And then there's RM-18 throughout.
06:33:19 And these two properties directly across from us are
06:33:23 your multifamily homes.
06:33:25 That's what I wanted to show with this map here.
06:33:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we go back to the public.
06:33:35 Those who want to speak on item 1 come back up again.
06:33:49 >> Denise, secretary of the Palma Ceia neighborhood
06:33:52 association.
06:33:53 And I'll just start over.
06:33:56 We had a neighborhood association had a meeting on
06:33:58 October 13th, invited the Maases to discuss their
06:34:03 rezoning request.
06:34:04 We listened to their presentation, and then they left,
06:34:07 and all 20 people at that neighborhood association
06:34:10 with the exception of the president, who had a little
06:34:13 bit of a conflict of interest, voted no.
06:34:17 That we do not want this in the neighborhood.
06:34:20 As I mentioned, the neighborhood association worked
06:34:24 about three-plus years with the Planning Commission to
06:34:26 lower the density in Palma Ceia.
06:34:28 A lot of these were grandfathered in.
06:34:32 And we had narrow streets.
06:34:34 In fact, we have had neighborhood complaints on
06:34:36 parking from Roosevelt elementary.
06:34:40 Multiple neighbors have complained about the parking
06:34:43 and the density of that area.
06:34:45 So we recommended no.
06:34:48 And I have the letter as well as a letter from another
06:34:52 neighbor who spent an e-mail.
06:34:54 So that was our recommendation.
06:34:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
06:34:56 Would anyone else like to speak?
06:34:58 >>> Robert Faust, west GRAVA street.
06:35:07 I have been sworn in.
06:35:08 I want to reinforce what Dee said, as a neighborhood
06:35:12 we work very hard to work with the comprehensive plan,
06:35:15 and looking at that map, the comprehensive plan, and
06:35:20 you do have a few grandfathered things in.
06:35:23 But it's a hard map to see.
06:35:32 But there's Roosevelt in the blue.
06:35:36 And as you can see, you know, here's Bay to Bay.
06:35:40 There's a lot of multifamily up towards Bay to Bay.
06:35:43 But once you hit that Third Street, it's almost all
06:35:46 single-family except for properties that were going
06:35:50 through that a comprehensive planning process.
06:35:54 So we would certainly not like to see more townhouses
06:35:56 down there.
06:35:57 We want to see more single-family homes in agreement
06:36:03 with the comprehensive plan.
06:36:04 And we understand that you suggested a PD.
06:36:06 And that's a way -- we have done PDs on my farm, and
06:36:11 that's a way for you to have some control over what
06:36:13 happens on that site.
06:36:14 I understand -- my understanding is if this gets
06:36:17 rezoned there's nothing to say that they could turn
06:36:20 around and build two residences there.
06:36:23 That's my understanding.
06:36:26 We are very concerned about it.
06:36:27 So if you want us to go through a PD and have it
06:36:33 grandfathered in or worked in, with the proper parking
06:36:36 and things like that, but we are not hearing that.
06:36:38 So we would like you to deny the rezoning.
06:36:41 Thank you.
06:36:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
06:36:42 Would anyone else like to speak?
06:36:44 If you are going to speak, please come up and line up.
06:36:53 >>> Jessica O'Donnell. I live at 3413 west Toucan
06:37:00 Street.
06:37:00 My husband and I just moved to the neighborhood about
06:37:02 three months ago, and one of the reasons that we chose
06:37:05 to live in this neighborhood was because of the large
06:37:09 number of families, families with small children, and
06:37:16 I care to express opposition to this.
06:37:19 I have spoken to many of the families on our street.
06:37:23 And we are all opposed to the conversion to RM-18.
06:37:29 We do not want like Mr. Faust said, in two weeks from
06:37:33 now, for it to be torn down and become a four-plex.
06:37:38 So I know, I read the entire transcript from two
06:37:43 months ago in August, and I know that Mrs. Maas said
06:37:49 that was not the plan, but, you know, what if she
06:37:54 changes her mind in a month or two months from now?
06:37:56 I just want to express my opposition.
06:37:58 Thank you.
06:37:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
06:37:59 Next speaker.
06:38:03 >>> My name is Steven Faust.
06:38:07 I have been sworn in.
06:38:08 I reside at 3515 west Obispo street.
06:38:11 And vehemently opposed to changing actual zoning of
06:38:14 the property.
06:38:18 The intent of the current owner to me is unimportant.
06:38:22 It's what change for the neighborhood and the ability
06:38:25 for someone to build multifamily in the future which
06:38:27 will be completely different from the current.
06:38:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
06:38:45 >>> Ron Nobel, 3403 west Obispo street, I live
06:38:49 immediately adjacent to the petitioner's property.
06:38:54 I think Mrs. Saul-Sena put it pretty accurately going
06:39:00 back to September 22nd.
06:39:01 They asked the applicant to consider to come back with
06:39:03 a PD.
06:39:05 It was expressed to the applicants very clearly that
06:39:07 council could not and would not be able to support
06:39:10 Euclidean zoning application that was before them
06:39:12 today for the reasons you already heard about, on the
06:39:17 potential future development, redevelopment as a
06:39:20 multifamily structure on that property.
06:39:22 The second thing I asked for was for the Palma Ceia
06:39:26 neighborhood association.
06:39:29 The association briefed you very well on.
06:39:32 That the applicant has come back now because they
06:39:34 don't want to do a PD because of cost, because it cost
06:39:38 too much.
06:39:39 The applicant as you are aware don't live in the home.
06:39:43 First of all, they are both professional real estate
06:39:46 folks.
06:39:48 Both real estate professional, they own a minimum of
06:39:50 eight separate properties throughout Tampa.
06:39:52 I think more than eight properties.
06:39:54 Most of them rental units.
06:39:56 And what they are coming here today saying, we don't
06:39:58 have the money, we don't want to spend the money to do
06:40:00 a PD, but we do want you -- if you get the Elmo,
06:40:06 please -- we want you to rezone your property so first
06:40:08 we can rent out this 200 square foot garage behind the
06:40:11 property, and secondly have the ability in the future
06:40:13 to tear down those structures and put up the
06:40:16 multifamily dwelling unit.
06:40:18 That's very unacceptable to the neighborhood as you
06:40:20 have heard.
06:40:21 They are essentially saying, trust us, the PD is too
06:40:25 expensive, but we are not going to tear the property
06:40:27 down, and again those are assurances that we just
06:40:32 don't have.
06:40:33 I will tell you that this neighborhood would also be
06:40:35 opposed to amending this petition to a PD or having it
06:40:38 come back before you as a PD.
06:40:40 And part of the reason for our testimony this evening
06:40:43 is to also address the inappropriateness of this
06:40:47 specific use that they have proposed, the 200 square
06:40:50 foot garage, as well as the future PD rezoning, that
06:40:52 would allow a multifamily structure off the property,
06:40:55 not the purpose of the PD and certainly not consistent
06:40:58 with the neighborhood character or the rezonings in
06:41:01 the area.
06:41:01 The rezonings of RM-18 that you have seen that we have
06:41:04 shown you, those are what I call artifact, if you
06:41:07 will.
06:41:07 There have been no similar rezonings that they have
06:41:09 brought before you in the years and years and years in
06:41:11 this neighborhood.
06:41:12 This is the first such request.
06:41:16 There certainly has been no such rezonings granted
06:41:18 consistent with that.
06:41:21 The second thing that we just want corrected is the
06:41:24 character of the neighborhood.
06:41:24 He showed you pictures of duplexes, triplexes, other
06:41:28 types of dwelling units in the neighborhood.
06:41:30 A lot of those were blocks away, at least a couple
06:41:33 blocks away from the property.
06:41:35 This is a predominantly single-family neighborhood.
06:41:38 It always has been and it will continue to move in
06:41:41 that direction as redevelopment occurs.
06:41:44 If the properties that she showed you the pictures of,
06:41:46 especially the immediately adjacent properties, those
06:41:48 are not conforming structures on those property, okay?
06:41:51 Especially the ones in the RM-16 zoning district.
06:41:54 They are not conforming properties.
06:41:55 They have been there for years and years, and when
06:41:59 those cease to exist there will not be a redevelopment
06:42:01 to a multifamily structure on the property.
06:42:03 Very different from what has been presented here.
06:42:09 A number of other things but I am going to go ahead
06:42:11 and stop now.
06:42:12 I do want to share with you a little before and after
06:42:14 picture of what happened between the path here and
06:42:17 this last.
06:42:18 And I'll close with this.
06:42:19 (Bell sounds)
06:42:19 A little before and after, what is different here, the
06:42:26 fence is the same.
06:42:27 That's always been there.
06:42:28 This is the area they are looking at for parking which
06:42:31 won't work for a number of reasons.
06:42:33 I am not going to go into that right now.
06:42:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up, sir.
06:42:38 Your time is up.
06:42:39 That's it.
06:42:39 Three minute is up.
06:42:43 Mr. Dingfelder.
06:42:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Rod, could you show us?
06:42:48 Don't leave us in suspense.
06:42:49 I just want to see --
06:42:51 >>> The important point of what we have been dealing
06:42:52 with, and -- the before and after picture here, the
06:42:58 ones that you can see clearly, they have now gone out
06:43:01 and they have brought electricity to the building,
06:43:04 okay?
06:43:04 What they are supposed to be waiting on in this
06:43:07 process, they have gone out, done an electrical
06:43:10 hookup, they were hooking up a washer and drier, but
06:43:14 really shown a lack of respect for our neighborhood,
06:43:16 showing a lack of respect for this process.
06:43:18 The on the thing they have done as you can see with
06:43:21 the dirt they brought in, the fill dirt, and I don't
06:43:25 know if that's for parking or what, but again --
06:43:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
06:43:30 Thank you, Madam Chair.
06:43:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Maas, you may come up for
06:43:34 rebuttal.
06:43:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If I can ask a question before she
06:43:41 start rebuttal because that way she can rebut whatever
06:43:44 staff says.
06:43:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Cole?
06:43:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Whoever doing this petition.
06:43:52 Abbye, if you could bring up the existing zoning map.
06:44:06 You might want to pull that back a little bit.
06:44:14 Oh down just a little bit more.
06:44:32 I used to live right up on Santiago, and now I live
06:44:35 about 15 blocks from here.
06:44:39 Bay to Bay is at the top of that map.
06:44:42 Then you got Santiago, San Juan, San Pedro, Obispo,
06:44:46 and this property is on Obispo.
06:44:49 As I looked at this it downed on me -- and I guess you
06:44:52 have it colored in.
06:44:53 You have colored in the RM-18 in green there?
06:44:58 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.
06:45:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Out of the several hundred
06:45:02 properties on the streets I just named, from Bay to
06:45:05 Bay, down to Obispo, from side to side, around
06:45:10 Roosevelt elementary, you have got one, two, three,
06:45:15 four, five, six, seven, eight -- well, you have five
06:45:19 different projects, probably ten or twelve lots that
06:45:24 are RM-18.
06:45:25 >>> Yes.
06:45:27 And everything else shown there in yellow is RM-16.
06:45:30 >> And my point is, and I had forgotten this, but this
06:45:34 property is already RM-16.
06:45:36 >>> Yes, it is.
06:45:37 But because it only has 5 that you square feet it's
06:45:40 only eligible for one unit under the RM-16.
06:45:44 >> Which is probably exactly the case for every single
06:45:46 yellow property in that neighborhood.
06:45:48 Correct?
06:45:49 I mean, every single lot there is 50 by 100.
06:45:53 >>> Those were platted, appeared to be platted at 50
06:45:56 by 100 but I don't know the configuration.
06:45:59 I mean usually we do that red-blue map that actually
06:46:03 shows the development pattern where sometimes more
06:46:04 than one lot goes to together.
06:46:06 People own a lot or lot and a half, or something like
06:46:09 that, which could be the case for some of those on the
06:46:12 multifamily family uses you see.
06:46:13 It might not be the case for this other one.
06:46:16 They could be nonconforming, that's correct a.
06:46:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The last time I was thinking maybe
06:46:20 they can do the PD and maybe it's not setting a bad
06:46:23 precedent.
06:46:23 But then the way I looked at it today, I was sitting
06:46:26 here looking at this entire yellowed area which is
06:46:29 RM-16, okay.
06:46:31 Assuming the folks only have a single lot.
