Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
5:30 p.m. Thursday March 10, 2005.
Captioner's Text of Proceedings - Unedited Rough Draft

>> Let us pray. Lord, every week this governing body has to
make decisions with moral and/or ethical implications. I pray
that you help them to know what is right in your sight and give
each one of them the courage to make the right decision every
time. For in the long run, we all shall prosper by their course
of action. Amen.
(PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE).
>> GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
(Roll call)
>> GWEN MILLER: I'd like to put on the record that Ms. Rose
Ferlita will be late. Mr. Shawn Harrison and Ms. Mary Alvarez
will both be out of town tonight.
Is there a motion to open the public hearing? Motion made
second and carried. Mr. Stefan? Jim Stefan, public ^ officer.
I usually do a little handout and a couple of words. But they
tell me that if I just say we are going to do the PowerPoint
presentation now, they will start the thing rolling. That's what
they told me.
>> GWEN MILLER: Well, we have it.
>> Again, we are here to talk about the housing and
community development programs. (Inaudible) the first thing we
want to talk about from these funding sources that this evening is
about with the community development block grant where everybody
talks about the CDC funds, the emergency shelter grant, the home
investment partnership grant and the housing with persons with
aids programs. Those are the four major programs, federal
programs we are talking about tonight. The reason for it to
present the types. And there were some handouts on your chairs
and we had some handouts out for the audience to pick up as they
came in, is to talk about the different types of activities that
have been previously taken with these sources of money, to talk
about the anticipated levels of funding, and we're going to have a
slide on that later on in the presence -- presentation, to talk
about the range of eligible activities. And that again is
included in the handout that is we gave, and to talk about other
pertinent requirements as the topics come up. I guess the overall
purpose of this is to gain information at the initial stage of
this process from interested citizens about housing and nonhousing
programs. And to provide any person the opportunity to be heard.
This slide talks a little bit about the HUD grant funding
that we have, and what we have is the entitlement which is the
first number up there, 4.5 million dollars and this is about the
third year that there have been reductions in the funding for the
program. And it's about a 5.3 million-dollar program on the
community development block grant. Out of all the four funding
sources for federal grants that we're talking about, the one that
is most desirable is the community development block grant,
because that basically marriages with the other funding sources to
make things happen so it is a very important funding source,
probably, from my perspective at least and the city's, the most
important for the four. So for that one to go down is a hardship.
Again, by rules, you can only spend 15% of your entitlement
funds for public services. And you can see, again, current year,
that would have been about 675,000 and that goes down to about
$40,000. The next one shows that the home program is going down a
little. The American dream down payment is going down about 43%,
and the emergency shelter grant is going down about 3% and then
the housing opportunities for persons with AIDS is actually
increasing by about 27%.
The next thing I would like to cover is basically a
calendar. And after this overall calendar we are going to be
talking about the two major processes that are involved with this.
The first one is the RFP process and the second one is the kickoff
of what we are doing tonight which is the needs and recommendation
process. We went out with RFP's to various entities that are
currently being funded and requested RFP's from all outside
agencies back on March 2nd, or those program submissions were due
back on March 2nd. We went out in about the first week in
February with the applications. Tonight, again, is the public
hearing on the predevelopment costs action plan and then the thing
after that is the actual needs and recommendations, responses to
the things that come tonight will be developed in May and June,
and will be presented to the advisory groups as well as the City
Council. Then there will be another public hearing on the
recommended program which will happen approximately July 21st with
the off-calendar. I think that's the first available date coming
back, so it will probably be that date. Then the next process
after that is August 4th which we will come back to council with a
recommended program, and then we ship it up to HUD approximately
August 15th, and the whole process takes place on October 1st. The
RFP process, we had our first technical assistance workshop on
January 18th, and that was requested not only by some of the
citizens at last years' meetings but also by a couple of city
council members who asked for it. We felt they needed to do it
and did do it. That workshop was advertised not only on the cable
TV station but it was also in a couple newspapers and also on our
website. In the future, we're going to try to even get the word
out further maybe through press releases or something like that.
There were 42 people that actually attended the workshop, so
it was very well manned. The evaluations provided very good
feedback. It was desired by just about everybody that was there
so it was extremely helpful in putting together the applications.
And again, it happened on January 18th, and the application
deadline just passed, I think last Friday. Or last week sometime.
>> LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, in the future, before the
workshop, the one that was held in January, if you want to use
council as a way to let people know about it and don't call it
RFP, call it, you know, how to get access to city funds. Because
people might not know what RFP is. But anyway, because we have
people who are constantly asking us so it helps us to know before
you have the technical assistance workshop so we can tell them to
attend. But I think it is great that you are doing it. I think
that is terrific.
>> And the more we can publicize it, the better it is for
everybody so thank you very much for offering to do that. The
evaluations will be forwarded to a review committee on Monday
afternoon we are meeting and again the review committee has eight
or nine members, two of which are on the citizen advisory group
and we have a person that is on the Planning Commission also on
the staff as well as people in various departments throughout the
city in addition to community relations, community affairs,
neighborhood liaison, housing folks, as well as budget folks. The
evaluations are due back from the evaluators the beginning part of
April, and we will be trying to incorporate all those things into
a funding proposal to come back sometime in late -- mid to late
June. The other part of the process is tonight, which is the
first public hearing, and that's regarding the needs and
recommendations. The needs and recommendations that we receive
and you should have received copies of it in your chairs this
evening, we will have a meeting on the 16th with the individual
departments, and they will begin to respond to the citizens'
request at that point in time. Most likely they will be calling
the individual people and talking about their request and making
sure that they understand it in order to formulate a response.
And the initial responses to come back from the department should
be sometime in the May-June time frame.
The second public hearing regarding the block grant program
again is most likely to be on the 21st, and at that point in time
we'll be proposing a council to City Council. And there will be a
final response to the needs after the budget gets adopted at the
end of September, and the response will be updated in November and
December and given back to City Council and the individual -- in
the individual block advisory groups. That's basically the end of
my presentation. If would you like, frank Reuter, who is the
chairman of the advisory committee, is here and can start to go
over the needs and recommendation process, thank you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Mr. Rota?
>> Good evening, 908 east Louisiana Avenue in Tampa, I am
chair of the citizens evaluation committee for CDB funds. Before
we begin tonight I would like to thank Jim Stephan for the way
they have worked with us during the pass year, and Marian Coretta
and Ms. Cross. Basically we are going to be going through this
booklet here. What I will do is go through the citywide request
and call up the area representatives for each block area and they
will do their request individually.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Could I ask Jim Stefan a question
before you start with your part? I had two questions. For one
thing, let me reiterate what Linda says, excellent presentation,
great graphics. Thank you and your staff for doing that. You
said it is a 15% public services cap. I was wondering, how is
public services defined? I mean it is all about the public,
but --
>> Public services are the programs that we provide through
most of the nonprofit agencies, the mend EZ program, programs with
visual and dental associations, Center for Women, we have roof
repair, emergency plumbing, we have --
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: So then describe the other 85% then.
>> It's housing projects, administrative staff, capital
projects.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Then my other question is, we have been
hearing through the Florida league of cities and the national
league of cities about just drastic slashing or elimination of the
entire CDBG program through the federal government in Washington,
and yet, you know, you were talking about a decrease, but what was
it, a 5% or 10% decrease? I'm hearing two different things
actually. What do we hear from Washington?
>> I was torn whether to talk a little about that.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: I think you have to.
>> What is known is very little at this point in time.
There are drastic recommendations for not the year that we're
talking about now but the following year.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
>> That's the bush recommendation. They are talking about
wholesale reduction of programs, they are talking about the whole
basis of programs being switched from housing and urban
development to the Department of Commerce and it would have a
totally different slant on it, what is people are saying. Whether






that can be accomplished in the next year, most people are saying
that it can't be accomplished for even the '07 year because of how
much the legislation has to be rewritten, it has to get through
both the house and the Senate, and there's an awful lot of work on
it and there is an awful lot of opposition to changing it. But
yes, I have a pamphlet all about it, and there's been stuff with
the league of cities, almost any agency that's involved with city
governments and stuff like that are starting to write about some
of it. None of them are that the programs and projects and what
we use the funds for will be done in the same manner. It is how
different and what the different slant would be that is the -- the
unknown is what scarce a lot of people.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: So maybe this is a good opportunity to
tell folks who do care about CDB programs to contact your
Senators, representatives, and your presidents, to leave C. DB
alone.
>> Yes. Mr. Reuter: If I could direct your attention to
Page 3, we have only four requests. In the past years we had
seven or eight, this year we only have 4. First one deals with
code enforcement. Solid waste and code enforcement collaborate to
actively address illegal dumping particularly on vacant lots and
rental property debris and especially when people move out and it
sits on the side of the curb. We are scheduling more roll-off
Dumpsters. We will penalize code violators, like we have had some
houses that have been that way forever and ever. We would like to
see statutes change to address those violators. We are excited
about proposed change for Nebraska Avenue. However lighting has
been left off all reviews we have seen so we would like lighting
to be used up and down Nebraska. Number 3 we are excited about
because we got started in the Nebraska Avenue project last year.
We are asking for citizen-involved proactive transportation task
force that will be involved with the metropolitan planning to
address future transportation needs. One thing that became very
AP parent when we were talking about Nebraska Avenue is we were
not addressing the needs of Tampa, Florida, north Boulevard, and
some residents were concerned about increased traffic when
Nebraska was reduced to three lanes so we were thinking of a
comprehensive task force made of citizens from different
neighborhoods. The last one -- different neighborhoods. The
last one deals with excessive litter. We are asking for trash
receptacles put on all major thoroughfares in parts of the city so
they will throw the trash out and not on the roads. If you go to
Page 4 we are talking about block area 1. That is basically the
north boundary of the city limits. South boundary is Adamo Drive.
East boundary is city limits and west boundary is 40th street. So
if anyone is here from block area 1 okay, if I could direct you to
Page 7 which is block area 2. The boundaries of block area 2,
northern is the city limits, south boundary is McKay bay, east
boundary is 40th Street and west boundary is 15th Street. Anyone
from block area 2.
>> Hello, I'm Mark Hamberg, 102 east Martin Luther King
Boulevard, I'm here representing block area 2, I'm also the C. D.
B. advisory co-chair. First of all I would like to comment on the
four area-wide requests which were already brought to your
attention. Two of the four requests, number one and number four,
really deal with a lot of litter and illegal dumping. And it's a
big problem in east Tampa, and although I think code enforcement
has really been on task in working hard on the code end, what's
not being addressed is the actual dumpers themselves. We really
don't have in place any enforcement or citation or anybody being
cited or arrested or anything for dumping the debris or waste. We
sight site the owners but unless we address the actual dumpers or
litterers themselves we are not going to solve the problem. It is
a big problem. We are continue to go put it forth in our requests
year-in, year-out, and two of our four requests essentially this
year. And I would like to see some attention given to -- actually
we had solid waste rangers. We brought that up. They are no
longer part of the solid waste staff. And some sort of direct
enforcement of the actual litterers and maybe even some arrest
powers and what have you. But the other two items that we have in
our block area 2 requests, of course they are already spelled out
on Page 7. But we're very concerned about doing some improvements
along the commercial corridors. There's a request in there for a
specific one, 29th Street, Martin Luther King, 22nd street can all
use some incentivizing to get the commercial up and running. I
can't tell you, that when a property is renovated and put on the
market in these areas, there's plenty of tenants to fill the
buildings and there's plenty of interest, and it's a key to the
economic development of the area that we get viable businesses in
the east Tampa area that will also help keep up the cleanliness of
the arbitration et cetera. So I would like to you pay special
attention to that if we could. We also have a request in there
that is for renovation of the 18th Avenue playground. I would
appreciate any attention that could be given on those requests.
Thank you.
>> Block area 3. Boundaries, north will be city limits,
south will be Hillsborough bay. East boundary is 15th street.
West boundary is North Florida Avenue. On Page 10 are some
requests about southeast Seminole Heights. The way the process is
going, they are not putting additional poles up or lights up. All
they are doing is replacing the additional bulbs that are up
there. If you look at Page 10 we have a list of lighting in
Seminole Heights. At this time I would turn it over to the chair
of Sherry Simons, 911 east shadow lawn Avenue.
>> Two years ago we did a complete lighting survey, went
down every single street, turned our car lights off to see what
kind of condition our lights were N. a lot of bulbs were out,
there were overhanging trees, and there were huge pockets with no
lights. We are a highly pedestrian community for various reasons,
people are either walking their dog or getting from one place to
another. There are streets I would never walk on. You are
completely in the dark. I would like to -- I don't want to read
every single one of these, but between Nebraska and Taliaferro
there are five pockets. Between Nebraska and 12th there are 16
pockets, between 12th and 15th there are 14 pockets. If you do
down any of these streets and you turn your lights off you would
be amazed. You can't even see the houses there. It's like a
model moon at night. We need lighting terribly. We all know dark
places lead to crime and that is something we night every day in
our community. We try real hard, but we need the support. We
need the lights. We need to see what is going on in our
neighborhood. Thank you.
>> On Page 11, again, block area 3, new curbing and repairs
needed for southeast Seminole Heights, requesting new installation
of curbing in many areas. We have many streets experiencing
advanced states of soil erosion, basically they don't have enough
curbs. We are also requesting improvement on sidewalks on Page 12
and basically several new installations of sidewalks. Block area
5, basically the boundaries will be north I 275, south is
Hillsborough bay, east is North Florida Avenue, and west is North






MacDill of block area no one is here. Okay, block area 6.
Basically the boundaries, north boundary would be west Columbus
drive, south boundary is 275, east boundary is North Florida
Avenue, west boundary is North MacDill Avenue. That's block area.
>> Good evening, council, and public. Jimmy grace, 1749
walnut street, Tampa, Florida. First of all, I want to thank City
Council and the department heads also for what's been done.
Basically our concerns possibly have been met. Also we really
want to thank you-all for the street lights on Main Street. You
can see a difference driving up and down. A lot of people were
trying to figure out where they were, the streets were so bright.
It has helped a lot with taking down the crime, but we need more,
we need more in the community, and more of the merchants feel
that. We are asking for common devices basically on the streets.
We have a charter middle school on Spruce and Rome. They are
investing quite a bit of money building a new gymnasium and
activity center there. It's a four-way stop but traffic coming to
and from that, kids have to cross that street. They are asking
for common devices and that was submitted by miss Carolyn Collins
at that point. Also residents are asking for some of the alleys
to be repaved and upgrade so did the traffic can move through
there. One of the reasons we are asking for that, we are actively
working with the Planning Commission now, Mr. Hostler, to develop
a West Tampa economic development plan, and that's one of the
ideas and assets that we have asked for is since there's little
parking in West Tampa, that the alleys be accessible so there can
be parking in the rear of the business buildings. We are also in
the process of developing a Main Street advisory board to see how
we can enhance the business district of Main Street. We are right
off the interstate, we are the first exit off the interstate going
west from downtown. That change will come, so we are asking for
City Council's support with that. For that effort. Also, with
the decrease in fundings from HUD, it's one thing we have been
told, that HUD will decrease. We're looking at 5 million dollars.
We are asking that City Council look forward to that in the
future. We are asking as the entities in West Tampa, that if
council could concentrate on capital improvement, sidewalks,
street lights, parks, we would be very appreciative and we
ourselves will try to take care of the rest. We will still come
back and ask you for money, though, but we will try to take care
of the bulk of that. And getting on to funding, I myself have a
nonprofit organization called fatherhood assist lifestyle legal
services. That nonprofit organization helps prevent device. As
we see now, domestic violence in our neighborhood takes a lot of
the assets of our city through police enforcement, so forth. We
are attempting and have developed a course, a curriculum for high
school students so we can take young boys, young males who have
fathered a child while they are still in high school, to take them
through a curriculum to where they understand their rights and
responsibilities as fathers doesn't stop after that baby is born,
but they have 18 years of responsibility, and try to lead them
through that path to understand that that partner is a partner,
may not be a lover anymore, but is a partner, and they should act
accordingly and in a civilized way. That course was developed in
one of the institutions here and we are seeking fundings for that.
We ask for your continued effort to help West Tampa and we will be
back at City Council to solicit your help and also we want to try
to keep West Tampa safe. We want to try to increase the economic
viability of it. Thanks you.
>> On Page 19 is block area 7. Basically the boundaries of
block area 7 north boundary Fowler, south boundary Sligh, east
boundary city limits, west boundary is city limits and Armenia.
At this time I would like to turn it over to David west.
>> Good evening, council. I'm David west, 1412 east 109th
Avenue. And I'm the block captain or area captain for block area
7. First off, I would like to thank everyone involved with the
CDBG paragraph. It's turned out much better in the past than it
was the year before. It is just amazing the change there's been.
And now they have a PowerPoint! Can't get better than that!
Okay. I would like to say we support all of the citywide requests
that came up. I know that the lighting on Nebraska and the
long-range transportation plan are being worked on. That leaves
just the code problems that we are really having a problem with.
I need to say a couple of things about that. It seems it's always
the same people that violate the code. They might not -- they
clean up one mess and start another or they might move some of
their mess around and act like they are complying, but then they
start making another pile someplace else. And we believe it's the
landlords and the tenants that are being evicted every month,
usually the same buildings when you drive down the road, it's
usually the same complexes, duplexes or rental homes where the
trash is pushed out to the curb and it sits there forever. What
we would like to see done is perhaps the landlords be educated on
their responsibilities of what they need to do to keep their areas
clean and not leave the stuff laying out there for months on end
and just hold them accountable, let them know that they need to do
more than what they have been doing so far. And the vacant lots,
a lot of those, a lot of the trash that gets thrown on the vacant
lots we believe are thrown from the landlords moving out tenants
as well because it's the same stuff all over again, furniture,
appliances, nick knacks, just the same stuff, and it is probably
the same landlord over and over when they evict someone, instead
of taking it down to the garbage dump, they dump it onto one of
the vacant lots. So we would like to see if we could do something
with the landlords on that.
Now for our asking: As always, we would like to have
additional N.E.A.T. pickup or have a neighborhood dump site. This
is a highly transient area, trash always being left on the curbs
or vacant lots. Several N.E.A.T. pickups per year, once a month
trash pickup. We would like to have a roll-off Dumpster located
on a vacant lot owned by the city or something and let everyone
know that you can come and dump your stuff and it won't cost you
anything, over a weekend, and then they come and they throw their
stuff away. City comes back, pulls a roll-off up onto the truck
and takes it away. Hopefully it will work. I know there would be
problems with it. They think we can dump here all the time now,
they might, but I believe if we could educate the people once
again that, would help a lot. And then we have the flooding
problem again; at the corner of 14th and east 109th at the
intersection of he Lantana and east 109th. These were fixed about
three years ago but they're already torn up and they flood
whenever it just rains a little bit. Doesn't take much water
there and it just goes under. And you can lose your car in there.
It's terrible. So we like to see that fixed again if we could.
And on to the sidewalks. I was going through the police grid 20,
and I noticed that they don't have any sidewalks at all in that
area, subsequent for it was 0005 will marks east of 14th Street.
No, 1005 Wilma. And the contractor actually put the sidewalks in
on that block, two sides of the block, because he built the houses
there, so he put in the sidewalks. And that's the only ones they






V. so we would like to see some sidewalks going over there to
extend to North 14th or as far as practical on Wilma. And also on
aster from Linebaugh to east 109th Avenue and a sidewalk on North
13th Street. 13th street would be really helpful because that's
where they -- we have a lot of drug dealing going on over there
and if they are allowed to just hang out in the streets, that's
one of the reasons they give that they are walking up and down the
road in the middle of the street because they don't have anywhere
else to go. If they had a sidewalk they would be expected to stay
on the sidewalk and not on the road approaching cars. So a that
may help out that problem too. And also, we would like to further
the speeding -- speed bumps or speed tables, I guess they're
called nowadays, from -- on east 109th. Right now they have the
speed tables that go from 30th street to north 15th Street and
then it stops and from 15th to Nebraska it turns into a racetrack
down in there. The people once they get over those humps, that's
it. They're going for bear to get over to Nebraska Avenue. And
it is a cut-through street, which it really does get a lot of
traffic. And we'd like to see the speed tables going down from
North 15th to east 109th Avenue. There's a lot of school children
that use that area to walk to school, and they do have sidewalks,
but once again, you know, if a car is blasting down through there
or a truck and they lose control, we are going to lose some
children. And I have another request that was given to me by
residents of Sulphur Springs. They went to quite some trouble to
do these, so Frank, would you hand one each for the council
members? The people that are along Juneau, Juneau street is one
of the thoroughfares in Sulphur Springs, and it is a busy street.
There are 727 school children that go to the elementary school
over there, and they all come from this one little block, well,
these several little blocks over there. But the people that live
along Juneau have signed a petition -- I think there's 477-some
names that are on there. Not all of them live on Juneau, but it's
all the surrounding areas. They know what it needs. And you can
see the pictures in there where the children are walking out in
the road and such like that, even when school busses are coming
and whatnot. You could take those pictures and use them in almost
any neighborhood. That's the way the foot traffic is going on in
North Tampa, east Tampa, west Tampa, I'm sure. Everywhere. It's
just interchangeable. But that is a highly transient area as
well. And they tell me that there are seven bus stops along
Juneau in that stretch I was talking about, school bus stops. And
these busses are going to middle schools and high schools, all the
children going to elementary school, and they have to walk in that
area. There is no bus service to their school because they're
within the 2- or 5-mile limit, whichever it is. They really do
need to have something to keep them safe and to put them on a
sidewalk I think would help them out quite a bit. And like frank
said, the lighting initiative, we are really excited about that
coming along. We just heard a report from officer Hutchins or
last Tuesday -- or Monday, and it sounded really good, they're
moving into our area to start upgrading the lighting. But I found
out that while they're doing that, they're not going to fill in
the dark spots. And that's one of the big problems we have are
the dark spots. Like frank said, the lighting will help quite a
bit, but when you have a block, a block-and-a-half, two blocks
without any lights, that is where all the trouble will congregate,
it will move to that area. So I know once the initiative gets
find, you are going to have a lot of people coming in and asking
for more lights to be put up in their areas. So I just thought I
would get that in there, a little bit ahead of time. That's all I
have. Except for Pete Johnson, one of our residents, he has a
request also. Thank you.
>> My name is Pete Johnson, 301 Druid hills road in Temple
Terrace. I'm not a citizen anymore but I'm fighting for my
neighborhood. This is a piece of property -- that the city owns
on 22nd street and 97th. It's almost a full city block. It
hasn't been used in over 20 years. It is a perfect place to put a
park. The city already owns it. They have to develop it but they
don't have to buy the property. A retention pond on this property
also would alleviate the flooding on the corner of 22nd and
Linebaugh which when it rains it floods private homes, I mean it
literally goes into private homes. It is ridiculous why this
property has never been used by the city. The second is the
drainage at Linebaugh. The third thing is yes, the code
enforcement. They have done a lot of wonderful things, stepped up
to the ballpark. But I have been on one address for over seven
years, and this is what it looks like, and I can't get it to
court. I literally cannot get it to court in seven years. It is
just unbelievable. So code enforcement needs more support. They
need -- I don't know what it's going to take. Curtis's hands --
the poor man is probably pulling his hair out. He's doing the
best he can. But he needs a hell of a lot -- I'm sorry, he needs
a lot more support. The next thing I would like to talk about is
the AIDS housing. I am HIV positive. My bills run for my
medication between 2500 and 3,000 dollars a month. 2500 to 3,000
dollars a month. I have to go on my ADAP program. They made me
cash out my entire life savings for the program. It used to be
25,000 dollars. I had to liquidate all my assets, my retirement
accounts, everything. Okay? They are changing it next month to
13,000 dollars and within six months I won't be able to own my
home to get the medication that keeps me alive. We're not dying.
We're going to be here. You are not going to get rid of us.
Okay? You guys have got to come up with programs, whatever
government, to subsidize people. I mean 3,000 dollars a month is
a hell of a nut to crack for medication just to keep you alive.
So please, whatever can you do for the housing for the aids people
do, what you can. Because I will be there probably in about six
months. Thank you.
>> If I could direct your attention to Page 21 which is
block area 9, boundary for this block area, north boundary is west
Columbus drive, south boundary is west Euclid. East boundary is
South MacDill and west boundary is old Tampa Bay. Is anybody from
area 9?
>> Counsel, I would like to thank you for listening to our
proposals tonight. I look forward to hearing responses and we
will see you again in July.
>> LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to reassure people in
here that some of the things that you asked for don't need
funding, they need work by council. Specifically code enforcement
is something that council is working on to come up with better
regulations, additional funds that, the department will be able to
capture to hire more inspectors, and we are looking at a host of
solutions to the problem. We have recognized it as maybe the
city's number one problem,. We have a workshop coming up April
7th at 1:30 if anybody would like to attend. Also some of the
other issues you have raised -- the transportation issues,
sidewalks, things like that -- we are also really focusing on.
>> Question for staff. Are you answering Parks' question?
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: I noticed a couple of the different