06:46:37 Everybody could come in and ask for the same thing,
06:46:39 give them the RM-18 and therefore would be qualified
06:46:42 for two units on that typical single-family 50 by
06:46:48 100-foot lot.
06:46:49 >>> Correct.
06:46:52 >> I just wanted to put in the context because I had
06:46:54 really forgotten.
06:46:55 I thought they were going from RS-50 to RM-18 or
06:46:58 something like that.
06:46:59 But now it dawned on me that this whole
06:47:01 neighborhood -- everybody in yellow here is in the
06:47:05 same situation.
06:47:05 They have all got the RM-16.
06:47:07 But most of those houses are single-family houses.
06:47:10 >>> Correct.
06:47:12 >> They my be showing RM-16 and we have grandfathered
06:47:15 them in at RM-16 for various technical reasons.
06:47:19 But at the end of the day, you know, my experience in
06:47:22 walking my dogs through these neighborhood, the
06:47:24 majority of is it single-family.
06:47:25 >>> Correct.
06:47:26 And just to add to that, these two down here in
06:47:29 yellow, the one withs immediately adjacent that are 50
06:47:32 by 100, those are the ones that have a duplex.
06:47:37 And then another duplex immediately two stories next
06:47:41 to it.
06:47:41 So they were either like that prior to zoning
06:47:46 conformance, at 1987 and 1956, or they -- that's it.
06:47:53 They are nonconforming because of the 5,000 square
06:47:56 feet.
06:47:57 So as Ron just alluded to, the ones that are in there
06:48:00 today, should they be destroying, you know, they are
06:48:04 legal nonconform.
06:48:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
06:48:07 I just wanted that clarification.
06:48:14 Maas: I would like to reiterate the request is
06:48:37 consistent with the comprehensive plan, and the city
06:48:40 has approved -- has found in the application
06:48:47 everything to be consistent.
06:48:51 Land Development Coordination, LBC landscape
06:48:58 specialist, Hillsborough County, city planning,
06:49:00 stormwater, transportation, wastewater, solid waste,
06:49:04 water, parks and rec, Tampa Fire Rescue.
06:49:08 So they have found it to be consistent.
06:49:17 There were some changes that were made back in 2005 in
06:49:24 Palma Ceia.
06:49:25 And during that down plan the north side of Bay to
06:49:32 Bay -- the north side of Bay to Bay was down -- there
06:49:41 were many people chose to be downplanned.
06:49:45 We were talking about the south side of Bay to Bay,
06:49:47 and we were not included in that down-plan.
06:49:52 My property was not in that down plan at our side of
06:50:01 the Bay to Bay was not included in that.
06:50:10 I don't feel we are asking for much.
06:50:12 I really feel that the first time we were here it
06:50:15 should have been approved.
06:50:20 We are just asking for our zoning to be recognized.
06:50:25 We are in a multifamily zoning district.
06:50:29 And we are just asking for that zoning to be
06:50:31 recognized.
06:50:35 It's not in a historic district.
06:50:41 The future land use is residential 20.
06:50:48 We are not asking for residential 20.
06:50:49 We are only asking for residential 18.
06:50:55 I'm sorry, RM-18.
06:51:01 So by 2025, the city has approved it to go up to a
06:51:10 residential 20.
06:51:13 But like I said -- okay.
06:51:23 And from the last hearing, I took the advice of
06:51:32 council, and I went and talked to the neighbors in
06:51:36 the -- not the whole neighborhood but the ones that I
06:51:39 could get in contact with.
06:51:41 I have here approximately 48 signed petitions.
06:51:46 I spoke with neighbors, honestly discussed all the ins
06:51:55 and outs of the three zonings.
06:51:57 I understand that there was a letter that was
06:52:00 distributed.
06:52:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
06:52:05 Just so far you know, the purpose of your opportunity
06:52:07 is to address those issues that were raised by the
06:52:10 people who spoke against you, not to bring up
06:52:12 something new, because those people, you bring up the
06:52:15 concept of a petition now that has signatures, the
06:52:18 people who wish to speak could not address it and then
06:52:21 give you the opportunity to have them respond to it.
06:52:23 So the purpose of rebuttal is for you to address the
06:52:26 concerns that were raised, and to allay those concerns
06:52:31 if you wish to, to City Council before they
06:52:33 deliberate.
06:52:33 >>> Well, I did write a letter to City Council today,
06:52:38 because I understand that there was a letter written,
06:52:46 misrepresenting my discussions with the neighborhood.
06:52:55 So I feel it very necessary to state that I was very
06:53:03 honest with people and very forthcoming, and I did
06:53:06 not -- I did not misrepresent the facts.
06:53:14 So regardless, I understand, you know, I did not bring
06:53:20 it to when I was supposed to.
06:53:21 However, I do have 48 signed petitions.
06:53:23 There were four people that withdrew their petitions
06:53:26 due to the letter that was sent out.
06:53:30 And, also, with regard to a couple of -- when the
06:53:42 HLA -- HOA, when my husband and I went to the HOA
06:53:48 meeting, we went before them, and they were not in
06:53:54 support of us.
06:53:57 And I would like to say at the very beginning of the
06:53:59 meeting, there was more discussion.
06:54:03 And I went into it in my letter to you with regard to
06:54:07 why they were mostly there except Ron Nobel.
06:54:12 They were there for the planned expansion and certain
06:54:18 things going on with that, i.e., parking, some tree
06:54:22 issues, and so then my husband and I started to
06:54:33 present our case to them, and they were not
06:54:36 particularly fond of the rezoning.
06:54:40 However, I did ask who in the room lived in the area
06:54:45 where Obispo is located.
06:54:47 (Bell sounds)
06:54:51 Not one person raised their hand.
06:54:53 >>GWEN MILLER: You cannot speak anymore.
06:54:57 That's it.
06:54:58 There are any questions from council members?
06:54:59 We need to close the public hearing.
06:55:02 >>> Can I say one more thing?
06:55:04 >>GWEN MILLER: No, your time is up.
06:55:08 >> Move to close.
06:55:09 >> Second.
06:55:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second to close.
06:55:11 (Motion carried)
06:55:12 What's the pleasure of council?
06:55:13 Ms. Saul-Sena?
06:55:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
06:55:18 We have heard testimony -- I move for disapproval
06:55:20 based on the lack of consistency with the character of
06:55:31 the neighborhood, specifically objective 26.1, land
06:55:38 use and single-family neighborhoods, maintain the
06:55:42 stability of existing neighborhoods while expanding
06:55:45 opportunities for housing choices.
06:55:48 The majority of land use in this neighborhood is
06:55:52 single-family.
06:55:54 We heard testimony from staff as well as neighbors
06:55:58 that the character in the neighborhood is
06:56:00 single-family, and what's being proposed is not
06:56:04 compatible with that.
06:56:05 So it speaks to a finding of fact of maintaining
06:56:09 neighborhoods stability and fostering compatible
06:56:13 in-fill, and we heard testimony that this would not be
06:56:16 compatible.
06:56:21 >> Second.
06:56:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
06:56:24 Question on the motion?
06:56:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
06:56:27 Did I interrupt, Charlie?
06:56:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll speak next.
06:56:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think the denial is appropriate.
06:56:36 I think we all feel bad about it because they seem
06:56:39 like very nice young people trying to get ahead.
06:56:44 But I don't think they can do that to the detriment of
06:56:46 this neighborhood.
06:56:48 I have received and put on file numerous e-mails, and
06:56:54 I'm sure the rest of council has received.
06:56:55 I counted about 15 in opposition, about three in
06:57:00 favor.
06:57:01 I don't count heads but I do think -- I looked at the
06:57:03 addresses of the folks who are sending these, and many
06:57:06 of them do live up and down Obispo and take on some of
06:57:10 these on the streets that are adjacent to this.
06:57:15 I think this project and proposal is inconsistent with
06:57:19 the surrounding neighborhood.
06:57:21 I think taking this little single-car garage and
06:57:26 converting it into a separate unit is not the
06:57:30 character of this neighborhood.
06:57:32 It just isn't.
06:57:34 This is either a single-family neighborhood or it's a
06:57:36 little small apartments.
06:57:39 But they are legitimate, old, garden kind of
06:57:43 apartments, that everybody there for many, many, many
06:57:46 years.
06:57:47 And the other is they got multifamily zoning.
06:57:51 They have got an RM-16 just like many, many on the
06:57:54 property in the neighborhood.
06:57:55 But there are hardly any RM-18s anywhere south of
06:57:59 Bay to Bay.
06:58:02 I'm just elaborating on Ms. Saul-Sena's motion, as was
06:58:06 stated, this is not a PD.
06:58:08 If it had been a PD there might have been more
06:58:11 protection for the neighborhood, or parking would have
06:58:15 been addressed.
06:58:16 There's huge parking and traffic issues around
06:58:18 Roosevelt that we hear about all the time.
06:58:22 And I mentioned that at the last hearing.
06:58:24 So I second it.
06:58:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
06:58:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
06:58:29 I haven't spoken too much because I have a terrible
06:58:33 sore throat and I told Mr. Dingfelder to stay away and
06:58:35 he won't listen.
06:58:36 I heard testimony on both sides.
06:58:42 Same old cliche.
06:58:44 It bad to be A an attorney.
06:58:45 It's bad to be a realtor.
06:58:47 It's bad to be a City Council member.
06:58:48 It bad to be anything nowadays.
06:58:50 Tay that and I wipe it out.
06:58:52 It's either good zoning or it bad zoning.
06:58:54 It either right or it's wrong.
06:58:57 It doesn't matter to me if you own eight units, 80
06:59:00 units or 8,000 units.
06:59:02 That's your problem.
06:59:03 Not mine.
06:59:05 So I tried to give you a lesson in logistics here that
06:59:11 that doesn't go with the majority of council members.
06:59:13 It goes only on the facts and merits of the case.
06:59:19 You are all sworn in so I have to assume that all of
06:59:21 you said the truth.
06:59:22 If you didn't no one is ever going to find out.
06:59:25 That's why I am not in for the swearing-in.
06:59:27 Because all people are supposed to tell the truth.
06:59:31 And these thing are complicated.
06:59:37 I took a drive through and saw the whole landscape.
06:59:40 I drove further on both sides of the road, up and
06:59:44 down.
06:59:44 I did go through Obispo but I believe Roosevelt
06:59:48 school.
06:59:49 And you do have a problem.
06:59:51 And the problem is traffic from the school.
06:59:53 There is no doubt in my mind because I hit it at the
06:59:56 wrong time.
06:59:57 Thank God I had a little more than a quarter tank of
07:00:00 gas.
07:00:01 But saying that, when you buy things, and you want to
07:00:09 build things, you have to realize yourself, it ain't
07:00:15 upon Mace or my council member or anyone in the
07:00:18 neighborhood to know what you do with that property.
07:00:20 Only you know.
07:00:20 We don't know.
07:00:21 But your due diligence is to do that when you buy it.
07:00:26 Not after you bought it.
07:00:28 And what can happen, what cannot happen?
07:00:31 So these are the things that as all of you speak --
07:00:34 and I'm trying to understand which way it's going and
07:00:37 how, how this thing is, and why people do things.
07:00:41 And it becomes very difficult to sit on this side of
07:00:45 the dais.
07:00:46 Even though it seems simple it's not.
07:00:48 So therefore I understand what it is, and we'll take a
07:00:51 vote here shortly.
07:00:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask Mr. Dingfelder?
07:00:59 At Roosevelt school, did they have parking spaces or
07:01:01 did they park in the street?
07:01:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The teachers or parents?
07:01:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Well, whoever.
07:01:06 Most of the school.
07:01:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know if I should -- Mr.
07:01:10 Shelby, it might be new evidence?
07:01:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I missed it.
07:01:14 I'm sorry.
07:01:16 Is it a question regarding --
07:01:18 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Do they have ample parking or do
07:01:20 they park on the street of?
07:01:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's relevant to your decision
07:01:24 in this case --
07:01:27 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
07:01:28 If that's a question that you want to have answer ad,
07:01:31 the best opportunity would be to open it up.
07:01:35 I think it would be inappropriate to have other City
07:01:37 Council members testify on that issue.
07:01:39 However, I'm not sure there is anybody that could
07:01:41 respond to that question.
07:01:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Garcia have any --
07:01:49 >>JULIA COLE: I don't know.