neighborhoods spoke to this 18th Avenue playground. Is that on
our work program? Is that on any of the cit plans for the near
future?
>> Wayne Pappy, deputy director of parks and recreation.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Same question for the DeSoto
improvements that are also mentioned in there. I don't know if
you have seen the pact.
>> We are aware of the 18th Avenue proposals. We have them
in our long-range planning and will be working on them during the
current upcoming budget year. Most of those things in DeSoto are
taken care of and we are continually working on that problem at
DeSoto.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: There's a lot to do there sound like.
Thank you, Wayne. The other question I have, Bonnie (you were.
>> I will try to be more graceful.
>> Bonnie, I was curious in a generic sense, there is a lot
of federal money that comes into TPD that we see and it goes back
out to TPD in large grants and that sort of thing and they decide
how they want to spend it, you know, working with neighborhoods
and crime-fighting, that sort of thing. I'm thinking one of the
best ways you can fight crime is to light areas better and I'm
wondering -- and I'm not discussing the question right this second
because it probably takes some research but would you research the
possibility with chief Hogue of trying to use some of the law
enforcement grants to use for that neighborhood light something.
>> Sure. We will see what restructure we can do.
>> ROSE FERLITA: If I could make a couple brief comments.
The pharmacist that usually relieves me on Thursday, his mom is
critically ill. I had to go back to work and because of that I
came in late, and I think Madam Chairman entered that in the
record.
Frank Reuter and I talk about many of issues in Seminole
Heights, so I am cognizant of the issues you have raised tonight.
In terms of lighting, which was one of the last things you talked
about here, I do want to impress upon you and I think I did this
again last year as well, although we have a lighting initiative,
lights that are not on but are -- we have the availability of
those lights, those are the types of issues that will help a
little bit in the interim while the lighting initiative continues.
And that is if lights are out, that doesn't mean we have to wait
for any lighting initiative. You need to report those polls to us
and get the appropriate numbers to us. I see Bonnie wise and Jim
shaking their heads because that is something that can be
addressed right away. It is not the total fix but it is somewhat
of a fix as we are trying to go there this. I didn't hear anyone
else's presentation but have I this in front of me but I will do
my homework as I do all the time. Pete, I am sorry about the
hardships you anticipate or you are having but I want to tell you
particularly as a healthcare professional that has a HIV practice,
those are things that you need to talk to us about, have dialog
with us as well but at the same time, there are many state and
federal dollars that fit into this component. This council, the
council before I feel this administration, as the administration
before, has always supported any kind of funds for people with
AIDS. And I think that is one of the initiatives tonight. As
well, because of some lobbying, and some times people don't think
their voice counts but it does. You are absolutely wrong. We had
an issue with many of our patients in terms of the doing-away of
the medically-needy program. That is, I understand, something
that has been reinstated by Governor bush and it is certainly from






I'm sure by a lot of lobbying by Democrats and Republicans
throughout the state. You need to continue to hear your voice
heard. A long time ago it was a terminal disease people didn't
know how to deal with. It is a controllable disease. So I think
this council -- I know this council is sensitive to what we can do
in terms of housing. Some of those other issues are not within
our purview so let those legislators in Tallahassee and Washington
know about that as well and I thank everyone for all the work that
has been done because I know a lot goes into these presentations
for CDBG, so thank you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Anyone from the public want to speak.
>> My name is Lena Young Green, 3406 north Evan Avenue. I
am here tonight to talk about a request that we have put in for
funds for the youth of our community. In Tampa Heights, we have
of the 9,000 residents, we have almost 33 percent that are youth.
And not enough programs in that community. Not enough programs
also that are neighborhood-based. The request that we've put in
is directly for our kids that it's being put into as Tampa Heights
Junior civic association, we live in the community, we work with
the kids, and we like you to pay special attention and kindly
consider that request. Thank you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
>> Madam Chairman, Ali Akhbar president of Tampa Heights
Junior civic association, the grant that Ms. Young who is the
president of our association just talked about. It deals with our
children living in Tampa Heights, and we strongly urge you to be
passionate when you are looking at that, because we because we
have experienced a great cut -- our funds was cut off last year
and we have had to go out and get private funding just to make it
through the last summer. One of our donors gave us funds to make
it through the last three months. If they hadn't, we would have
shut down. So we appreciate your giving us this grant so we can
use this as a spearhead or springboard to go to our private donors
and say the city is concerned about our children, we ask also that
you give us your support. If we don't have your support and we
won't have an after-school program, we won't have a summer program
in Tampa Heights. So we have been working diligently on this and
we hope and pray that you look into your hearts and you look into
your pocketbook and squeeze this money in there. It's for our
kids and the kids are our future. This will do a lot to keep them
off the street after school and during the summer months. So
please, we ask you that you take this strongly into consideration.
>> GWEN MILLER: Mr. White?
>> KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, for coming down. I want to put
on the record, I am very familiar with the program that you do.
And this program will be a priority on my radar for this
particular CDBG funding process and I know you were cut short on
your funding last years, it actually ran out before the summer.
And this program that you-all provide for the children in the
Tampa Heights area is a wonderful program and there are several
needy children that were it not for involvement in this program
would have alternative methods of entertainment for the summer
which would probably end up involving criminal activity. And
you-all are such positive role models over there in this program.
So I want to let you know this is a priority program for funding
on this councilman's radar.
>> Thank you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
>> Good evening. I am Sara Bella from housing
corporation. We are certified and Fannie Mae approved housing






agency that works nationwide and here in Tampa. We are
revitalizing our program. And we offer a program for low to
moderate-income families to buy their first home. We are offering
our program benefits that are very significant for these families,
especially for minorities and Spanish-speaking persons. The
benefits are interest below the market rate, waiver of private
mortgage insurance, flexible underwriting, and free credit
counseling, counseling on predatory lending. We also have a
foreclosure prevention program and we do refinancing. We connect
our clients with down payment and closing cost assistance
programs. We also accept no () credit and we have been able to
help a significant number of families to buy their first home. In
the year 2004, we conducted 223 workshops for first-time home
buyers. And 112 work shops on predatory lending. We also had
four special workshops and 79 persons bought their first home.
During this year, we have contacted first-time home buyer seminars
for 118 persons, 23 persons have been able to buy their first
home. We have done 80 workshops on predatory lending and we have
done 80 refinancing. So I think our program is very important for
low to moderate income families, minorities, and in Tampa, we want
to be able to help a significant number of families to obtain
their first home. That's why we brought our program before you
members of the council. And we hope have you a positive reaction
to our proposal and give the consent to the proposal of the CDBG.
>> GWEN MILLER: We need to have a motion to close the
public hearing.
>> So moved.
[Motion Carried]
>> GWEN MILLER: I would like to thank everyone for coming.
I know our department will be very happy to go over your
application and things will be done real fair.
>> Madam Chairman, if you could just wait a moment,
Mr. Massey is going to be down in one minute.
>> GWEN MILLER: Mr. Morris Massey, would you come from the
back, please?
>> Relative to the ordinance of zoning board we request it
be continued to next Thursday morning at 10 a.m. There is still a
discrepancy in the legal description that one of the property
owners brought up to me tonight. We want to make sure the legal
description on the ordinance is correct so if you could continue
that until next Thursday at 10 a.m. (So moved).
[Motion Carried.]
>> LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do we need to reschedule the subsequent
public hearing?
>> We do but that's already been scheduled so I think it
will come up in the agenda and we will just have to open it and
continue it for another week. I apologize about the confusion,
but we will have to do it that way.
>>>> KEVIN WHITE: Excuse me, do you know if officer Guffey
was able to come back in?
>> ROSE FERLITA: I spoke with him about this.
>> I spoke with him this morning, and he said two officers
will be able to conduct the event on Saturday.
>> KEVIN WHITE: We had verbal confirmation the last time
and nobody showed up and that was the entire problem with EMS the
last time.
>> Officer Guffey said he had the names of the two officers
that were going to be available and he was satisfied with that.
>> KEVIN WHITE: I would like to move that item on the
agenda. Motion moved, seconded, and carried.