07:01:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Obviously you are going to have to
07:01:53 reopen the public hearing.
07:01:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't mind sitting here till 2:00
07:01:59 in the morning.
07:02:00 But bring something on.
07:02:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The answer to your question is, if
07:02:04 you wish to have the question answered you are going
07:02:07 to have to have a motion to open the public hearing,
07:02:09 it will have to be seconded and have a vote on that
07:02:12 motion.
07:02:12 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I keep hearing how horrible the
07:02:14 traffic is around the school.
07:02:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's relevant to your decision.
07:02:18 >>> Yes, it is.
07:02:20 I move that we open the public hearing.
07:02:22 >> Second.
07:02:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to reopen
07:02:24 the public hearing.
07:02:25 All in favor say Aye.
07:02:27 Opposed, Nay.
07:02:28 Okay, Mr. Garcia, can you answer that question?
07:02:30 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
07:02:35 I have been sworn.
07:02:36 Really, that's under the purview of the school
07:02:39 district as far as what happens with the parking.
07:02:42 We have no purview over how the design is of the
07:02:45 school, or how the school functions.
07:02:47 That's something strictly an agreement between the
07:02:49 school district and the jurisdictions.
07:02:51 So we really are not --
07:02:53 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I'm not trying to change the
07:02:54 rules.
07:02:57 I keep hearing the school is the problem, okay?
07:03:01 And if the school is a problem, it shouldn't be any
07:03:04 parking in the street.
07:03:05 I don't care who the school is.
07:03:06 >> Roosevelt has been there quite a few years.
07:03:11 >> I don't care how long it been there.
07:03:14 But if it's causing a problem and a hinderance for
07:03:16 this family that wants to rezone their property then
07:03:19 it has to come in to play.
07:03:20 >> That's something again that has to be negotiated
07:03:22 between the jurisdiction and the school district.
07:03:24 It's the responsibility of the school district as far
07:03:26 as their design is concerned.
07:03:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's close the public hearing.
07:03:30 >> I'm sorry, before do you that.
07:03:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's nothing to rebut.
07:03:36 No offense.
07:03:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's close the public hearing.
07:03:46 Do we get a motion and second to close the public
07:03:49 hearing?
07:03:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if that's your decision, it
07:03:51 would be my recommendation to give him the 30 seconds
07:03:53 if there's anything she wishes to do to address that
07:03:55 issue of parking which was raised by the question.
07:03:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to leave because I don't
07:04:02 feel well if this keeps on.
07:04:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I don't have a dog in the
07:04:07 fight.
07:04:08 My job is to make sure there's due process that all
07:04:11 parties are afforded --
07:04:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We voted before.
07:04:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
07:04:19 All in favor say Aye.
07:04:20 Opposed?
07:04:20 We have a motion on the floor to --
07:04:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To deny.
07:04:25 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion to deny say
07:04:27 Aye.
07:04:27 Opposed Nay.
07:04:29 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott and Mulhern
07:04:31 being absent.
07:04:35 And Caetano voting no.
07:04:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 3.
07:04:50 >>> I would like to say one thing.
07:05:09 >>GWEN MILLER: You can't.
07:05:11 >>> I'm also an occupational therapist and I work with
07:05:14 people --
07:05:15 >>GWEN MILLER: You cannot speak any more.
07:05:17 That's it.
07:05:18 >> Thank you.
07:05:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
07:05:27 Item number 3 on your agenda tonight, Z 09-3-88 is
07:05:31 located at 3010 West Gandy Boulevard.
07:05:34 Petitioner is progress bank.
07:05:37 This is a request for a special use for a bank with a
07:05:40 drive-in window.
07:05:41 And there is one waiver associated with this request
07:05:44 this evening.
07:05:45 That is to reduce the required separation from the
07:05:48 drive-in window to a residential use from 50 feet to
07:05:51 38.2 feet.
07:05:53 I will go ahead and show you the site.
07:05:59 I'm sure many of you will be familiar with this area.
07:06:07 Gandy Boulevard to the north, MacDill to the west,
07:06:13 predominantly CG uses all along Gandy with the
07:06:18 exception of the CVS PD that is located immediately to
07:06:23 the west of this project.
07:06:28 Here is an aerial.
07:06:33 This is the proposed site, shares a walk with the
07:06:38 Walgreen's, CVS over here, bank here, mobile home park
07:06:43 to the north, the Moose Lodge to the east.
07:06:46 >> Does the moose have any objections?
07:06:49 >>> I haven't heard from any of the moose.
07:06:52 >> You haven't heard from the moose.
07:06:54 >>> Here is a picture of the site.
07:06:57 This is moving east toward Bayshore Boulevard.
07:07:07 The next property.
07:07:09 Moving back east.
07:07:10 The Walgreen's.
07:07:13 This is looking back east.
07:07:17 Continuing east -- I mean west.
07:07:20 I'm sorry.
07:07:20 I'm disoriented now.
07:07:23 Here is CVS.
07:07:24 The northwest corner is the 7-Eleven.
07:07:28 The northeast corner.
07:07:31 And then moving back toward Bayshore, the north side
07:07:34 of Gandy is the mobile home park.
07:07:41 The multifamily residential.
07:07:48 The petitioner is requesting the special use on the
07:07:51 .65-acre site located in a commercial general zoning
07:07:55 district and residential single-family.
07:07:57 There's a small portion at the rear of the lot, which
07:08:01 I can show you that is RS-60.
07:08:07 I would like to show you that on the atlas.
07:08:12 There's no part of the structure that you can see on
07:08:25 the site plan in front of you will be constructed
07:08:27 there.
07:08:29 It supported by Walgreen's to the west, Moose Lodge to
07:08:32 the east, residential to the south, nonconforming
07:08:34 residential to the north which is the mobile home
07:08:36 park.
07:08:37 This request is to allow for the construction of a new
07:08:39 building for a bank with a drive-in window.
07:08:41 The main building setback part follows.
07:08:45 82.83 feet, south 62 feet, west 27 feet, and east 41
07:08:49 feet.
07:08:50 The bank use requires 14 parking spaces, and 14 spaces
07:08:54 are being provided according T one ADA and two
07:08:57 compact.
07:09:00 There are just a few findings of inconsistencies on
07:09:05 tree and landscape.
07:09:08 Mary Daniel Brice has been in communication with the
07:09:10 petitioner and they have worked those items out.
07:09:13 They are going to be changed in between first and
07:09:16 second reading.
07:09:18 And the second comment you will see in the staff
07:09:20 report on page 3 was from transportation asking that
07:09:24 the sidewalk be delineated through, I believe, the
07:09:28 driveway on the site plan in between first and second
07:09:33 reading.
07:09:34 In relation to the special use criteria, a bank with
07:09:38 drive-in, the one waiver which I stated to you was the
07:09:41 distance separation to the residential uses, which is
07:09:44 allowed.
07:09:45 The other criteria are direct access to an arterial
07:09:48 and collector which this site has, adequate space for
07:09:54 the vehicles to queue prior to using drive-in.
07:09:57 Staff is available for any questions.
07:09:59 I do have a revision sheet should it be the direction
07:10:03 of council, or the desire of council to approve this
07:10:08 request this evening.
07:10:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Abbye.
07:10:12 That's a good presentation.
07:10:14 There's two single-family residential directly behind
07:10:17 this project.
07:10:19 >>> Yes.
07:10:19 >> I'm just wondering about -- we all know bank hours
07:10:23 are pretty, you know, reasonable.
07:10:26 So I don't have a great concern about that.
07:10:28 But I do have a little concern about the ATM/night
07:10:34 deposit lane that's on the east side.
07:10:38 And I'm just wondering during your discussions with
07:10:41 these folks, is there any discussion about that issue
07:10:44 and the possibility of just doing your traditional ATM
07:10:48 at the front of the building or something like that,
07:10:50 so it wouldn't be -- so, in other words, we are not
07:10:53 activating a -- or not activating that drive-in at
07:10:58 night?
07:10:59 >>> I see what you mean.
07:11:00 To have it actually wrap around the building to then
07:11:03 use that?
07:11:04 >> That's what it appears we are encouraging.
07:11:09 In contrast to the old-fashioned way was just pull up
07:11:12 tot to the front and just park, and that sort of
07:11:14 thing. Anyway, I just wondered if that came up in
07:11:17 your discussions.
07:11:17 >>> No, we did not talk about that.
07:11:20 There is a ten-foot high concrete buffer that is
07:11:24 existing, but they are going to keep along the south
07:11:28 board, to potentially be in it front so there isn't
07:11:39 traffic circulating to the rear of the property.
07:11:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is it now just a standard thing
07:11:50 that the lighting has to be oriented away prosecute
07:11:53 the residential, and it's low, and it's not going to
07:11:57 bleed into the residential uses?
07:11:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Well, I am aware that there is
07:12:01 actually, I believe, state regulation that regulates
07:12:04 the amount of lighting on an ATM at night due to crime
07:12:07 and lumens and other things.
07:12:10 So I would have them speak to that.
07:12:13 The parking lot lighting that is controlled by our
07:12:15 code is to be directed away from residential.
07:12:19 And I'm not sure how much lighting will actually be
07:12:21 occurring in that southern part of the parcel, since
07:12:24 there is no parking or anything back there.
07:12:26 I'll let the petitioner speak to that.
07:12:28 I know that there is a certain state regulation as far
07:12:30 as the lighting of ATMs and they do have to be lit
07:12:35 at all times in the evening for safety and other
07:12:39 reasons.
07:12:46 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
07:12:47 I have been sworn.
07:13:12 Ms. Feeley did a presentation.
07:13:22 There are only a couple other things that relate to
07:13:23 the comp plan.
07:13:24 This is an arterial with Gandy Boulevard.
07:13:26 This is basically in the southeast corner of the
07:13:29 intersection of MacDill and Gandy Boulevard.
07:13:31 This is predominantly CME.
07:13:38 There are a variety of general commercial uses as
07:13:40 she's already related to you this evening.
07:13:42 Walgreen's of course was approved by this body a
07:13:45 couple years ago, which lies directly to the west of
07:13:48 the site, has development along this section of Gandy.
07:13:53 There is two significant points, I think one is the
07:13:55 directional lighting.
07:13:57 Today's directional lighting is so good you can
07:13:58 actually be directly next door, be about 30 feet high,
07:14:02 the lighting has made some great strides as far as how
07:14:04 they are able to defer that lighting off of the
07:14:08 adjacent residential uses.
07:14:10 The second point is that is really significant that
07:14:13 you do have an existing ten foot concrete masonry wall
07:14:16 to the south part of this particular site, which is
07:14:18 actually access of what you are currently allowing,
07:14:23 the two residential uses to the south of the site.
07:14:27 A good point about the hours of operation, I always
07:14:30 like to ask about that myself, Mr. Dingfelder.
07:14:32 The only other outstanding issue, I guess, would be
07:14:35 that Kojak's is a little bit less than an 8th of a
07:14:38 mile east as far as places in the area.
07:14:41 I'm sure you have been there more than once, Mr.
07:14:44 Dingfelder.
07:14:49 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
07:14:51 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
07:14:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:14:53 >> Good evening.
07:15:04 3816 west Linebaugh Avenue, sweet suite 112, Tampa,
07:15:09 33624, and I have been sworn.
07:15:23 Again, this is an application for a special use permit
07:15:28 for a drive-through.
07:15:30 The drive-through being located along the south side
07:15:33 of the site.
07:15:35 There is a drive-through lane immediately adjacent to
07:15:37 the building, another drive-through south of that, and
07:15:40 then there's a bypass lane further to the south of
07:15:43 that.
07:15:45 We do have the Moose Lodge to the east, the Walgreen's
07:15:50 to the west, the Walgreen's to the west with, their
07:15:53 drive through is actually right here at the southeast
07:15:57 corner of that building, and we anticipated a couple
07:16:04 of the potential issues would possibly be noise from
07:16:08 the drive-through windows, and of course lighting, as
07:16:13 Mr. Dingfelder said.
07:16:14 The bank will have banking hours, so the noise from
07:16:19 the speaker box on the drive-through shouldn't be an
07:16:21 issue.
07:16:22 And as far as lighting is concerned, we are not
07:16:27 proposing to put any light poles in the back or
07:16:29 anything like that.