>> GWEN MILLER: Number 2?
>> So moved to continue.
>> GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on Item Number
2.
[Motion Carried.] To continue: Number 2? Is somebody
going to speak? Oh, she's there?
>> ROSE PATRICIA: Planning commission staff, Item Number 2
on the agenda, transmittal public hearing on proposed amendment to
Tampa Comprehensive Plan, capital improvements element. This is a
text amendment to the comprehensive plan. This is an annual
update to the capital improvements element which will reflect the
schedule of projects for fiscal year '05 to fiscal year 10, based
on changes made to the city's capital improvement program in the
fall. This is a routine amendment. It is required by the state.
The planning commission heard this plan amendment on February 14th
and found it consistent and recommends approval to you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience who would
like to speak on Item Number 2?
>> Good evening, Madam chair. Hall Stevenson; you I was
probably here a little too late, however, when I read this offer,
I became very, very concerned. When I look around and see what's
happened in my neck of the woods; which happens to be in the
Interbay impact-fee zone. And I see what's happening in the area
south of Gandy. These amendments were adopted, as I understand
it, September 18th, 2004. And it would appear to me that somebody
that's doing the planning and someone that's looking ahead just
got blinders on because I see only one project, only one, between
now and fiscal year 2010 that's in the Interbay district, and that
is north of Gandy. And I plead -- I realize we can't do anything
about it right now but we have another round of things of CIT
starting in June next year, and I plead with this council. You
are the legislative arm of this government -- that we direct
staff, the planners, to begin to take the blinders off and let's
look at the broader spectrum. If I could use a little analogy if
I may. Let's say I've got a 55-gallon drum here and this is my
neighborhood. And I've got a 2,000 gallon drum here and that's
the traffic. I've got a pipe that run from his there to there but
there's no valve in it and I have a funnel here. What happens
when it can't get in there? It overflows and when it overflows
into the neighborhood and then the quality of life, the health and
welfare of safety of our families, children, grandchildren and the
quality of life is going right down the tube. So I realize there
is nothing we can do here tonight, because this has all been
budgeted. But I could not -- I had to come down and at least have
my peace about this. Because we have over the years squandered
the CIT on things that it was never meant -- very little of that
CIT money has gone for the infrastructure and that is part of what
it was passed for. And I guarantee you the 16-1/2 million dollars
that is going into the Bucs training center is not a public
facility because not a single one this of you in this room or I
can use it and that was publicly passed. So thank you, Madam
chair.
>> I have a.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you for all you are doing in your
community and thanks for coming down -- in our community. My
question is this, Al. You wanted to focus on improvements south
of Gandy, okay, even though I would argue that the 7
million-dollar improvements that we are going to start this year
on Manhattan to the north of Gandy will help the folks living
south of Gandy because a lot of them go somewhere and they are




going to go up on that side.
>> I will be reasonable on that.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: All right. If you had to pick another
major thoroughfare for a transportation project south of Gandy --
we have already done Westshore -- we have talked about Manhattan
south of Gandy, but it seems to be very controversial in your own
neighborhood. But is there any consensus within your group about
what the next major project is that you-all would like to see us
tackle south of Gandy in terms of specific roadway improvements?
Or is that something you would like to take back to your group and
get back with us?
>> I could give you my opinion and the opinion of some of
the people, but we have not specifically addressed that situation.
In my estimation, what they just completed on Westshore in 2004,
they need to go back and reexamine what they've done. There's
been over 2,000 units rezoned and approved in this chamber and by
this staff since January of 2003. And less than 125 of those are
out of the ground.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: So clearly the three lanes you are
saying was inadequate?
>> That's inadequate. I talked to the director of
construction at WCI, the Westshore yacht club, and he said he was
flabbergasted because he was under the understanding that it was
going to be four-lanes.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Could you go back to your group and
maybe get back with us?
>> I will be happy to. I will talk with Mike. I am no
longer the president and chairman of the board. I do assist him
on setting the agenda. In fact, next month we have Mr. Snelling
and his group coming and maybe we can make that a part of the
agenda and I would be happy to get a consensus and report back. I
appreciate it. Thank you.
>> GWEN MILLER: Anyone else to speak on item 2? We have a
motion and second to close. All in favor say aye.
[Motion Carried.]
>> GWEN MILLER: Item 3 needs to be opened and withdraw it.
[Motion Carried] motion to withdraw carried.
>> GWEN MILLER: Next one needs to be continued. You need
to open it first.
(Motion made and seconded to open Number 4.)
>> GWEN MILLER: We need to continue.
>>THE CLERK: Do you want to know if there is anyone from
the public to speak to that?
>> GWEN MILLER: Anyone want to speak to item 4? If it's
going to be continued can they at the next meeting?
>> Council, the policy is if they give testimony now they
will not be able to give it the date of the continuance. My
advice is they can speak whether they are in opposition of
continuance in this case.
>> We are here for the petitioner and I really don't need
to speak.
>> GWEN MILLER: Please come to the mic.
>> 4325 west Aegean, Jim LeCrem. I am the representative
for the agent, the petitioner, and if we are given a continuance
for the next meeting, I don't need to say anything if my
continuance doesn't, I need to impromptu argue the case although I
didn't bring my support, my graphics or anything else. If I could
take one second of the council's time, the gentleman was up here
talking south of Gandy --
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's deal with this.






>> I will excuse myself.
>> GWEN MILLER: All right. What is the next available
date?
CLERK: These are all one cycle. These run independent.
>> GWEN MILLER: What is the next date?
>>THE CLERK: March 31st, 5:30. System we have 11 land
rezonings, three continued land rezonings and one wet zoning.
>> GWEN MILLER: This will be at 10:30. We have a motion
and second, Mr. Shelby.
>> MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, and we will give any other members
of the public opportunity to speak on continuance if they wish.
>> GWEN MILLER: Do you want to speak in favor? Speak on
that? Come on up.
>> TRACY Torreville: 708 west Ohio. I am voting against a
continuance because a number of our neighbors are here about this
property. It's been on the record quite some time and it would be
inconvenient for us to come back again for another meeting. I
myself got up early.
>> JOHN DINGFELDER: How many times has this one been
continued?
>> GWEN MILLER: This is if first time. Anyone else want to
speak? Just on whether or not to continue it.
>> It's very inconvenient. My wife and I lost time at work
to get here at 5:30. We went to the county zoning commission on
this property and the one next door, across the street from it,
and they were unanimously turned down. And now we have to come
over here to hear the same thing again.
>> GWEN MILLER: What is your name?
>> Gene Biddle, 707 West Ohio Avenue 33603. I have been
there 40 years. I don't want a continuance. I want to do this
tonight.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask a question of our
attorney.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: They can put their objections on the
record tonight.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What are council's options? We are not
required to continue but I believe it's been the practice of
council to continue -- once.
>> MARTIN SHELBY: I don't believe it's been within the
code. It's been council's practice and custom to do that.
Council's options are that they can take testimony tonight.
Council's options are that if after listening to petitioner's
rebuttal or discussion continuance council can vote to not
continue and to hear the entire petition on the merits and make a
decision. The other opportunity is that council can take
testimony and then continue it. But basically, the rule is one
that is set by custom and council does have the option of waiving
its rules.
>>GWEN MILLER: You said we can take testimony tonight and
then we vote not to continue. Will they be able to speak the next
time if we hear their testimony tonight?
>> My concern would be you would still want to have -- you
could take testimony, but it would be out of context because you
would have to have the petitioner make a presentation.
>> Kathleen O'Dell, this small scale plan amendment was
found to be inconsistent with the commission. I don't know what
they would be able to achieve between now and then. One concern I
have is if you have members of the public that would like to speak
it could be very well that what they are speaking to is an
amendment as it exists today but it could possibly be changed






between now and the 31st and they would not have an opportunity to
address that. So from a practical perspective that's something
that council would have to consider.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a suggestion procedurally to get
this off the dock. If folks want to speak tonight, why don't we
go ahead and let them speak in opposition, put their issues on the
record? Because some of them have indicated they don't want to
come back another night so at least we will have heard that. If
the petitioner comes back a month from now with some minor changes
or if there's major changes, we can always, I believe, waive our
own rules of the. Especially if it is major changes. If they are
back again, they can speak again. But I just think as long as
they are here and they want to speak, we should let them speak.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let me hear from the petitioner.
>> Jim LeCrem. Although it doesn't say on here, we need a
supermajority to get this passed. We have five out of seven here
tonight. I would have to win all five of your supports that are
present in order to pass this tonight, which I think is unfair to
my client. The second things, we do not -- this is a very small
project, a one-lot situation. The building is already existing,
the use is already set. We do not contemplate making any changes
in what we are asking for at a future day. But our major thing
is, I have five out of seven presents, I need five votes to carry
this. So therefore, we would at least request the vote be put off
when we can make our presentation and have seven council members
present and have our support lined up, which --
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
>> If the matter does not receive a supermajority vote it
has to continue until council members are present and they have to
have the opportunity to review the record prior to their vote. So
if that is a concern of the petitioner, he can continue to go
forward, and if he does not receive the supermajority vote, it
will be by, as a matter of course, continued to the next regular
meeting.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. Let's hear from the public. You were
going to speak? Saul is she speaking on the continuance?
>> I think to oppose.
>>GWEN MILLER: Are you speaking to continue or not to
continue it?
>> No, not to continue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, based on the number of
residents who came to this and the fact that it was scheduled, I
think we should just go ahead and hear it tonight. So therefore,
I move that we open the public hearing.
>> The petitioner is not prepared to present his case.
>> Well I think we should at the very least hear from the
members of the public. It seems to me when we have a public
hearing scheduled and people have been activated, the petitioner
should be prepared to present their case.
>>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead and speak, ma'am.
>> My names Linda Valez Rodriguez.
>> Are you going to be speaking to the merits of the case or
the continuance, whether or not it should be continued?
>> No, I don't want it to be continued.
>>GWEN MILLER: So tell us why you don't want it continued.
>> Because I oppose it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Hold on.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Have we decided that we are going to
continue it or not?






>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion to continue it it's been
seconded. We just haven't carried the motion.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Would that not determine whether or not we
are going to continue it?
>>GWEN MILLER: We made a motion to continue. We have yet
to give a date for continuation.
>>ROSE FERLITA: But have we voted on it?
>> The public hearing is open. There is a motion on the
floor to continue. Well, here's the question. The petitioner is
requesting it to be continued. What is the motion that is on the
floor?
>>GWEN MILLER: The motion on the floor is to give the date.
We voted to continue it.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did we vote to continue it?
>> No, you didn't vote to continue it. So there's a motion
on the floor to continue with a second. You have heard testimony
both before and against. That motion has to be voted on.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: But discussion on the motion?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes. Go ahead.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we vote to continue it, just yea or
nay, then we are cutting off the possibility of hearing this
testimony that some people want to give in advance of the hearing.
So I think we should pull back on that motion to continue since
the public hearing is open, give the folks the opportunity to
speak their opposition to the project, they can put it on the
record, it's on the record, we'll have heard it, and then we can
continue it for a full presentation pro and con a month from now.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I don't agree with Mr. Dingfelder, what a
surprise. The issue is, if I were one of those residents out
here, I would not want this council to hear this tonight and put
this opposition -- I am expecting this is opposition in some cases
at least, and for this to be decided later. I think Ms. Saul-Sena
is as much on target as she could ever be. If the petitioner is
coming and he is coming with the expectation that it is to be
continued, that's fine but that is like going to class without
studying for the exam. These people to protest, I think they
should have the opportunity. If I were them -- I'm not going to
support a continuance because simply I no they would like to give
their testimony now and weigh in on it now. I think that is only
fair to them.
(APPLAUSE).
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So let's vote on the motion.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: One other comment. From a due process
and fairness perspective, petitioners -- and I'm going to name
names like David Mechanik and Steve Michelini who are in front of
us on a weekly basis ask for continuances and we do not baselining
and grant continuances. Mr. LeCrem, we don't see more than once
or twice a year asks for a continuance and we are saying
absolutely not. And out every fairness to the folks that are
here, I would say we want to hear your testimony, and give us your
testimony. But at the same time, I think there's an equal
protection argument here for Mr. LeCrem to say why is he being
treated different from some of these other petitioners that we
grant continuances all the time to?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, we are going to have to go
back with opinion versus opinion. If Mr. Mechanics or the
Michelinis of the world decide to do that that is fine. We give
them the option for continuance. In a lot of cases there is not a
lot of opposition to continue. Tonight there is opposition
because they want to be heard. So I think it was the same council






member, Mr. Dingfelder that talked last week about finality in
some cases.
Tonight these people want finality so I again have a problem
with that line of thinking and that's the Democratic process,
everybody thinks differently. But any petitioner, be it the
Mechaniks or Michelinis or anyone else, you come and ask for
continuance, doesn't mean you are going to get it so you better be
prepared. And that is what is happening.
(APPLAUSE).

>>GWEN MILLER: Please, no clapping. Council men, we need
to make a decision.
>> Call the question.
>>GWEN MILLER: The motion is to continue. To March 31st.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I withdraw the motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you withdraw your second?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: So we have a motion for continuance. So
what do we have.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We hear from the staff, the petitioner,
then opposition.
>>ROSE FERLITA: We have to go through the process again.
This is located on North Boulevard. The address is not a
North Boulevard address. It is 702 Ohio. Residential change from
SMU 10 to SMU 6. The planning commission did hold a public
hearing on November 6 and found the planning amendment to be
inconsistent with the Tampa Comprehensive Plan and are forwarding
that recommendation to Tampa City Council.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. In opposition? -- now, the
petitioner?
>> Jim LeCrem, 4325 West Aegean. When we had the meeting
with the Planning Commission the other day -- let's see where I
want to go -- this is located across from the Woodlawn Cemetery,
which by today's standards, people do not build new homes,
expensive homes, certainly homes that support the value of this
neighborhood, riverside heights, across from a cemetery. You will
hear from some of these people tonight, yes there is new
construction going up on North Boulevard. It is not across from
Woodlawn. It is down farther where you have RO and residential
across the street from it, and in the area where Woodlawn is
across from North Boulevard, by the standards of the riverside
heights neighborhood, that area is blighted. I do not have my
visuals with me tonight. The house that we're speaking of was
blighted before Mr. Ireland bait. The house across the street and
behind -- I mean beside, are rental properties. Then we have four
vacant lots sitting there which are again across from Woodlawn
which will not in my opinion of selling 30 years of real estate in
town will not be permitted for homes. Somebody will be standing
up here trying to make the same case with those four lots.
There's also a house that is below minimum standards -- it really
looks like it is about to fall down there on half of a lot --
somebody will be here making the same case for an R. O. type
situation there. The neighborhoods will say we don't want it, we
don't want it. This particular area is almost a blight situation.
You will hear tonight from the neighbors that we don't want the
traffic, we don't want the traffic. North Boulevard is a nice
wide road. It's always been one of the roads in Tampa that had a
little less traffic than many of the others. The key to the
traffic on the North Boulevard situation as with the I-275
improvements that are going to happen there within the next two






years, there is an onramp going on I-275, a double lane on-ramp
where they purchased ten units from the projects there that will
alter the traffic situation in that whole area. North Boulevard
from approximately Buffalo on down will become a feeder onto 275,
and look more like South Howard and Himes than it does North
Boulevard now. So therefore, when people say, we don't want the
traffic, we don't want the traffic, the kids, the kids, I say the
traffic, this project, a 50 by 130-foot lot with a 720-foot
building on it, with the curbcut, on North Boulevard, the traffic
situation that this project creates and the traffic situation the
neighbors say that they want, is moot. The on-ramp and perhaps an
off-ramp -- I'm not sure of my facts, if I knew I was going to
argue tonight I would know whether it is an on-ramp or off-ramp
coming on North Boulevard, but the on-ramp itself will draw enough
traffic on North Boulevard where any traffic Mr. Ireland's project
has will be insignificant whatsoever. He is trying to put
money -- he has a one-person office, he's a sum on his-serve, he
has no employees. His clients do not come clients do not come to
his office. Et is going for an RO. Would he like to move into
the hour, put up a little sign, would like a 25-foot each-way sign
situation advertising his business. He has no employees. He does
have temporary people that may come and pick up papers and forms
on occasion, it would be a minimal parking situation. He plans to
operate there. He's been in that neighborhood for 28 years. The
Ohio Boulevard access would not be used. He plans to maintain
that front as a residential look or a residential look to it so it
does not disrupt the neighborhood there. Where do I want to go
from now? Basically, council, we ask that since we have a limited
impact property here, a small building, a small businessman, North
Boulevard is, if you ride up and down, you see there is money
going up and down towards Buffalo there is money going towards
Columbus but where you have the cemetery area, if you look, you
will see, that money, money has not gone in there. The people
willing to put the money in there are the RO users not the people
that want the residences or think there will be residences built
across there.
Just recently you did, I believe, the Firemans Credit Union
or Fireman's Retirement Fund. Right alongside there are four
vacant lots sitting there. We have petitions, I think it is right
to give the RO, let the people put their small businesses in
there. We are on 60 by 100. If the neighbors in this particular
area are afraid this is going to mushroom and build, I always say
we are 50 by 130 lot. For anything to happen in there, they will
have to come back to the council and get another zoning for the
next lot back to do anything that has any real impact. At that
time if the council decides we don't want new development, fine,
don't give those people that RO. That will stop any development
of, A, building a new building our building a building that is
going to have a Dumpster. Mr. Ireland will not have a Dumpster in
his building. He will have regular garbage pickup. If he can get
regular garbage pickup on North Boulevard he will have that and
not put that on Ohio. No plans to put cars entrances on Ohio.
Sure a car could make a mistake and park there occasionally.
Let's see. I believe that just about covers the merits of his
project. Won't have a Dumpster, small, no employees. Traffic
situation, a one-person office doesn't create much traffic,
doesn't active North Boulevard. You are going to have the
entrance, a double-lane entrance to I-275 on North Boulevard where
the projects were. That will completely change the flavor and
character of North Boulevard when that happens, you will see even






more petitions of this kind. Council in the past has moved
towards going on and letting the doctor, the dentist, the law, go
along and locate on North Boulevard. This is the last little spot
that is along there. The money hasn't gone in there. It's
obvious to see if you go by, the neighborhood has flourished.
That neighborhood 20 years ago I wouldn't make second mortgages in
that neighborhood but now I can't afford to live there! The
neighborhood has flourished. This little section has no. We ask
that you go on and let us have the RO zoning so he can bring that
section up, that house up to minimum standards, rental-type unit
into a nice little 700-foot office situation to do his business
there.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: As I look at this map here, it appears
that starting at Peninsula and going up to Indiana, there is one,
two, three, four, five, six, and then Indiana there is 7. On the
other side of Peninsula there is like 8 lots. I am wondering,.
Mr. LeCrem, if you or staff can give me an idea of what is
the today usage of the properties that front North Boulevard along
that stretch? In other words I think we need to focus on
consistency and compatibility. Rose, do have you that?
>> The existing land use map that you are looking at? Yes,
it's all yellow? That is all single family development.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: But the actual use right now?
>> Single family development.
>> But the actual use is for those 7, 8 lots?
>> What is shown on this particular maybe is existing land
use off of the property appraiser's files and it is all single
family development.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I notice there is a photograph of
Mr. Vicanti's.
>> Single family development.
>> Three streets down between friendly and Plymouth there is
office development. We have four-and-a-half vacant lots at
Peninsula and Woodlawn, which is one 130-foot lot away from this
property. Those lots -- I have been doing this for 30 years in
town -- across the street from that, that cemetery, I doubt I
would bet the farm on the fact a developer will not come and ask
for single family permits to build single families on that
location. They will come in here and ask for an RO. You can see
by this little map we are here.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you put that on the overhead?
>> Yes. I'm not -- there we are. We are here. If anybody
can figure out why those were divide how they were, back in the
30s and '40s, I have spent a lot of time talking to historians
trying to find out what it was. It was intense whatever it was.
This area here is all vacant. The house that sits here is beyond
falling down. I hate to say that about anybody's house. This
section right here is where you put the Fireman's Credit Union
or --
>>ROSE FERLITA: No, it's across the street.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The purple one?
>> RO here, vacant lots here. The fireman's place is right
in here someplace. They're asking for another zoning here. We
will see what happens with that. We have got the RO here. RO on
this corner.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>> This whole area here is going RO. It has been a trend up
and down that street to go with the RO. We would like to get it
there on this 50 by 130-lot there.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Is this the house they have been doing all






the renovations on, kind after brownish colored house?
>> This is a very small house that is green. Renovations
have been going on. Everything as far as bringing the house up to
where it is a habitable situation now has been done with the
house. It's painted kind of a dark brownish green. There is no
parking or anything. We wouldn't want to do that and be
presumptuous, but the yard is a little rough as far as grass, but
the house itself has been brought up to the point where it is
relatively attractive and we submitted my picture. I said we
didn't come to -- we submitted our picture at the other hearing.
At the other hearing staff recommended this be passed. It was the
commission whose recommendation that it not pass but the staff
itself recommended that they do go on and give the ROs down
through there, get that into an RO situation rather than holding
out for five weak houses to be left in a neighborhood that has
really flourished over the last five or six years.
>>KEVIN WHITE: What is this Buffalo you have been
mentioning?
>> I have been around 30 years. You put a little pressure
on me and I collapse. Martin Luther King.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Oh. Sorry. I got you.
>> It's hard to change. I still refer to it as Buffalo.
>>KEVIN WHITE: You know what happens if you refuse to
change. You get left behind.
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we go to the public to hear what you
have to say.
>>GWEN MILLER: Give us your name.
>> Linda Valdez Rodriguez and I living right next door 704
West Ohio. I have been living there 52 years, my whole lifetime.
Okay? I was raised there. I raised my children there. And I
would hope to living there for the rest of my life. For some
people, they don't seem to understand that home is home. Okay?
And many of us have the opportunity to go elsewhere to all these
other neighborhoods like Carrollwood. But many of us have chosen
to stay there at home. Right next door, which is 702 West Ohio,
that house has never been a rental house. It belonged to a
neighbor who died, and her husband, and then another married
couple bought it. And then Mr. Ireland has purchased it. It's
said that he lives in the neighborhood somewhere, but the way I
feel is, with all due respect, that he makes the business at his
home. But all my neighbors have submitted many petitions at the
last -- at the Planning Commission meeting, and I was hopeful that
they would pass them on to you for all the elderly people who
couldn't be here tonight, and I am asking you for your support.
Let me tell you a little bit. As far as the houses, there
are a few businesses, okay? There is a business right there,
Martin Luther King and North Boulevard a block there. All the
rest of them are homes. Okay? On our side. Until you get to the
fireman center which is on the other side of the street next to
west; which is a long way from us. All the others are residential
homes where people live. So I'm asking for your support in
allowing us to keep our area residential. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next?
>> My name is Gene Bidell, I live at 707 west Ohio, 33603.
My wife and I have lived in the house for 40 years. And we bought
that house in that neighborhood and bought it because it was a
quiet, lot of elderly people there, and over the years, I put a
lot of money in my house. I put an in-ground swimming pool in the
back, I put a gazebo with a hot tub in the back, I put a
wrap-around porch, stockade fence around the back, walkways -- I