07:16:29 In fact, this is a landscape plan that addresses the
07:16:35 comments that are in your staff report from Mary, and
07:16:42 in fact I have an e-mail from Mary where I said we
07:16:46 addressed all those comments.
07:16:47 But if you take a look at the south portion of the
07:16:49 site, we have pretty heavily forested that, and that's
07:16:55 an effort again to intensify that, and further screen
07:16:59 buffer that area from the residences.
07:17:04 I do have some photos here of the rear wall.
07:17:09 And you can see, it's a good size wall, solid
07:17:12 concrete, ten feet tall.
07:17:17 It extends along the entire south side of the
07:17:28 property.
07:17:32 So we feel that between the traditional screening that
07:17:37 we are adding back at the rear of the property, the
07:17:40 lack of light poles, and whatnot, that we are
07:17:45 adequately screening the property from any adverse
07:17:50 lighting.
07:17:53 Of course, there shouldn't be any noise issues with
07:17:57 this property.
07:17:58 With regard to the ATM and the night drop-off, we did
07:18:01 look at that.
07:18:02 We looked alternative ways of the night drop-off, and
07:18:11 typically those functions occur today, you know, more
07:18:15 in drive-through in the back, so we pushed that toward
07:18:19 the front to get away from the adjoining residential,
07:18:23 so that there wouldn't be an issue there.
07:18:28 Again as was noted earlier, the ATM lighting and
07:18:31 whatnot is cut-off lighting so it shouldn't spill onto
07:18:36 the adjoining properties.
07:18:39 There are two waiver requests associated with this
07:18:41 one.
07:18:42 The distance waiver that Abbye discussed, and it's 38
07:18:45 feet from the nearest point from the property line to
07:18:50 the outer edge of the outside or farthest
07:18:56 drive-through, actually 48 feet or so to the speaker
07:18:59 box.
07:18:59 So it's a pretty small waiver in that respect.
07:19:06 The second waiver is an administrative waiver.
07:19:10 And that was generated in our work with Mary
07:19:15 rearranging the site to work with saving the trees on
07:19:20 the east side.
07:19:21 We spent considerable amount of time doing that.
07:19:25 We had Mary on-site several times.
07:19:27 We were out there with our landscape architect.
07:19:30 We actually staked out the curb lines to see where the
07:19:33 curb line would be in relation to the trees.
07:19:36 Looked at specific limbs to be pruned and how we were
07:19:40 going to take care of that.
07:19:41 And I think Mary is pretty well satisfied with how we
07:19:43 did this.
07:19:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you have any opposition tonight
07:19:47 that you are aware of?
07:19:48 >>> Not that I'm aware of.
07:19:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's see if you have any.
07:19:52 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
07:19:54 item number 3?
07:19:55 Anyone want to speak on item 3?
07:19:58 >> Move to close.
07:19:58 >> Second to close.
07:20:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
07:20:02 All in favor?
07:20:03 Opposed?
07:20:04 >> Thank you.
07:20:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
07:20:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance providing special
07:20:10 use S 2 approving a bank and drive-in window with
07:20:16 RS-75 residential single-family zoning district in the
07:20:19 general vicinity of 3010 West Gandy Boulevard in the
07:20:22 city of Tampa, Florida more particularly described in
07:20:24 section 1 thereof providing an effective date.
07:20:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
07:20:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Including the revisions that were
07:20:32 passed out here on V 09-388.
07:20:35 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:20:38 The question on the motion?
07:20:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a couple of things.
07:20:43 On the ATM I think it was persuasive that they did try
07:20:46 to move the ATM up toward Gandy and that ten-foot
07:20:50 concrete wall is pretty impressive along with the
07:20:52 additional buffering.
07:20:53 So the other thing is they say they are going to put
07:20:57 progress bank in, so we don't want to stop progress.
07:21:00 Second.
07:21:01 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:21:02 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
07:21:04 Opposed, Nay.
07:21:04 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott and Mulhern
07:21:07 being absent.
07:21:08 Second reading and adoption will be on November
07:21:09 5th at 9:30 a.m.
07:21:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 5.
07:21:51 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
07:21:52 Council, item 5 on your agenda this evening was 09-36,
07:22:01 601 east Whiting Street just a few blocks from here,
07:22:04 from a CBD-2 to CBD-2 to residential multifamily.
07:22:10 There are two waivers associated with the request, and
07:22:12 that is to allow further reduction of loading berths
07:22:16 from two to zero and also to allow for loading and
07:22:19 solid waste department vehicles to maneuver in the
07:22:21 right-of-way.
07:22:24 Let me acquaint you with the site and then I will go
07:22:27 through the staff report.
07:22:42 Building over 120 feet in height must be site plan
07:22:55 controlled.
07:22:56 This building that is being proposed this evening on
07:22:59 the 3,637 square foot site is 539 feet in height.
07:23:07 It is 29 multifamily residential units, had 2-story
07:23:12 building consisting of four public amenity and
07:23:14 mechanical stories, eight stories of parking, 30
07:23:18 stories of residential above the parking.
07:23:27 Footprint is less than 50 by 100.
07:23:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
07:23:32 >> Here is the site located here.
07:23:34 Whiting garage is located to the west here.
07:23:37 Fort Brooke garage here.
07:23:41 If you will remember just a few short months ago we
07:23:45 rezoned the parcel here -- it off the screen, I'm
07:23:50 sorry -- for a building very similar to that, just a
07:23:53 little bit larger than this one is.
07:23:55 It also had the robotic parking which is included in
07:23:58 this building here, and was strictly residential uses.
07:24:03 >> I'll bet it's been a year, though.
07:24:05 >> Yes.
07:24:07 I wrote down the number and the ordinance before I
07:24:09 came down.
07:24:10 It was a Z-08 filing.
07:24:12 It wasn't that long ago.
07:24:14 Jill did it.
07:24:16 In proximity to this the two tallest buildings of
07:24:18 course are the ones directly across the street from
07:24:21 us, SunTrust and one Tampa center, which are almost
07:24:25 equivalent in height.
07:24:32 This is an aerial.
07:24:35 It is at the corner of Whiting and Morgan street and
07:24:39 it's predominantly surface parking Crosstown to the
07:24:43 south.
07:24:48 I'll show you some pictures.
07:24:54 This is looking east.
07:24:59 This is the northeast corner immediately across.
07:25:06 This is looking south from the northeast corner toward
07:25:10 the subject property over here.
07:25:15 Whiting garage.
07:25:17 Immediately to the left.
07:25:20 Here is looking from the Whiting garage at the subject
07:25:23 parcel.
07:25:25 The view down Whiting.
07:25:28 The view north.
07:25:32 Morgan.
07:25:33 And a view that I left at the top of the parking
07:25:37 garage looking down.
07:25:46 We do have a couple of findings of inconsistency that
07:25:49 are technical in nature, and these two resolved in
07:25:54 between first and second reading.
07:25:55 I do have a revision sheet for this as well.
07:26:01 There are a total of 36 parking spaces required and a
07:26:04 minimum of 64 spaces are being provided with the
07:26:06 proposed automated robotic parking system that is
07:26:11 internal to the building.
07:26:13 There's one entrance for Morgan street into the
07:26:15 vehicle loading zone where the vehicles then lift it
07:26:18 to a parking space within the eight-story parking.
07:26:21 The site is 16.7% of covered open space proposed
07:26:27 consisting of amenities and art work.
07:26:29 There is no commercial component to this commercial
07:26:31 request.
07:26:31 Four sided elevations have been submitted and reviewed
07:26:34 as a part of this application.
07:26:37 Land Development Coordination pursuant to
07:26:39 correspondence from the Aviation Authority, we need a
07:26:42 note added to the site plan that the development is
07:26:45 subject to the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority
07:26:47 height zoning review process.
07:26:51 Mary had a couple Land Development Coordination tree
07:26:55 and landscape -- she had a couple of corrections, also
07:27:02 related to the tree table, and also some transplanted
07:27:06 trees that are shown here on-site that they are to
07:27:09 look at transplanting, she wants a note concerning
07:27:11 those.
07:27:12 Transportation had a couple issues related to the
07:27:21 textured granite paving shown on the site plan.
07:27:24 They want to have that removed at this time, and a
07:27:27 note added that any alternative materials in the
07:27:30 right-of-way may be considered during the right-of-way
07:27:32 permitting process.
07:27:34 In addition, they would like two trees shown on the
07:27:39 side of the driveway, the vehicle access to be
07:27:42 removed.
07:27:44 They are within the site visibility.
07:27:46 And they also had a couple of notes that they needed
07:27:55 added.
07:27:56 Lastly in relation to solid waste there were some
07:27:58 notations to access that need to be added on page 4 of
07:28:02 your staff report.
07:28:02 And lastly, they are showing the stormwater vault
07:28:05 within the access drive to the compacter, and there
07:28:11 were some concerns on behalf of solid waste related to
07:28:14 having that truck for the solid waste continuing to
07:28:18 have to go back and forth.
07:28:19 So we are going to add a note to the site plan that
07:28:21 the final location of the vault and design of the
07:28:24 vault will be subject to review by transportation and
07:28:27 solid waste at the time of permitting.
07:28:29 So that we can make sure that's in a safe location
07:28:33 both for our vehicles and for the operation of the
07:28:35 site.
07:28:36 All of those comments that I just went over provided
07:28:38 in a revision sheet.
07:28:40 I have met with Mr. Bricklemyer and given him a copy
07:28:46 of this and the petitioner is amenable to those
07:28:48 changes in between first and second reading.
07:28:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you give revision sheet to the
07:29:00 clerk?
07:29:01 >>> No, I haven't.
07:29:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question on that, Madam
07:29:04 Chair.
07:29:04 So on Morgan street, there is some type of swing gate.
07:29:08 There's some type of loading area there?
07:29:13 That's where the garbage container is?
07:29:15 That's where the dumpster is?
07:29:18 >>> Yes.
07:29:18 You will see two access, the one to the south will be
07:29:21 for the trash pickup.
07:29:25 And there's a gate and rollup door and that's going to
07:29:27 be for trash pickup only.
07:29:29 And then you will see there's 20 feet minimum
07:29:31 clearance height including roll-up door, the swing
07:29:33 gate, and you will see right in the middle of that it
07:29:37 says lid, and that is the vault that they are
07:29:43 referring to.
07:29:44 That solid waste is concerned about the design of that
07:29:47 vault immediately under what is going to be the
07:29:52 service area for the compacter, for the trash.
07:29:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the other question I have is
07:29:57 when folks move in and out of this building, is there
07:30:02 a service elevator?
07:30:06 >>> I can't speak to that.
07:30:07 I will have to let the petitioner speak to that.
07:30:09 I believe that discussion was had at the last hearing
07:30:11 as well.
07:30:12 Because there is no loading area.
07:30:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You mean the other project?
07:30:17 >>> The other, yes.
07:30:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission?
07:30:24 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
07:30:37 I have been sworn.
07:30:51 We like the motto for the CBD that is the T sky is
07:30:55 limitless.
07:30:56 We do have a limit.
07:30:57 The request for you has already been laid out by Ms.
07:31:00 Feeley.
07:31:01 I think what is significant is she has told that you
07:31:03 just two blocks away you have.
07:31:05 approved something very similar in character to what
07:31:08 is being proposed here this evening.
07:31:09 Ironically by the same representative of that other
07:31:12 project.
07:31:13 It's the same representative of this project.
07:31:15 So I think he's already got a lot of his presentation
07:31:21 already figured out.
07:31:23 But, anyway, this is pretty characteristic of at least
07:31:33 what we are wanting to see downtown which is more
07:31:34 residential development.
07:31:35 Okay.
07:31:36 So that's here.
07:31:37 The only on the thing that I will mention in addition
07:31:39 to this is this is actually going to be the third,
07:31:42 because we already have the venue at the corner of
07:31:46 Kennedy and Ashley, but also very similar in character
07:31:48 to what's being proposed here this evening.
07:31:50 Planning Commission staff had no objections consistent
07:31:52 with the comprehensive plan.
07:31:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:31:55 >>> Keith Bricklemyer, the attorney for the applicant,
07:32:09 Tampa downtown invest limited, 500 East Kennedy
07:32:12 Boulevard, suite 200.
07:32:15 I have been sworn.
07:32:25 The overhead.
07:32:26 This is a little bit better orientation to how this
07:32:34 site relate to downtown.