spent thousands of dollars because I like that neighborhood.
Now, I'm 120 feet from this house. I try to measure it.
It's about 120 feet. I see that house -- and I just recently
retired. I turned 62 October 1st, I said I got it made, I got the
pool. The kids are grown up. The dog died. Wife still working,
I got a check from the state DOT, social security I got my rocking
chair on the front porch, got my Jacuzzi, got my swimming pool.
Got it made. I retired. First day I sat on the porch, people are
whizzing by 50 miles an hour. I haven't been there. I have been
working 12 hours a day for 40 years. Me and my wife. She worked
in a hospital, was an EEG technician at St. Joseph's Hospital. So
I called the cops. You know what? This is ridiculous. He said
the speed limit is 35, Mr. Biddle. Looks like they are going
faster. How about North Boulevard? I can see these two houses in
contention from my porch. Zoom. It's got so bad that what I am
trying to say that those businesses that they allow to be on North
Boulevard have brought more traffic than we really need because I
used to go to work, I go to the stop sign, and I look both ways
and I wouldn't see no cars. Now it takes me 15 minutes to get out
on the street. So you know what I did? I went back to work
part-time. The noise factor is so bad. I hear the trucks, I call
them these drug dealers, they drive with the boom boom boom, up
and down my street, up and down north from Columbus, speeding. I
sat out there one day in my neighbor's driveway and I watched the
cars before I called the police. They said it was a new
phenomenon. A new phenomenon? So if you let these people put
businesses there, when I am sitting on my porch, I will see signs
that says Abe's Bail Bonds or Joe Lawyer, I will be looking at
commercial property. I paid my house off 20 years ago. My sons,
one is policeman, one is a store manager at Publix. I don't bring
my grand kids over to ride up and down the street. They use toyed
ride bikes. No more. If you pass that, I will be moving out of
the City of Tampa. Thank you. Goodbye.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> My name Mr. Garcia. I live at 712 west Ohio, about 200
feet from the corner which is affected by the change. Just like
it is other people, I am a retiree. I used to work for GTE 29
years and I bought the house 27 years ago and -- and I so want to
be there for the rest of my life. I expected it to be a Kwai oat
neighborhood and it is still is and we have been praying to keep
it that way. And we have problems in the traffic in North
Boulevard area. But on the so-called Ohio Avenue, the traffic is
still what you can expect in the residential neighborhood. We
also have a bunch of kids walking around there, living all around
us, coming from the school there by west Avenue, and then also
Tampa bentis academy which is on North Boulevard, and then we have
another ground for baseball and support which is on Plymouth and
Massey. And all these kids, they go around there, and they are
circulating our street and other streets. And so I want for these
kids to be safe. I feel bad. I had three boys and nine
grandchildren and they spend time with me in summer. And they
drive me nuts, but anyway, I would like for them to be safe. But
anyway, in this case, like these other people, I don't like to be
living in the back of a business, because that won't be good for
my children or me or anyone. So that is one reason I am against
that. It doesn't give a good picture of a so-called neighborhood
having stores just 200 feet away from you. It will depreciate our
property. And will make our life miserable. So I am among the
ones requesting your goodwill and kindness to please see the
things from our side and try to help us in this endeavor. Thank






you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next.
>> Hi. My name is Barbara Biddle 707 West Ohio and I want
to thank you for letting us move on with this meeting. I have a
couple things to address. This gentleman said he went from all
different directions where we were directly speaking about Ohio
street. We actually have two agendas here. One is on Ohio and
one is on North Boulevard. If the house that he's speaking of,
Mrs. Linda said it is not a rental and she is right, it is not.
We knew the people for 40 years then a young couple moved N.
across the street from us facing North Boulevard, that house has
also petitioned for the board to review tonight also. And if we
have people and businesses, quote, on those corners, we will have
traffic going on North Boulevard and traffic going on Ohio. We
live at the upper part of the street which is going on to North
Boulevard. He addressed a couple of things. First he said that
the house was deteriorating, falling down. No, it was a young
couple that moved into that home. They repaired that home, they
put a swimming pool into that home. Unfortunately their marriage
dissolved and it was resold. So the house was not falling down.
The man that previously owned it had it fixed in part of that
area. Secondly the house across the street has been rented for
many years. Those people are not just trying to sell it because
they can't afford the taxes or the property. If you are renting a
house, your taxes are going to be running a lot different and a
lot higher. So as far as coming off the interstate and all the
other traffic that this gentleman is speaking, we will have more
traffic if this is where he is going at. Secondly, he also said
that, you know, he wouldn't put a second mortgage into this area,
but now, all of a sudden, he wants to improve it by putting a
business. Well, I happen to group to introduce myself to the
person who was purchasing or I thought had purchased it, which was
a young man. At that point in time, they had a plumber up there,
and, of course, needing a plumber, we have people in the area ask
this gentleman for his business card. And I said, I'm so glad to
see a nice young man move into the area. He said, oh, no, he is
already prepared to make this a business and has removed the tub
out of the house. So that was to tell us that he would not be
living in that house if there was a tub being removed out.
Because in order to sell a hour, you should or you are supposed to
have a tub in your home.
The other indication, too, is that all of a sudden he spoke
about the people behind him in the other houses and the other rent
of land that is in that back area. And, of course, we would have
to go before a board again if those people behind his home would
like to be pursued to put it into commercial property. That is
their choice, whether or not they want to pursue to get that into
commercial property. And he is saying that we would have to come
again to be prepared to maybe help someone or to be able to say
before the board, we don't want them to turn their homes into
businesses also. We don't want businesses. We want to live in a
residential area. We have enough businesses on the street. And
those businesses in those homes are vacant. They've got signs up
there they're for rent. They're vacant. They want to change them
into other businesses. This gentleman can put a small bail
bondman business on that corner and then turn around and sell it
and somebody else wants to put something else on that corner.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have you to wrap it up.
>> I'm sorry. Excuse me. Thank you for listening. We
would like to oppose it.






>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have asked Mr. Thornton from
transportation to research the access from North Boulevard to the
interstate and how that may affect the commuters.
>> Tracy Torreville: 708 West Ohio. Obviously I am against
this. First of all I have given and you handout of recent sales
of homes in the neighborhood as opposed to previous years, and you
can see how much our property values are rising in this
neighborhood. It is my understanding that this zoning that he is
asking for was an incentive to help improve neighborhoods that had
fallen below the standards as this neighborhood was considered to
be 10 to 15 years ago before I even was a Tampa resident. But as
you can see, without any of these rezonings, the neighborhood is
coming up on its own. Secondly, I also agree that to be deeper
into the neighborhood is probably, you know, the optimum place to
be. I'm on the outer block. I can see across the street. One of
the homes, properties going up for rezoning tonight. And as I
look out of my backyard, I can see obviously through the
chain-link fence one of the yards of another property. So the
second thing is that I chose this block as a student because I
couldn't afford homes deeper into the neighborhood. It wasn't a
huge difference in price but it was a significant difference. But
I chose this neighborhood. I'm at USF and obviously there is
neighborhoods closer to USF I may have been able to afford to move
in, and some that I couldn't. But I chose this neighborhood. One
of the things I like about this neighborhood is as you hear, many
of the residents have been here for years. When I priced these
properties, I went down Boulevard clique click by click, selecting
each property, selecting the sale, whatever, and I found only a
limited number of properties actually adjacent to Boulevard that
have recently sold. Most of them have been owned by the same
person before I could even say when, so there's also many
residents that have been -- have owned this property, have been in
these properties for entire life times. And if you start letting
people rezone around them, I think it's unfair and unjust, because
these people have stuck through the neighborhoods through the bad
times and now the neighborhood is up and coming and people are
loyal to this neighborhood. My hygienist in the dentist office I
go to was raised in this neighborhood and brought her family up in
this neighborhood. I run into all kind of people that say, oh, I
love that neighborhood, I understand why. I have only been here
about three years, but it's a neighborhood, and that's how we want
to keep it. There's plenty of streets in Tampa that have high
traffic. If you go to South Tampa, off of Westshore, where
Westshore is quite busy or MacDill or different place that is have
high traffic flows, when you are in those little pocket that is
people like to be in, there is still a lot of residents that
choose to live on the high traffic areas because they choose that
neighborhood. We have a great location. We are moderately priced
at the moment although it's going up. So we want to keep it a
neighborhood.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> My name is Sharon keen, I live at 918 West Virginia
Avenue, 33603. I've also lived at the neighborhood 40 years but
I'm basically here to give and you historical perspective of what
is going on in North Boulevard. I was very frustrating to sit
back there and hear questions that I had the answers to and I
couldn't answer. But basically, what happened, the riverside
civic association has always supported this designation on North
Boulevard. This is one of the things that galvanized us as a






neighborhood association. Basically, the history is this: We
were having a lot of problems with North Boulevard -- code
enforcement, fencing operations, drug sales. It was very
difficult to find people who wanted to raise a family on North
Boulevard due to the high traffic volume and at the time crime
that was taking place on that corridor. Our property values
deteriorate as you get closer to Martin Luther King. And North
Boulevard they increase as you head towards the river. So we sat
with city and we tried to come up with a plan for North Boulevard.
They suggested a commercial designation. We thought that would
just intensify the problem. So sitting with the city, we came up
with the possibility of this RO development. The first building
to be designated as such was the City of Tampa fire and police
pension building which the year it was completed won design
awards. And there are a total of ten properties. Mr. Dingfelder,
you were asking. There is a total of about ten properties that
have achieved this designation.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What side of the road is the police and
fire building?
>> See, there is two of them. That's the problem. There is
the City of Tampa police and fire pension office which is on the
east side and there is the international association of
firefighters union which is on the west side. So there is a total
of about ten of these zonings that have gone through with no
opposition. This is the first time there's been opposition, and I
think it's because of the success that we've had as a neighborhood
association that now, you know, quite a few of us feel that we
have the ability or we can be picky now, because it's true, our
property values have soared and so forth. So the issue that you
are going to have to solve here -- now, keep in mind -- and I just
gave some code enforcement brochures to the young lady back there
who's lived there since 2001 because they are going to have to
handle the code enforcement on this corridor. There is a
two-story apartment building with a Columbus drive address that
faces North Boulevard that has been under code enforcement for 20
years. We know that code enforcement with five warnings before
you get a fine is not the easiest thing. I realize there is now
new ordinances before council that will help remedy this but this
is what they are going to have to face. The issue before you is
this. Do you feel the corridor is strong enough now that people
will want to raise their families on North Boulevard? Or do we
still need to have the sort of buffer between this artery and the
residential? Remember, this is residential office. Okay? Very
low intensity. Have low traffic volume if any, even very low
pedestrian. So you are going to have to make this decision, I
guess, and try to do what is best for the neighborhood. I don't
think the neighborhood is going to live or die on this issue. I
spoke to my board. We have a 55-member board. None of them want
to revisit it but they weren't worked up enough to get petitions
either and fight it really hard so we leave it in your lap.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next.
>> David Andrew, 809 west Ohio. I will make this brief. I
live about 12 houses away from this unit that they are trying to
work on. And every day I have to sit at that stop sign, right at
the corner, right where this house is, and it's hard enough to get
onto North Boulevard, whether you are making a left or a right,
regardless. But they say they are going to have parking in the
back which means they will have to take a privacy fence down and
have an entrance on the side. But occasionally there will be
people that park on the road in front of the stop sign. If you