07:32:39 This is the parcel in question.
07:32:42 This is the previously approved project that is of a
07:32:45 similar design.
07:32:46 But this one is actually unique.
07:32:48 I'm very pleased to be able to present to you a
07:32:51 project that I don't think has any comparable in the
07:32:54 City of Tampa.
07:32:55 This will be a project that has one unit per floor for
07:33:02 28 floors, and then the penthouse is the top two
07:33:05 floors.
07:33:08 Each unit, when you put your car in the robotic
07:33:12 garage, you go to the elevator, the elevator arrives
07:33:15 at your unit.
07:33:16 So it is a very, very secure situation for a resident.
07:33:23 We think that because of the small size of this
07:33:25 project that it is also probably uniquely positioned
07:33:32 to be able to respond to the real estate market should
07:33:36 it ever recover.
07:33:41 We are certainly hopeful of that.
07:33:44 The booklet that I think was distributed, that Abbye
07:33:49 distributed earlier, has some additional color and
07:33:53 flavor to the presentation that Abbye made.
07:33:56 I think she very accurately described the components
07:33:59 of the project.
07:34:01 Those elevations from each view are included.
07:34:05 There's a landscape plan included in the booklet, as
07:34:07 well as in the large plans that you have.
07:34:10 And I don't dwell on details of those issues unless
07:34:14 there are specific questions.
07:34:15 There is not a service elevator.
07:34:17 There are, however, two elevators, so someone moving
07:34:21 in can use one --
07:34:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have any opposition that you
07:34:29 know of?
07:34:31 >>> Not that I know of.
07:34:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a question.
07:34:33 Mr. Dingfelder.
07:34:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Keith.
07:34:37 The quote public open space, what is facing on Jackson
07:34:47 or Whiting?
07:34:48 I'm not sure.
07:34:50 I guess it the front of the building.
07:34:58 >>> It actually at the corner of Whiting and Morgan.
07:35:07 I think the streetscape of this building is really
07:35:10 very nice.
07:35:10 It's open area.
07:35:13 This is a 21-foot tall ceiling.
07:35:15 And all of this area is open as well as the corner on
07:35:21 Morgan street.
07:35:22 >> And the 604, or where folks would drive in?
07:35:28 >>> 601, yes.
07:35:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public wants to
07:35:34 speak on item number 5?
07:35:35 >> Move to close.
07:35:36 >> Second.
07:35:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
07:35:38 All in favor say Aye.
07:35:40 Opposed, Nay.
07:35:41 Okay.
07:35:44 >>GWEN MILLER: They have to come up with a --
07:35:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They have to come up with a name
07:35:50 for these buildings.
07:35:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If it was in the middle of the
07:35:52 block.
07:35:53 But you are giving the street some gifts in terms of
07:35:56 landscaping and seating and open spaces and because of
07:35:58 all of that I think this will be a fine project.
07:36:00 I hope it comes to fruition.
07:36:04 In our near future.
07:36:05 I would like to move an ordinance rezoning property in
07:36:07 the general vicinity of 601 east Whiting Street in the
07:36:10 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described
07:36:12 in section 1 through zoning district classifications
07:36:15 CBD-2, central business district, to CBD 2, central
07:36:21 business district, residential, multifamily, providing
07:36:23 an effective date including the comments made on the
07:36:26 revision sheet.
07:36:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:36:29 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
07:36:31 Opposed, Nay.
07:36:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott and Mulhern
07:36:36 being absent.
07:36:37 Second reading and adoption will be on November
07:36:39 5th at 9:30 a.m.
07:36:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 6.
07:37:07 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
07:37:09 Item number 6 before you this evening is located 2815
07:37:14 and 2817 west Parkland Boulevard.
07:37:18 It is in the Parkland Estates overlay district.
07:37:20 And the request is from RS-75 residential
07:37:25 single-family and planned development to planned
07:37:26 development for residential single-family.
07:37:29 There are no waivers requested the staff says or
07:37:35 permitted with this application, but there are no
07:37:36 waivers they could ask.
07:37:42 Let me go ahead and do my site presentation first.
07:37:44 And then I think I will just kind of talk off the cuff
07:37:51 and request.
07:37:53 It a little bit complicated.
07:37:57 But after three months of working it with I think we
07:38:00 have it down pretty good now.
07:38:02 You see here the subject property is located in green.
07:38:06 Parkland Boulevard to the south.
07:38:08 MacDill over to the west a little bit.
07:38:13 Y'all see on here several PDs.
07:38:17 And what I learned through researching this project or
07:38:21 working with this project is that at the time the
07:38:23 Parkland Estates overlay back in-oh end of 2003
07:38:28 beginning of 2004, that when there were existing
07:38:31 structures within the overlay area, that did not
07:38:33 conform to the new overlay standard that they were
07:38:38 advised to PD in order to vest that nonconformity.
07:38:41 So that is what you see scattered in bits and pieces
07:38:45 around on this area.
07:38:48 And they all have the same Z 03-149 number so it is
07:38:53 all in the same area wide rezoning at that time.
07:38:56 This property has five platted sixty-foot lots.
07:39:01 And another item under the overlay is that even though
07:39:05 the predominant zoning of this district of the area is
07:39:09 RS-75, the overlay preserves that 60-foot platted lot
07:39:13 as originally platted in the Parkland Estates overlay
07:39:16 are developable lots.
07:39:18 So I am going to talk a little bit about that when we
07:39:22 get into the presentation.
07:39:25 Here is an aerial of the site.
07:39:27 Parkland to the south.
07:39:30 MacDill a little further over.
07:39:34 Lots of trees in the area.
07:39:40 Here is a picture of the subject property, the western
07:39:42 portion of the subject property.
07:39:45 The two existing single-family homes on the subject
07:39:47 property.
07:39:50 The part I am showing you now is the PD portion.
07:39:55 I'm moving east along Parkland.
07:39:58 And this is the second.
07:40:00 This is on the western portion that's currently zoned
07:40:02 RS-75.
07:40:07 This is to the west of the site.
07:40:15 Down to the east.
07:40:22 On the southern portion of Parkland Estates, Parkland
07:40:26 Boulevard coming back down immediately south of the
07:40:30 site.
07:40:42 They said that they wanted to create two RS-75 lots on
07:40:46 the eastern portion of the site.
07:40:50 And when I looked at it and saw that on the western
07:40:54 three lots it was a PD, we said we can't just take 30
07:40:58 feet out of a PD and add it to the two 60-foot lots
07:41:01 that are on the east because then you have apportion
07:41:04 zoned RS-75 and a portion zoned PD.
07:41:07 Somehow we have to make that PD something other than
07:41:10 PD or go ahead and PD the whole thing.
07:41:12 So what's before you tonight is three options.
07:41:16 The 60-foot platted lots whether they PD this or not,
07:41:21 four RS-75 or any combination thereof.
07:41:24 I believe it's the petitioner's intent -- and they'll
07:41:27 speak to that and keep everything on the western
07:41:30 portion of the property the way it is.
07:41:31 They are just looking to create the two RS-75 lot on
07:41:33 the eastern portion.
07:41:35 And the only way to do that is to reallocate all of it
07:41:39 under the PD and that's what's on the site plan before
07:41:41 you this evening.
07:41:42 All of the setbacks, everything is compliant with the
07:41:46 Parkland Estates overlay.
07:41:47 And any development on-site will need to go ahead and
07:41:50 comply with all of that at the time of permitting.
07:41:53 Staff found the request consistent.
07:41:56 I believe there is only one modification that's needed
07:41:59 in between first and second reading and that is in
07:42:02 relationship to one tree that was mislabeled and we
07:42:05 would like to have changed.
07:42:07 Thank you very much.
07:42:19 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
07:42:20 I have been sworn in.
07:42:24 This is a really interesting one.
07:42:25 It's in a really, really great neighborhood.
07:42:29 Basically, this is really a technical type of issue
07:42:33 because of where it's at, and the option before you
07:42:35 really is kind of a challenge for RS-75 lots, four are
07:42:41 60 lots, basically something that's already allowed.
07:42:44 But with a PD, there's going to be some protections
07:42:47 there as far as design is concerned, and where the fat
07:42:51 print is going to go because there are a lot of trees
07:42:53 on the lots in question.
07:42:55 If you drive the area, and I'm sure some of you have,
07:42:59 or you are already familiar with it, even on the
07:43:01 future land use map you can see the character of the
07:43:03 area is mixed as far as the size of the lots, and the
07:43:05 architectural features of the area.
07:43:07 There are quite a few houses that are very similar in
07:43:10 character to what's being requested.
07:43:11 Even as far as the RS-60 requests are concerned.
07:43:14 Just to the south there, you see four straight lots in
07:43:17 a row where you have RS-60.
07:43:21 Some two-story homes, some single story homes
07:43:25 association bigger homes, but it's quite a variety for
07:43:27 residential features in the area.
07:43:30 Based on what is allowed in the area under the RS-60
07:43:35 and some of the characteristics which are still
07:43:37 predominantly single-family detached, Planning
07:43:39 Commission staff obviously came to the conclusion that
07:43:42 this really is going to be in character with the area,
07:43:44 it's not going to produce any additional impacts to
07:43:47 the site.
07:43:48 Thank you.
07:43:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:44:04 >> My name is Steve Rosen.
07:44:05 This is my wife Liz Rosen.
07:44:09 We have been sworn.
07:44:09 We live at 2817 Parkland which is the western portion.
07:44:12 And that is 180 feet.
07:44:15 We also own the adjacent property, 2815 Parkland which
07:44:19 is 120 feet which gives us 300 contiguous feet.
07:44:24 We have been good neighbors for 25 years, and we had
07:44:28 good neighbors, and we take a cue from councilman
07:44:32 Miranda ask for this rezoning because there's good
07:44:34 rezoning and bad rezoning.
07:44:36 This is clearly good rezoning for the character of the
07:44:38 neighborhood.
07:44:39 This will keep two 75-foot lots and bring all of the
07:44:44 land into the PD, and we on the western end will have
07:44:48 150 feet left.
07:44:49 We have no intention of selling the house.
07:44:51 We raised our children there.
07:44:52 And now our grandchildren are enjoying the home in the
07:44:55 neighborhood.
07:44:55 So we ask that you approve our rezoning request, and
07:45:00 in closing I would like to tell that you we have never
07:45:04 gone through a rezoning process, and we have done this
07:45:06 on our own without counselor outside facilitators and
07:45:11 I don't think we would have gotten here without the
07:45:12 help of Ms. Feeley so we thank Mrs. Feeley and staff.
07:45:17 >>> I would like to add that we do have letters of
07:45:20 support from the homeowners association, and the
07:45:24 neighbor on our east, and our neighbors across the
07:45:28 street.
07:45:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just have a comment after we
07:45:35 close.
07:45:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public to speak
07:45:37 on item number 6?
07:45:38 >> Move to close.
07:45:39 >> Second.
07:45:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Now, Mr. Dingfelder?
07:45:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Obviously wave to read this
07:45:47 ordinance.
07:45:47 We have a letter from the president of the Parkland
07:45:50 civic club, probably the most protective civic club in
07:45:54 our community.
07:45:56 So if anybody was against this, we would have heard
07:45:59 about it.
07:46:02 I'll move an ordinance rezoning property in the
07:46:03 general vicinity of 2815, 2817 west Parkland
07:46:06 Boulevard, city of Tampa, Florida, more particularly
07:46:09 described in section 1 from zoning district
07:46:11 classifications RS-75 single-family and PD, planned
07:46:15 development, residential single-family, to PD, planned
07:46:18 development, residential single-family.
07:46:21 Providing an effective date.
07:46:21 >> We have a motion and second.
07:46:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Speaking for yourself on your own
07:46:32 behalf is oftentimes the most effective.
07:46:35 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:46:36 All in favor say Aye.
07:46:38 Opposed Nay?
07:46:40 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Scott
07:46:41 being absent.
07:46:43 Second reading will be on November 5th, 9:30 a.m.
07:46:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 7.
07:47:30 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Feel land development.
07:47:32 Item number 7 on your agenda is V 08-39 located at
07:47:37 2005 and 2107 Osborne Avenue and 4616 north 22nd
07:47:43 street.
07:47:44 The request is from PD, CG and RS-50 to PD.
07:47:50 For a medical clinic.
07:47:51 There are two waivers associated with this request
07:47:54 this evening.
07:47:55 The first is to remove three grand trees, two of which
07:47:59 are hazardous, have been determined hazardous by parks
07:48:02 and recreation division, and one 30-inch that is
07:48:06 healthy.
07:48:06 So there were three 30, 37 and 38.
07:48:09 The 37 and 38 are hazardous and the 30 is in healthy
07:48:13 condition.
07:48:13 The second is to reduce the required buffer from 15
07:48:16 feet for the six-foot masonry wall to a PVC fence
07:48:22 along the western boundary, and this is due to all the
07:48:25 large specimen trees that are over there and not
07:48:28 wanting to put a masonry wall over in that section of
07:48:31 the property wanting to put a PVC, more of a pier and
07:48:36 lintel foundation and not tear up the root system.
07:48:43 Staff found this request inconsistent.
07:48:46 However if changes are made between first and second
07:48:48 reading it will be found consistent, and there are
07:48:52 only minor technical items.
07:48:55 I am going to go ahead and show you the site.
07:49:01 On the last page of the staff report, many of you may
07:49:03 remember, this site was previously rezoned, not too
07:49:07 far long ago.
07:49:08 It a large site.
07:49:10 There are 15 grand trees, and a combination of on-site
07:49:17 and immediately off-site.
07:49:22 The site is located in the East Tampa overlay district
07:49:25 and was reviewed by Mike Callahan, the urban design
07:49:29 coordinator for consistency with the overlay.
07:49:42 Let see if I can find the zoning atlas, too.
07:49:48 >> I remember a lot of discussion about a bus stop.
07:49:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
07:49:53 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I think I may have given you all my
07:49:56 copies of my zoning atlas.
07:49:58 22nd street to the east, Osborne to the north.
07:50:04 The site that previously came before you was a little
07:50:07 bit -- thank you -- has been picked at.
07:50:13 And you can see all the nice beautiful trees here.
07:50:18 There is one existing structure here, and an existing
07:50:21 structure here.
07:50:23 And those will be removed.
07:50:28 You can see here the PD that was previously rezoned,
07:50:34 and some of the CG portion, and also the RS-50 portion
07:50:40 which is the back portion.
07:50:41 This is poinsettia.
07:50:43 It went down -- a portion of poinsettia has been
07:50:46 vacated but not the whole thing.
07:50:47 You will see on your site plan how the site is going
07:50:49 to wrap around with the building oriented at the
07:50:52 corner of 22nd and Osborne, parking along the south
07:50:55 area here, stormwater, large stormwater, pond in the
07:51:00 back here, adjacent to the single-family residential,
07:51:04 and a small portion of parking here.
07:51:10 This is the current structure looking from Osborne
07:51:13 south.
07:51:16 This is looking from 22nd west.
07:51:21 Going down 22nd toward the back of the site.
07:51:31 One of the existing drive aprons.
07:51:36 Back up on I-4.
07:51:38 And this is moving to the west.
07:51:43 The side of the existing structure.
07:51:46 To the west there's a place of religious assembly.
07:51:48 This is not included.
07:51:49 This is looking down poinsettia.
07:51:53 That I showed was partially vacant.
07:51:58 This is moving further to the west.
07:52:04 The high school is immediately catercorner to the
07:52:06 northeast corner of 22nd and Osborne.
07:52:09 There is an additional place of religious assembly
07:52:11 immediately across 22nd street, on the east side of
07:52:15 Osborne of the
07:52:18 And there is a vacant parcel to the north.
07:52:21 This is the northwest corner of the site moving west.
07:52:27 There's a vacant piece, single-family residential.
07:52:44 I would like to quickly go through the staff report.
07:52:48 They are petitioning to rezone the property for PD,
07:52:51 planned development, to construct the medical clinic.
07:52:54 The 2.19-acre site is surrounded by a mix of
07:52:58 residential, office, place of religious assembly,
07:53:03 school.
07:53:03 The PD setbacks are as follows:
07:53:06 14 feet to the north.
07:53:08 170.6 feet to the south.
07:53:10 27.8 fate to the west.
07:53:13 12 feet to the east.
07:53:15 The site is proposed to contain one story, 15,000
07:53:19 square foot medical clinic oriented toward 22nd street
07:53:22 and east Osborne Avenue.
07:53:24 It will have a maximum height of 27 feet.
07:53:26 Vehicular access will be located off of east Osborne
07:53:29 and 22nd street.
07:53:30 A total of 105 parking spaces are required and 105 are
07:53:34 being provided including ten compact and five ADA.
07:53:38 The subject site is heavily wooded, containing over 50
07:53:42 trees, including ten grands, three being requested for
07:53:45 removal of which two are hazardous.
07:53:48 In addition there are six off-site grand trees that
07:53:51 are in close proximity to the site are required to
07:53:54 meet the protective radius.
07:53:56 The existing PD on the property was rezoned in March
07:53:59 2008 with 31 town homes.
07:54:02 s was a portion of the subject property 2.21-acre and
07:54:06 was proposed for seven buildings with a waiver for the
07:54:07 removal of one grand tree.
07:54:11 Staff findings, the site plan setbacks must be revised
07:54:14 to be measured to the structural pillars of the
07:54:16 overhang of these features meet the code definition of
07:54:19 structure and the building height is listed on the
07:54:22 site plan as 20 feet as shown on the elevation at 27
07:54:25 feet.
07:54:25 This conflict also needs to be resolved.
07:54:29 Tree and landscape had two comments.
07:54:32 One is that the tree table needs to match.
07:54:37 One of the species, the black cherry is not protected.
07:54:40 The tree table needs to be updated to reflect this.
07:54:45 And also there is a comment from Mary in relation to
07:54:47 the buffer waiver, that tree and landscape is in
07:54:50 support of the buffer waiver given the large number of
07:54:52 trees on that western boundary.
07:54:54 And the last words from parks and recreation, the
07:54:59 proposed plan request removal of three grand trees
07:55:02 on-site two of which meet hazardous criteria. Due to
07:55:05 the requirement of the overlay the specific location
07:55:07 of the structure will require removal of a
07:55:09 nonhazardous grand tree.
07:55:11 Within the proposed building footprint.
07:55:13 If approved, the removal of this tree will be $514
07:55:17 with inch for inch replacement, provided in the site
07:55:22 plan prayer to the second reading of the ordinance.
07:55:25 There is further analysis of the PD criteria and the
07:55:30 overlay criteria have been provided to you.
07:55:33 There have been no waivers.
07:55:38 Staff is available for any questions.
07:55:39 I do have the revision sheet that I will pass out to
07:55:41 you now should it be the desire of council to approve
07:55:44 this on first reading this evening.
07:55:59 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
07:56:00 I have been sworn.
07:56:01 A couple of things very briefly.
07:56:04 Ms. Feeley already told what you the request is this
07:56:06 evening, obviously for 15,000 square foot medical
07:56:09 facility for the area.
07:56:10 It is located on the southwest corner at 122nd Street.
07:56:15 She's already given awe very good description of the
07:56:17 context.
07:56:17 The uniqueness that I want to point out here is
07:56:20 basically a couple of things.
07:56:21 We know this is in the East Tampa CRA which is the
07:56:24 largest CRA that the city has.
07:56:29 Also it's an urban village which with the new policies
07:56:32 we have, a very unique policy which basically is
07:56:35 something that will allow or spur potential for
07:56:39 economic development in an area within CRA areas, also
07:56:43 within urban villages specifically, and that is we
07:56:45 have a policy that allows, as you can see in this
07:56:48 particular instance, this property consists of three
07:56:51 separate land use categories, residential 10,
07:56:53 residential 20, CMU 35.
07:56:55 The new policy in the comprehensive plan, if you have
07:56:57 a project that comes in now and it has more than one
07:57:00 land use category, you are allowed to go ahead and
07:57:03 blend the land use categories into an average and you
07:57:05 can put the use anyplace on the site of whatever the
07:57:08 highest intensity is.
07:57:09 Or the highest uses of these categories.
07:57:11 Basically this policy is allowing this project to be
07:57:14 able to be constructed the way it is right now instead
07:57:16 of we would have to have a separate use here, separate
07:57:20 use here, separate use here under the old plan.
07:57:22 But now we are able to go ahead and consolidate all of
07:57:24 this, come up with an average which is allowed this to
07:57:28 become a reality.
07:57:28 One of the things as far as context that Ms. Feeley
07:57:34 talked about over here, this is not an existing road,
07:57:37 it just platted like.
07:57:39 That but basically this is where the church is located
07:57:41 at.
07:57:41 This is a residential that is I think going -- you are
07:57:47 going to have -- at this point it going to come this
07:57:50 way, and then you will have another point over here.
07:57:52 But basically this is bottom line, this will be a use,
07:57:56 it is an institutional use, will be of benefit to the
07:57:59 citizens within this community, and should be an
07:58:02 asset.
07:58:02 This is a collector road, 22nd street, this is
07:58:07 Osborne.
07:58:07 So it only short proximity away from two major
07:58:10 arterials so it has very good connectivity as far as
07:58:14 people within the area being able to come and use this
07:58:16 particular use.
07:58:16 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
07:58:19 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
07:58:20 Thank you.
07:58:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:58:29 Madam Chair and council, I'm Charles bottoms.
07:58:33 I'm the CEO with Tampa family health centers.
07:58:36 We have been providing health care in the Lee Davis
07:58:40 neighborhood service area for a little over 26 years.
07:58:44 We are currently operating a health center and a
07:58:46 dental center, a pharmacy, in the Lee Davis
07:58:49 neighborhood service center which is a county owned
07:58:51 building.
07:58:52 It is way too small.
07:58:54 There's in a room for expansion.
07:58:55 We also have a small health center located on
07:59:00 Republica de Cuba and 22nd with the old Spanish
07:59:05 hospital.
07:59:05 I think we have 18 parking spots, if that gives you an
07:59:08 idea, by no means meets current code.
07:59:12 What we are proposing is to build a 15,000 square foot
07:59:16 state-of-the-art health, dental and pharmacy with
07:59:19 radiology services.
07:59:22 We have overwhelming support of the East Tampa
07:59:25 revitalization committee.
07:59:27 We have discussed the construction with most of the
07:59:31 neighbors.
07:59:31 We have talked to the neighborhood association.
07:59:35 To my knowledge, there is no opposition from this.
07:59:39 As a qualified health center we did apply for and
07:59:42 received, I believe, $1.27 million of stimulus money
07:59:47 to help us on this project which will run
07:59:50 approximately 4 million.
07:59:51 The majority of our staff gets hired from the
07:59:55 community and we serve only to low income and
07:59:58 uninsured.
07:59:59 60% of the patients coming in will be uninsured.
08:00:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Can I ask you a question?
08:00:03 Which part of the part face it is church?
08:00:07 >> The church is considerable distance.
08:00:19 It will be the back of the building, or the north side
08:00:21 of the building.
08:00:39 >> This is the south elevation.
08:00:40 This is the north elevation, will be on Osborne.
08:00:43 The east elevation is 22nd street.
08:00:46 And what you see here are covered areas for the
08:00:54 patient residents to walk around the building.
08:00:57 There will be an entrance on 22nd street and an
08:01:00 entrance on the south elevation as well.
08:01:03 >>GWEN MILLER: You are purchasing the building on the
08:01:05 corner of 22nd --
08:01:07 >>> The old Harvard building we purchased.
08:01:09 >> What about the house by the church?
08:01:12 Are you purchasing that, too?
08:01:13 >> The house directly next to the church, no, we have
08:01:17 spoken with them.
08:01:17 We offered to purchase it at this time.
08:01:19 They are not selling.
08:01:20 >> Are you building a round it?
08:01:22 >> We are building a round it.
08:01:23 Yes, ma'am.
08:01:26 And the owner is a choir.
08:01:27 We have discussed it with him.
08:01:29 He had no objections.
08:01:30 >> You are purchasing the next house, though?
08:01:33 >> The next house we are purchasing.
08:01:36 Due to the large number of trees on the property, as
08:01:38 you have seen, we ended up having to buy considerably
08:01:40 more property just to be able to get the parking
08:01:43 spaces in, and protect all of the existing trees with
08:01:46 the exception of the one grand oak, and the two that
08:01:48 are distressed.
08:01:49 >> Ha will be --
08:01:53 >> That will be part of the entrance, yes, ma'am.