were ever at a stop sign like that you know it is difficult to
make a left or right when there is already a car blocking that
side because every time somebody is coming right at you making a
right onto Ohio. It's very tight to make that corner, and with
parking already on the side, it already throws you towards the
middle of the street regardless of whether you are going to make
that left or that right. That was one of the issues. I will just
make it brief. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> Christopher Ireland, the property owner. I reside at
916 west Braddock street, Tampa, Florida 33603. I grew up at 911
west Alfred street and have been in the neighborhood for 28 years.
I own a small legal service business, only me. I have a couple
employees that come by periodically once or twice a week that pick
up work and leave, are there for one or two minutes. My intention
is to improve the neighborhood. I have been there 28 years like I
said. Those houses on North Boulevard are debilitated, an
eyesore. My family have six houses in a six-block area between
Kentucky and Alfred street. I have a vested interest in this
neighborhood. I am part of the reason why everyone's houses have
gone up in value. So I take pride. I can put my business there,
move into this run down hour, fix it up, do everybody a favor.
It's going to be very small, no traffic. The population as far as
one gentleman was speaking 40 years ago, there is population
growth. My business has nothing to do with that, it has nothing
to do with people speeding up and down Ohio street. There will be
very few people coming in. Hardly any traffic. The reason she
mentioned about the tub being out. The house is in such bad shape
I had to get a demolition permit to tear up the back room. There
was damage, I had to replace the tub with the shower. Everything
is consistent. I watched the hearing six months ago about the
fire department. That's what I based my plan on. And they think
I am trying to hurt in some way. I have no reason to hurt the
neighborhood. I want to stay there my entire life myself, been
there my entire life. I don't know if it is misconceptions or
fabrications but they mentioned all those offices up and down that
street between Martin Luther King and Columbus are vacant. That's
not true. The rental properties are vacant. No one wants to live
there. I would not want my children playing in North Boulevard an
accident cocoa happen. The whole area is clean, I have done
massive work there on my property. I wish they could have come in
and helped me the three or four months I have been there working
so they could see what work was needed inside the house just
structurally. I have done nothing but improvements, trying to
improve the neighborhood. It is very low intensity. It's just
me. One of my employees that comes by a couple times a week, and
that's it. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next.
>> My name is Gene Duncholm (phonetic). 702 west Peninsula.
My property also borders North Boulevard. Where I am located, I
can see Mr. Ireland's property. It is about a block where from my
son attends the academy school that one of the members spoke about
earlier. I also go to the dental office right across the street
from where Mr. Ireland's businesses will hopefully be located. My
position is that all the commercial or RO properties along North
Boulevard enhance the neighborhood. I mean they all are
beautiful. What I see Mr. Ireland do with his property is
tremendous. I have been in that area for white a while. I have
seen the property go from a run-down dilapidated looking building
to a beautiful stucco building. He started landscaping. It






really looks good. I am in support of the request. I think it is
going to enhance the area. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next? If you are going to
speak, come on. Let's not have a debate.
>> Sorry, I was trying to be polite. My names Amy syringe.
I'm an applicant, actually on the agenda Number 7, I am across the
street. 3602 North Boulevard. I'm speaking in favor of his.
Don't know the man. Met him in the hallway at the planning
commission meeting but I figure this is to my benefit as well.
The -- some of the concerns that the community has raised,
although legitimate, aren't really founded. First and foremost
the traffic issue. Boulevard is a major artery, in my opinion
now, between MLK and Kennedy. And that is why I believe that the
traffic has increased exponentially over the last few years, not
because we have put in professional offices up and down the
street. Actually will go ahead and show you. I did a diagram of
the area we are talking about between --
>>GWEN MILLER: Get the hand Mick.
>> -- between -- this is Dr. Martin Luther King and this is
Columbus here at the bottom. The blue represent it is parcels or
the structures that are either zoned or being used for commercial
or business purposes, however you would like to label it. The red
are those that are zoned or being used for residential purposes or
are vacant lots, so I have kind of lumped those together. This
smaller strip here advertise Ohio property that is being discussed
now. And this larger one is the one that is my property. And you
will see that three blocks to the north there is this area of 11
structures or parcels that have been approved for commercial and
business uses. And most recently, and you will forgive me, I
don't have my notes in front of me, the house here that I am
pointing to on the corner of Virginia and Boulevard, and it would
be the southeast corner, I believe, is a brand-new building. I
have actually some pictures will show to the board of what kinds
of improvements these buildings are doing with this neighborhood.
The neighborhood is blighted. The houses that are old that have
the residents forever are run down and degrade. These new
businesses coming in are revamping theses and that is exactly what
this comprehensive plan category was designed to do. I was
designed to create a buffer between that artery that is Boulevard
so that the neighborhood that is behind it or even across from it
could improve despite the fact that there is that increased
traffic flow. Then, only -- I believe it is five blocks to the
south, on the corner of Plymouth and North Boulevard, and that
would be the northwest corner, I believe is the fireman's union
building that was just approved last year.
>>GWEN MILLER: Excuse me, miss.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I have a question. The bottom cross street
at the bottom of the diagram is what?
>> West Columbus drive.
>>ROSE FERLITA: So between Columbus and Martin Luther King,
how many sites are RO?
>> They are not all designated RO. They are some sort of
commercial or business purpose.
>>ROSE FERLITA: How many sites are RO?
>> There are 35 out of 93 parcels that are designated for
some sort of business public commercial use, whatever you want to
name.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Not RO?
>> Not RO. They don't speak to the actual designation.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Do you have any approximate about RO?






Because I am hearing different descriptions. I want to hear from
Rose, from staff.
>> Some have the RO zoning. Some have been developed as an
office use that are not zoned. Nor are they planned for it.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That was my question.
>> And I think that's why, because I can't designate what
they are being used for, or if they were zoned for that purpose.
And you see some numbers have been erased because I use add dry
erase marker but 7 percent of the structure from MLK to Columbus
are already being used for that purpose and there remain (buzzer
sounds).
>>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
>> There remain approximately 62 percent that are
residential.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next.
>> Hi. My name is Joyce Rumfeld. I reside at 805 west
Woodlawn and I have lived there since 2001. At the time I bought
my house it was pretty much the house I could afford and I have
seen the value go up. We are talking about the zoning so he can
do summons. Well, that's fine. But once they change the zone,
it's changed for future. The map shows, there's a stretch there
that has not been changed into professional offices. That's a
also the same stretch where the streets are paved with bricks.
It's a little more charming than the part that's down by Columbus
or the immediate part near Martin Luther King. It's nicer there.
One of the vacant signs (Inaudible -- we all know that any kind of
business, that is why we -- one of the things that happens is,
you have delivery trucks that make deliveries or compress mail,
legal documents delivered -- express mail. Those guys never have
room to pull in and turn around because they only can do so much
with the lots so what do they do? They park right at the edge of
the street. Here I am going to leave for work. There is a truck
there, but I am hesitant because I know someone is going to be
coming around the corner to drive right in to me. These are
dangerous intersections once someone is on the corner making a
quick delivery. Some of the businesses, and I don't know, do I
just pass this around, yes? Some of the business that is have
gone in aren't so pretty. The buildings are nice but there's a
whole lot of pavement. The second picture you can see a detention
pond. The detention important earthy depressions in the winter
and in the summer they are mosquito breeding grounds. They don't
have any outfall and they sit there with water. Here is another
one of the businesses. I took a picture on a Saturday, there is
garbage pull piled up outside his door. I guess his cleaners come
on the weekend and leave it. This is down south by Columbus
Avenue, one of the commercial businesses. The other thing I want
to mention, if these are so minimal, we do allow that you can buy
a house and have an office as long as you reside in the house.
Why aren't they doing that? If this is minimal use? But the
thing is, it's not really minimal use. These guys can actually
run the business, flip it, and make a ton of money. This is down
by Columbus, and this is the worst example where they built it
right on the road. This picture, I believe this is actually her
home that she bought, and if I'm understanding, she might want to
convert that. From what she said. Now, Indiana is the street
just north of Ohio. This is the residence that's on the corner of
Indiana. It's a beautiful home. You can flip through the
pictures. Now, if you want to start looking at property value,
this is Kentucky, which is just a couple streets up brick pavers,
brand-new home.






>>GWEN MILLER: You need to wrap it up.
>> Okay, the last thing I'm going to does, I will give you
all of these with property values on the corner, and I have a
petition with close to 100 signatures from the neighborhoods
neighborhood.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have two questions. Is this on the
corner of Indiana and Boulevard?
>> You can see the street sign.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I couldn't quite see it. And my other
question is, you showed us the diagram of the street with a high
oh being narrow? Do you know what the width is?
>> 51 right of way with 24 feet of brick paved road.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 24 feet. Thank you.
>> There's the zoning. This is the cemetery, all the red
streets are the brick streets. This is the area that hasn't been
tainted by offices. And this is --
>>GWEN MILLER: You need to wrap it up.
>> Anyway.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Petitioner, you want rebuttal?
>> Several of our people who don't want to see him there
have said we've got a lot of traffic. Fine, the traffic is there.
We are not going to create the traffic. The traffic is there.
Someone said we got noisy roads. Fine, the noise is there. Fine,
the man says he can't sit on his front porch? The boom boxes?
Fine. We are not going to add to that or create that. You talk
about UPS trucks parked in front of the stop sign there on the
brick street? Our curbcut is to the rear of the building ooh or
60 foot away from the traffic. We plan to use that, it plans to
be part, if somebody does park there, it is a mistake. Mistakes
happen, it won't be continuous. They say can you buy a house, put
a little one-room office night, yes, you can. But you cannot have
a sign in that office, you cannot have a legitimate situation as
far as attracting business because of your sign and getting the
advertising. You can't have commercial telephone numbers. You
can't advertise in the Yellow Pages that address under a business
name. It's strictly John Smith, lives here and he's got a number
and you call me. That's not professional. We are looking to make
that little section a professional section through there.
Traffic, the noise, we like to put up a sign. We can't do that
without the zoning. The brick streets, yes, are nice, we don't
plan to use the brick streets. We don't have a curbcut there. I
guess that pretty much sums it up. The commission is here to
decide whether we want to continue that on down, get the offers
through that little section. The lady that made the argument, you
were asking how many ROs there? There is 11 or 12. She had one
that she had missed that is on there across the street on the
corner of the cemetery so it is a few more. 37 percent. Do we
let the commercial go in, the RO's continue it on down the street?
The traffic is going to grow. The noise is going to grow.
Residential office or not. We've got the vacant lots there.
Somebody needs to ask, what is going to lap with those vacant
lots? I don't think they are going to go residential there.
Somebody might come in with a townhouse unit. But I don't think
they will go residential. There will be another group of people
up here saying we want this. I guess I need to sum up by saying
we would like to put a 50 by 100 foot lot to an RO that has a 700
square feet building that will be used by the occupant. He has a
plan, he had a plan when he bought it. He knew what he wanted to
do. Low-impacts business, low no Dumpster, won't use Ohio street,
not going to create any noise or traffic. Do we go and continue