08:01:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that you do a
08:01:58 lot of good in the community.
08:01:59 And I really appreciate you protecting the trees.
08:02:02 >>> Thank you.
08:02:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Medical clinic sounds like a
08:02:08 wonderful project.
08:02:09 The only question I had was Ms. Healey flashed a
08:02:15 Victorian -- what looked to be a really pretty
08:02:17 Victorian -- does that ring a bell?
08:02:22 >> It's the old Harvard building on 22nd and Osborne.
08:02:25 >> Right on the corner?
08:02:26 >> Right on the corner.
08:02:28 Diagonal from the school.
08:02:29 >>GWEN MILLER: They are purchasing that.
08:02:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So that's the roof then that I am
08:02:33 seeing in this aerial?
08:02:34 >>> Yes, sir.
08:02:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Any chance you guys are going to
08:02:37 save it and move it?
08:02:38 >>> It was considered, and no.
08:02:44 >> What was the consideration?
08:02:45 >>> We met with city staff.
08:02:47 There are funds to move it, locations to move it.
08:02:49 I guess it was just not decided to be something we
08:02:53 could do.
08:02:57 >> If somebody came along and was interested, I mean,
08:03:01 is that something that you all are considering instead
08:03:03 of demolishing it?
08:03:05 >>> Absolutely.
08:03:05 >> Get the word out.
08:03:10 >>> Yes.
08:03:10 I hope we can get the word out.
08:03:12 Because clearly it's not designated historic or
08:03:14 anything like that.
08:03:15 It's not an historic district per se but it looks like
08:03:18 a really nice house.
08:03:20 And I hope somebody can save this.
08:03:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Tearing the on the houses down --
08:03:34 >> There will be a very heavy tree barrier.
08:03:39 Is there a wall there?
08:03:40 Yes, there is a wall there as well.
08:03:42 >> There will be a wall put there?
08:03:43 >>> Right.
08:03:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
08:03:46 would like to speak on item number 7?
08:04:02 >> My name is James Cufak, one City Center.
08:04:10 For a number of years I worked with reverend Davis and
08:04:12 a group of people on the project.
08:04:13 We anticipated putting on that site.
08:04:16 We attempted to bring affordable housing to that
08:04:19 neighborhood.
08:04:20 That would have benefited 31 families.
08:04:23 If this project goes forward, I think it will probably
08:04:27 benefit 31 that you families.
08:04:32 In a time of turmoil in the medical area, I think this
08:04:35 project will be a great example of what the community
08:04:38 can do.
08:04:40 And I have no personal interest in this now.
08:04:43 The other project did not go forward due to the real
08:04:46 estate crisis that we had.
08:04:47 I am delighted to see the land that we worked on along
08:04:51 with Mr. Johnson and the city for a very beneficial
08:04:55 purpose will be put to a much more beneficial purpose,
08:04:59 and I think this will be a credit not only to the
08:05:01 neighborhood and to the community but the city in
08:05:05 general.
08:05:05 And I commend these folks for putting together a
08:05:09 worthwhile project.
08:05:11 And I would ask that you approve it.
08:05:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
08:05:23 >>> Ed Johnson, CRA manager for East Tampa.
08:05:26 I wholeheartedly support the building of this
08:05:31 particular health clinic for our community.
08:05:34 As all of you know, this has been something that has
08:05:36 been in the works for well over five years.
08:05:39 We have been working with Mr. Bottoms and his group
08:05:42 trying to locate property suitable to build this
08:05:44 facility over the course of that time.
08:05:48 We were instrumental in assisting where Mr. Bottoms
08:05:52 and Mr. Sam Kinsey and Mr. Frank Reddick also provided
08:05:57 assistance in dealing with both of the owners of these
08:06:00 two parcels that were purchased by Mr. Bottoms.
08:06:06 The big thing is that the dollars that were being
08:06:09 spent here immediately are coming from the stimulus
08:06:12 funds, and it's imperative that this project move
08:06:16 forward as expeditiously as possible.
08:06:18 We also want to have support from the East Tampa
08:06:22 partnership.
08:06:25 Beth could not be here.
08:06:27 She had to leave town but she wanted me to convey her
08:06:29 support on behalf of East Tampa community advisory
08:06:31 committee for approval on first reading if it so
08:06:35 desired.
08:06:36 Thank you.
08:06:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
08:06:38 >> Move to close.
08:06:41 >> Second.
08:06:41 >> All in favor of the motion say Aye.
08:06:44 Opposed, Nay.
08:06:49 >> Thank you, Madam Chair.
08:06:51 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
08:06:52 vicinity of 2005 and 2107 east Osborne Avenue and 4616
08:06:59 north 22nd street in the city of Tampa, Florida and
08:07:02 more particularly described in section 1 from zoning
08:07:05 districts classification CG commercial general to
08:07:08 RS-50 residential single-family and PD planned
08:07:12 development single-family attached, semi detached, to
08:07:16 planned development clinic, providing an effective
08:07:18 date.
08:07:18 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
08:07:21 All in favor say Aye.
08:07:22 Opposed, Nay.
08:07:23 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott and Mulhern
08:07:25 being absent.
08:07:26 Second reading and adoption will be on November
08:07:28 5th at 9:30 a.m.
08:07:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 8.
08:08:11 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
08:08:12 The final item in your agenda this evening is Z 08-69.
08:08:16 It's located at 10851 south creek Boulevard.
08:08:20 This is an area wide rezoning.
08:08:23 And I would like to go ahead.
08:08:28 It is PDA, planned developmental alternative,
08:08:31 residential retail office, commercial general, to PDA,
08:08:35 planned developmental alternative, residential, retail
08:08:38 office, general commercial.
08:08:39 There are no waivers requested with this petition.
08:08:43 The petitioner is requesting an area zoning for the
08:08:45 property generally located east and south of heritage
08:08:49 isle to the south of Cross Creek Boulevard.
08:08:52 The site was annexed to the city in 2000 and contains
08:08:55 131.92 acres.
08:08:58 The subject property generally referred to as star
08:09:01 contains the eastern portion of SDD which was
08:09:06 originally annexed to the east meadows joint venture
08:09:08 agreement in 1998.
08:09:10 The star agreement made the allowance for vested units
08:09:12 to be shifted or transferred between the west and east
08:09:15 portion of the SDD.
08:09:18 I'll show you that on a little map I have.
08:09:22 This was the East Meadows joint venture, the larger
08:09:34 area I talked about or the two pieces here, in the
08:09:37 annexation agreement it did allow for entitlements to
08:09:39 be shared and then star was the other two pieces.
08:09:42 So this was contained in the star.
08:09:48 Based on the development that has occurred this date,
08:09:51 there are 90 undeveloped units remaining in the SPD
08:09:56 parcels.
08:09:57 Petitioner is requesting to transfer those remaining
08:10:00 90 units from the west side to the east side and
08:10:02 convert those units to 25,800 square feet of
08:10:06 commercial space.
08:10:07 The resulting total development entitlements would be
08:10:11 335 residential units and 206,800 square feet of
08:10:17 commercial.
08:10:20 To go back over that, 90 residential units here, and
08:10:24 the PD will use an equivalent to change those units
08:10:28 into commercial or to change it into hotel.
08:10:32 That's what they are asking for tonight is to take the
08:10:34 90 units that are over here that are already vested,
08:10:39 associated with that, convert it into a commercial
08:10:41 use, and move it over to the on the side.
08:10:43 That's what's before you this evening.
08:10:50 There are four changes that would need to be made in
08:10:53 between first and second reading.
08:10:55 I have provided those on a revision sheet.
08:10:57 And it is to amend page one of the site plan by
08:11:02 removing the dark lines around parcel B-2 and D as
08:11:07 labeled to the parcel D, and parcel E-2 and it lists
08:11:10 those labels as the site plan for the rezoning as page
08:11:15 4 an and update the language on the first page of the
08:11:18 site plan to the reflect the new page added and
08:11:22 references to the 04.
08:11:27 There is one note to the tree and landscape specialist
08:11:30 that they wanted carried forward, and that was the
08:11:33 upland preserve represents an FG, FWFC recorded
08:11:40 easement for the East Meadows development and requires
08:11:46 the approval of the FGS, WFC and the City of Tampa.
08:11:54 This is the zoning atlas.
08:12:05 Cross Creek Boulevard running immediately within the
08:12:09 property.
08:12:12 East Meadows road over here.
08:12:17 As you know, in these PDAs, shifting any further
08:12:24 incremental review process as we do, to apply those to
08:12:27 the land area that remains within the area, we do
08:12:30 review that prior to and make sure that the
08:12:35 entitlement are available, and then for the PD type of
08:12:39 plan is done.
08:12:40 Staff is available for any questions.
08:12:51 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
08:12:52 I have been sworn.
08:12:53 Just a couple of additional factoids to add on to what
08:12:58 Ms. Feeley already stated.
08:13:00 This goes back to 2001.
08:13:03 When we had rezoning.
08:13:06 Basically 90 units were not used in the 2009 rezoning
08:13:09 so basically the city is transferring the entitlements
08:13:11 and converting them from residential use which is 90
08:13:15 units to the commercial equivalent which is 20,000.
08:13:17 She stated 25,800 square feet for rezoning that was
08:13:21 done in 2005.
08:13:23 So basically those two combinations have to come to
08:13:25 you with the 2009 rezoning right now.
08:13:29 Basically the entitlement as the trade-off is not any
08:13:33 additional transportation impacts, to take into
08:13:37 consideration in doing this what they did here.
08:13:39 The trade-off as far as conversion is concerned.
08:13:41 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
08:13:43 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
08:13:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
08:13:46 >> Good evening.
08:13:55 Kristin Talbert, of Bricklemyer, Smolker and Boles.
08:14:02 I think there are a few people in the audience tonight
08:14:04 that have some concerns about what's happening in the
08:14:07 area and I think the reason for that is there's a lot
08:14:09 of misunderstanding about what exactly is being
08:14:11 requested.
08:14:12 So I am going to try to be brief and get everyone out
08:14:14 of here very quickly but maybe sure I answer their
08:14:18 questions as best as I can and give you any relevant
08:14:21 facts.
08:14:27 That is the subject property.
08:14:29 That is the notice that went out to the surrounding
08:14:31 property owners.
08:14:31 They all saw that.
08:14:33 Now there was some concern raised about a lot of
08:14:35 people saw their properties being rezoned, but we have
08:14:38 trade to explain where we can that this is an area
08:14:42 wide rezoning so a lot of properties appear to be
08:14:44 rezoned, potentially changing.
08:14:47 That isn't.
08:14:47 Which brings me to what's actually changing.
08:14:52 What you see there in the orange is very similar to
08:14:58 what Abbye just showed you.
08:15:00 In the orange, there is the area, the entitlements are
08:15:04 being taken from.
08:15:06 If you will, the only undeveloped portion of that PDA
08:15:10 is being moved over.
08:15:11 It's really about 2 that you feet down the road is
08:15:13 about the difference.
08:15:15 We submitted this traffic analysis into the record
08:15:18 that demonstrates that there's no additional impact.
08:15:21 In fact there is an opportunity for lessening the
08:15:25 amount of trips and impacts all across because it's
08:15:28 conversion from residential to commercial.
08:15:30 So you get more internal trips captured from the
08:15:34 Heritage Isles development.
08:15:35 The other residential development is already out
08:15:37 there.
08:15:47 And there you will see the PM peek hour trips ever
08:15:50 essentially the same and all the other impacts are
08:15:52 less, and again that just indicates you are going to
08:15:55 have -- this is actually going to be a better thing,
08:16:00 and at the very worst it's the same difference for the
08:16:04 entitlement.
08:16:07 The concern that the neighborhood has had is that they
08:16:10 are concerned that things are going to change out
08:16:13 there, but I want to emphasize that things that are
08:16:16 out there, the developed portion, those aren't going
08:16:19 to change at all, and there is a gentleman here
08:16:23 tonight, weighs concerned about an existing mitigation
08:16:26 area that is not going to change.
08:16:28 The site plan that we have is exactly the same site
08:16:32 plan that is currently approved for the site.
08:16:37 None of the developed areas are going to change.
08:16:39 No areas that couldn't be developed before could now
08:16:41 be developed.
08:16:41 The only change there's going to be an increase of
08:16:44 25,800 square feet of additional commercial that can
08:16:48 be developed within the commercially designated
08:16:50 portions of the property.
08:16:51 And that's going to be the only change.
08:17:00 And just to demonstrate one of the areas of concern, I
08:17:04 know that existing elementary school is going to stay
08:17:06 there, the outdoor storage.
08:17:08 Other things are going to stay there much the same way
08:17:10 as they are.
08:17:11 I hope that alleviates some of the neighbors concerns
08:17:14 so they don't have -- feel like they need to have
08:17:17 further explanation, I'm happy to meet with anyone
08:17:20 outside who has any questions about the petition.
08:17:30 With that I'll just say that I really appreciated
08:17:33 staff's help, and I think that Abbye did an extremely
08:17:36 good job of the staff report and in her presentation
08:17:40 tonight of doing a very concise explanation.
08:17:46 It got complicated at times but I appreciate all their
08:17:49 assistance.
08:17:49 I'm here if you have any questions.
08:17:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The orange and yellow -- I
08:17:59 apologize for not being very familiar with the details
08:18:02 of this area.
08:18:04 I'm sure Mr. Caetano is.
08:18:08 So you said the yellow is the receiving area?
08:18:12 >>> Yes.
08:18:12 This is the southern portion of the PDA area.
08:18:16 The other area that you see is also technically an
08:18:21 area, any of those commercial areas could receive
08:18:22 these additional entitlements.
08:18:24 But, yes.
08:18:32 It's this area.
08:18:34 That is the undeveloped area that's probably going to
08:18:36 be the receiving the bulk of these entitlement.
08:18:39 You can see it's not moving very far down the road.
08:18:41 It going to be in that same vicinity.
08:18:43 >> It's hard for me to tell on this small map what
08:18:46 sort of potential is receiving areas.
08:18:49 Is this a big box potential that we are talking about?
08:18:52 Or is this some more stripped office/commercial
08:18:59 strips?
08:19:00 >> It's not a terribly large parcel.
08:19:02 I think it's about six acres and you can see a good
08:19:04 portion is actually wetlands.
08:19:06 There's not a lot of room for anything much bigger an
08:19:08 strip center.
08:19:09 Also, this is only 25,800 square feet.
08:19:12 It's not a real large area.
08:19:14 And I think there's only 4,000 square feet of
08:19:16 entitlement, commercial entitlement left in the PDA's
08:19:19 current -- worst case scenario you can see around
08:19:25 30,000 square feet.
08:19:26 >> That was my next question.
08:19:28 You said you were adding it onto your existing
08:19:30 entitlements.
08:19:31 I didn't November how much you had left.
08:19:32 You are saying approximately 30,000 at most.
08:19:34 >> With this addition.
08:19:36 >> What is that dimension between that lake at the
08:19:38 bottom or that wetland at the bottom?
08:19:47 Up, up.
08:19:52 >>> This area?
08:19:53 >> The lake where your finger is at right now.
08:19:56 To the bottom.
08:19:57 There.
08:19:58 There it is.
08:19:59 Pond or whatever.
08:20:01 What is the dimension to the side of that in terms of
08:20:03 that width?
08:20:06 >>> Let me see if I can answer your question.
08:20:08 >> Is that about a thousand feet or 100 feet?
08:20:11 >>> Probably around 400 or 500 feet.
08:20:29 Along that area will be about 4 or 500 feet,
08:20:34 approximating.
08:20:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
08:20:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public who wants to
08:20:40 speak on item number 8?
08:20:41 Come up and speak.
08:20:47 >>> According to the map that I got from these
08:20:55 developers, it looks like they are going to develop
08:21:01 property that they say they are not going to develop.
08:21:03 And I had owned property right across from Morris
08:21:06 Bridge Road from this property that I'm concerned
08:21:10 about.
08:21:11 And at this time, this is the one that carries the
08:21:14 pond, the big pond there.
08:21:16 And at this time the only access routes for the
08:21:21 stormwater coming from that property goes through a
08:21:23 natural creek that runs through my property.
08:21:26 And this young lady assures me that they are not going
08:21:29 to develop that, that that's not going to be
08:21:33 developed.
08:21:33 But according to the map here, it's misinforming.
08:21:37 And if it is developed, the stormwater that will not
08:21:43 be able to go into the ground will impact my property
08:21:51 drastically.
08:21:54 When Hurricane Charley came through at the corner of
08:21:57 Cross Creek Boulevard and Morris Bridge Road was all
08:22:00 underwater.
08:22:01 The storm system on Cross Creek Boulevard, all the
08:22:06 stormwater what coming out.
08:22:07 And this is what I am concerned about.
08:22:13 This young lady assures me that's not going to be
08:22:16 developed.
08:22:17 As long as it's not going to be developed, I have no
08:22:22 dog in this fight.
08:22:23 But if it is going to be developed in any way, you
08:22:28 know, I'm concerned about it.
08:22:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
08:22:33 Would anyone else like to speak?
08:22:34 >>> I just wanted to clarify a little bit for his
08:22:41 concerns.
08:22:43 Up in the New Tampa area as many of you know most
08:22:45 everything is what we call a PDA, a planned
08:22:48 developmental alternative.
08:22:49 And when those things are zoned to be a PDA they get a
08:22:52 set of entitlement with them and the impact associated
08:22:54 with those entitlement, be it transportation impact,
08:22:58 stormwater, wetlands, it all worked out at that time,
08:23:01 and also underneath all of that is the annexation
08:23:03 agreement when these pieces came into the city.
08:23:06 How we deal with that is it like a big bubble plan,
08:23:09 and as they fill in the pieces of the bubble and they
08:23:12 pull down off of that main pool of entitlement, they
08:23:14 come in, and they submit site plans to land
08:23:17 development, and we actually look at those site plans
08:23:19 and how they are engineered, and they show they are
08:23:22 meeting the requirements, both at the annexation
08:23:24 agreement and the PDA, and that is typically standard
08:23:28 stormwater, wastewater, solid waste requirements, much
08:23:33 as you would see on a PD or much as you would see on a
08:23:36 construction document under Euclidean tape of zoning
08:23:40 district.
08:23:41 So any impact, those are going to be taken care of
08:23:46 during those reviews.
08:23:47 This simply is in one area where there was a pool of
08:23:50 entitlement, they had some left over, and another area
08:23:54 they don't have so many entitlements so they are asked
08:23:58 to take those entitlement and shift them to another
08:24:01 area so they can use it and not develop an area.
08:24:04 So I don't perceive there being any issues in relation
08:24:06 to the gentleman's concerns.
08:24:08 But I know when you look at it, as a larger piece, it
08:24:11 may appear that there could be changes.
08:24:16 And there are many incremental plans already approved
08:24:19 and developed in that area.
08:24:21 That is not all vacant.
08:24:23 So there are already several developments that have
08:24:25 occurred there.
08:24:26 >> Mr. Caetano?
08:24:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: May I ask you a question?
08:24:31 The gentleman that just got up and spoke, is his
08:24:34 property at the red light at the end of Cross Creek?
08:24:38 >> I believe it up the road directly across from the
08:24:41 existing mitigation stormwater area.
08:24:45 >> On the north side of the road?
08:24:48 >> Along Morris bridge.
08:24:51 >> On Morris Bridge Road?
08:24:55 >> Yes, I believe that's correct.
08:24:56 >> Are you aware of the study that's on for the
08:24:59 widening of Cross Creek?
08:25:02 >>> I'm aware that the city is doing something to
08:25:06 widen Cross Creek.
08:25:08 I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the exact plans.
08:25:10 >> Okay.
08:25:11 >> If there's no one else in opposition, I just have
08:25:18 two very quick points for rebuttal.
08:25:21 The property that he is concerned about, this
08:25:29 mitigation area, this is not changed from the current
08:25:32 site plan to the site plan.
08:25:35 It still going to be an existing mitigation and
08:25:37 retention area.
08:25:38 And the piece that caught Mr. Dingfelder's eye, this
08:25:49 is already developed.
08:25:50 The Canterbury gardens.
08:25:52 It's to be redeveloped as residential.
08:25:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
08:25:58 >> Second.
08:25:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
08:26:00 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
08:26:01 Opposed, Nay.
08:26:02 Mr. Caetano, will you read that?
08:26:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance rezoning property
08:26:10 in the general vicinity of 10851 Cross Creek Boulevard
08:26:14 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
08:26:17 described in section 1 from zoning district
08:26:19 classifications PDA planned development, alternative
08:26:23 residential retail, office, general commercial, to
08:26:27 PDA, planned development, alternative residential,
08:26:30 retail, office general commercial, providing an
08:26:33 effective date.
08:26:34 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and --
08:26:36 >> Along with the addition to the site plan, between
08:26:44 first and second reading.
08:26:45 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott and Mulhern
08:26:48 being absent.
08:26:49 Second reading and adoption will be on November
08:26:50 5th at 9:30 a.m.
08:26:52 >> Move to receive and file.
08:27:00 >> Second.
08:27:01 (Motion carried).
08:27:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I hope this is the time to bring
08:27:05 this up.
08:27:06 I was always under the impression that whoever the
08:27:07 chair was, was in essence in charge, and a lot of
08:27:11 things that move on.
08:27:12 Came in the other day, and the vending machines are
08:27:16 gone.
08:27:18 I don't know if the chairman is aware of that.
08:27:20 But a lot of people use that vending machine.
08:27:22 And I know it's a mischievous thing to some but a
08:27:28 necessity to others.
08:27:29 I know I myself use it once in a while.
08:27:31 And it was a complicated.
08:27:33 Yes, you had to put your money on one side and buy
08:27:36 what you wanted on the other side to get that certain
08:27:38 number.
08:27:38 But that's progress.
08:27:39 What I'm saying is that I am certainly going to be
08:27:44 very upset if what I hear is true, they are going to
08:27:47 make a lobby.
08:27:48 This is not a hotel.
08:27:50 This is a city office building.
08:27:53 And I am not going to stand here as an elected
08:27:56 official and have someone other than the chair,
08:27:59 whoever he or she may be in this case, reverend Tom
08:28:04 Scott, to handle these things.
08:28:06 I can tell you that unequivocally.
08:28:08 I don't usually say these things.
08:28:09 But this is his direction, this is his call, in a lot
08:28:15 of ways.
08:28:15 And without any council discussion, over the space to
08:28:21 take these machines out, first of all, I don't know
08:28:23 who ordered them in or who ordered them out.
08:28:27 I was going to say, whoever ordered them in did the
08:28:29 right thing.
08:28:30 Whoever ordered them out, I don't think they are doing
08:28:33 the right thing for everybody in this building.
08:28:37 And the many people that come to this council that
08:28:38 have to wait sometimes three and four hours to get
08:28:41 their hearings heard, that they can't get a pop or
08:28:45 snack or something of that nature.
08:28:47 And -- thank you, Mr. Dingfelder.
08:28:54 Mr. Scott, sorry he's not here.
08:28:56 I usually speak when he's here, to give us a report.
08:29:00 I don't believe he did, but who knows?
08:29:07 I move -- I don't know who took those machines but we
08:29:09 should have them back.
08:29:10 That's my motion.
08:29:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a question on the motion.
08:29:12 Mr. Shelby.
08:29:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can.
08:29:15 Mr. Scott, Chairman Scott, is out of town.
08:29:22 I did at his direction contact the chief of staff, and
08:29:29 ask that the vending machines be returned.
08:29:32 I just wanted to say -- and not to speak for the
08:29:35 chair -- but it is my understanding that if he was
08:29:38 with unaware of the fact that the vending machines
08:29:41 were to be removed.
08:29:43 So just so that you are clear, I don't want to put
08:29:47 words in his mouth.
08:29:48 But just so that you are aware of the fact that at his
08:29:51 direction I did speak with the chief of staff.
08:29:55 I don't know what the resolution is.
08:29:57 >> I can guarantee you if the machines are not brought
08:30:00 back we can ask the chair to bring them back because
08:30:02 it's his or her responsibility, whoever the chair is,
08:30:05 to make sure that those things are done right.
08:30:07 That's all I'm going to say.
08:30:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
08:30:10 floor.
08:30:10 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
08:30:12 Opposed, Nay.
08:30:13 Anything else to come before council?
08:30:16 We stand adjourned.
08:30:17 (Meeting adjourned)
08:31:06
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.
|