on down North Boulevard and let the RO's go from MLK to Columbus
or to North Boulevard or do we let it grow up to it, fill in where
we've already got it and leave that little one section in a state
of poverty? You've got the vacant lots, you've got house that is
don't have money going into them. Mr. Ireland did put money into
his. He has brought it up. And it's just the council -- do we
want to do that, continue that? Ms. Saul-Sena, they took my house
from laurel Street. Believe me, they are putting on ramps on
North Boulevard they bought ten units of projects there and that
will alter the traffic situation through that area considerably.
For people who say they don't want the traffic noise, but it's
already there. We are not going to add to this. This is a
one-man operation going into this house. We are not going to add
to that. What is going to add to that, what is going to change
the neighborhood considerably is those two on-ramp lanes going
onto the interstate and I'm sorry, I was kind of led by the
secretary thinking I could get this deferred more easily than we
K. my presentation was not what I expected to make, I expected to
get a pass and come home back the 31st with visuals. Really, we
had 50 people come up here and tell you they want this change in
this neighborhood. That's me talking. You don't have to believe
me. Because they see, this is a hole. A beautiful nice
development, the RO's are nice, the new development as far as
homes that go in is nice. You hit that cemetery and it just
sinks. If it was a graph, it would go like this in front of the
cemetery. Small run-down houses, vacant lots is what we've got in
that three-block area. We want to close the gap in the
three-block area, let these people that have committed to put the
known there go. Some of these people that are up here saying we
don't want it, their opportunity to make some money will come
someday too. They may I change their mind. I 8 leave it. I
guess we have hashed it out.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: And a second. Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tony, is this yours? You gave sort of
an abbreviated version at the beginning of this. I'm glad we
started off the evening with the toughest one. There won't be any
tough ones later, right? (Laughter). But at any rate, Tony, give
me a little longer version of your staff recommendation because
obviously you have a little bit of conflict which is unusual for
us, but you have a little bit of could be conflict, planning
commission staff made a recommendation to us to approve. The
planning commission itself is recommending denial but I need to
know what your professional analysis was on this that led to you
recommend approval.
>> First of all, the reason why I gave an abbreviated
version of this, this was not originally mine, this was originally
Ms. Ogilvie's, which had a sister amendment. That will be
presenting to you in a few more minutes this evening. Let me go
ahead and show you graphically the future land use map. This is
the subject property.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Slide that up a little.
>> Okay. I am using the map for my plan amendment because I
apologize, I don't have the map for this one but it is pretty easy
to show. This parcel is the one that the applicant is bringing in
right here. It is oriented toward Ohio. It is ooh by 100-foot
lot. It will have egress and ingress off North Boulevard. As the
association president had succinctly stated, Ms. Keen from
Riverside Heights, there has been history on North Boulevard with
a trend to low-density office over the last six years we have






probably done in my estimation six to eight plan residential plan
amendments. Residential 20 allowing low density office. SMU 6
allowing low density office also. What happens in those cases
most of the projects that do come in come in as RO, or PD. That
is what is happening in most of the cases. In this particular
quadrant of 3 or 4 blocks you have not seen any kind of trend in
this immediate area. Have you seen closer three blocks to the
north. Have you seen significant change as far as trending
towards low density office and also to the south as it gets closer
to Columbus drive. There has been a pattern, and Ms. Keen had
reflected to you what the citizens of Riverside Heights had
thought in the past. There could be a tipping point. We don't
know. I think she is correct in trying to leave it in your
capable hands this evening. It's a rather difficult decision, I
am sure you mall make because you have some passionate pleas from
people in the area that live in close proximity to the houses. It
is a difficult situation. There has been a trend in the area.
Low-density office does serve as a good buffer. The question is,
when you really get down into the site-specific areas and you look
at the general context, have you to look from large-scale down to
small-scale. So if you look at the overall pattern of North
Boulevard, yes, there has been a trend. If you look down
site-specific, then you will have to look at these particular lots
in question. As far as the planning commission is concerned,
these same individuals, I don't know if all of them were here for
that, I was not present at that hearing that evening, as I did not
have any minutes that evening. But I know many of these
individuals that spoke to you that evening were present that
evening, and as a result of that, staff recommendation was a
finding of consistency which was presented to the planning
commission. The planning commission did feel that that was not
the correct recommendation to pass on to Tampa City Council for
consideration. So the recommendation by the planning commission
was a finding of inconsistency and that is what we are passing on
to you this evening. Ding thank you.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Mr. Garcia, could you grab the map that
young lady used a minute ago for me, please? One of the things we
have to remember when going up and down -- I just need that for a
minute, I don't have a question for you -- is the compatibility of
what they have had on North Boulevard. I will agree with the
petitioner on one thing, that this particular petition will not
increase or decrease the traffic on North Boulevard at all, I
don't think this one particular house, residence, office, whatever
the case may be, will increase the traffic. Two blocks down, I
used to be a Tampa police officers, I used to run radar out of
that vacant lot at Woodlawn and North Boulevard and the posted
speed limit on North Boulevard is 35 mire. I used to write
tickets at 55 and 60 coming down North Boulevard. As of three
weeks ago this council has directed the Tampa Police Department
traffic unit to run radar on North Boulevard coming across the
North Boulevard bridge as traffic approaches the Blake high
school. In less than one hour's time Tampa Police Department
issued over 60 citations with an average speed of 52 miles an hour
coming over the bridge in a school zone. At the top end of North
Boulevard toward MLK you will see commercial uses indicated by
blue on that map. Then you will see a four to five-block radius
that you have all residential that has remained historically
residential over the past decades. Then towards the end, the
South End of North Boulevard, that's when it starts to transition
once again. Not only do I not think this particular petition is






compatible with the neighborhood -- and not so much that the
neighbors have even spoken out strong and hard about what they
want -- it's a compatibility issue as far as I'm concerned. This
particular property I'm very familiar with, no matter how you cut
it, this property faces Ohio. It does not face North Boulevard.
It is not one of the North Boulevard residential office
compatibility uses. This faces a residential street and a
residential neighborhood that has always historically been that
way. And I don't think that this particular petition is
compatible. And one other thing that the petitioner said: Well,
all the other residents will have the opportunity to realize their
profit too one day. Profit is a very wonderful word in my
estimation. I have no, no qualms with profit. But out of the
renovations that your client has done, he can stick a for-sale
sign in front of that house right now and realize his profit today
as a residential component in that neighborhood. Based on those
facts and the incompatibility that I see with that, I will
recommend denial of the petition.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Thornton, we have you here, you have to
speak.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to thank you for researching
this, not to prove things one way or the other, just to clarify
the plans for the interstate.
>> Calvin Thornton, transportation division. I went to FDOT
website and it shows the I-275, Howard Frankland bridge to the
Hillsborough River link, proposed improvement, and this is a
future improvement, on this improvement it shows -- this is North
Boulevard -- it shows no ramps at North Boulevard with this
particular improvement. As we probably all know, the interstate
is a fluid road, and depending on some of the wishes, that could
change. But with this particular future construction project, it
shows no ramps on Boulevard. It still shows the ramps on Armenia
and Howard.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No on-off ramps?
>> No.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you very much for clarifying that. I
sit on a.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I sit on a number of boards and the fund
showed there wasn't a ramp.
>> I think there was a discussion about removing the Ashley
street out of the downtown and moving it on North Boulevard and
you would get additional capacity because you wouldn't have the
two ramps opposing each other but at this particular construction
phase the ramps are not shown.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question, Mr. Thornton.
Specifically related to this project, I don't know. Have you
studied this one?
>> I have not seen this plan amendment. We don't normally
look at plan amendments, just rezonings.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is Boulevard a connector or arterial?
>> It is an arterial.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: It is a four-lane arterial?
>> It is a four-lane arterial.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other question I had was, there has
been a discussion about where the UPS truck would go and where
this gentleman would park if he used this. I'm confused about the
access point for this property. And if anybody else can help me
on that, if you can't, that would be fine. Rose, or Tony, do you
know? (Inaudible etch last 6570 feet of the property, is the






curbcut so you would come in behind the house, approximately 25
feet over by the house. There is a good-sides --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: On Ohio?
>> No, on North Boulevard. The front of the house is
oriented towards Ohio. It is a small porch. The front door of
the house is not planned to be used for the business. The
business entrance and Mr. Ireland's entrance is as he would be
living there and have a parking lot there, his plan is to use the
rear of the house for all entrances and exits. If we could get
trash pickup on North Boulevard we plan trash cans to be in the
back.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So there would be a parking area or at
least a delivery drop-off area on North Boulevard, not on Ohio.
>> That is correct. Name tag in front of the house as the
residents look although we don't expect anybody to use front of
the house, perhaps the occasional visitor type situation. The
restrictions would be for size sign for oh Ohio, this 50-foot
frontage, the sign would be on North Boulevard facing back by the
curbcuts. Minimum impact on this whatsoever, only a mistake would
pull up and park in front.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do we need to close the public hearing?
(Motion made, seconded, to close the public hearing.
[Motion Carried.]
>>ROSE FERLITA: I would like to follow up on what Mr. White
said in all fairness to the petitioner and his representative.
The existing traffic is already existing. Whether that would
increase it or not, to what extent or not, who's to dictate? The
noise is already there. And hopefully this would not increase the
noise. The issue that the petitioner brought up about the ramp
and automatically by raising the issue about the ramp, said that
the transportation concerns would be moot because that would be
causing the transportation problems. But from what I understand
from our transportation expert -- we're done -- that is not going
to happen. So that is not going to increase the transportation
problem. And even if it didn't, the question about the delivery
of documents and where it is supposed to be delivered, I think the
petitioner's representative also said perhaps sometime they could
make a mistake and park in the wrong place. And that could be an
issue. Yes, it could be an issue. The issue about compatibility
with an established neighborhood was another concern of mine. I
believe that the petitioner said that this was something that was
going to improve this neighborhood because it was a deteriorated
area, and I think he went so far as to say it was blighted. Well,
I'm looking at a residential purchase in 2004 of 160,000 dollars.
Really nice, modest home. I am looking at a home that is older,
well maintained on Fibley in North Boulevard. Noise residential
component. Another nice Boulevard home in Kentucky. Nice
residential stock, well kept. Another one on Indiana. That's a
beautiful home. That hardly seems exemplary of an area that is
deteriorating or in any shape or form blighted. I think that this
RO request is not going to do well. It's not compatible with what
we have and the lady in the fourth row, black shirt, I'm sorry,
don't remember your name, has a right to have as much protection
close to this site as somebody has deeper into the neighborhood.
We heard the Biddels that have been there for 30, 40 years.
Circumstance I'm sorry about your dog, by the way. (Laughter).
>>ROSE FERLITA: These are people that have invested in this
neighborhood and as far as I'm concerned, it is our responsibility
to make this investment worthwhile. I would defer to Mr. White
because I think he wanted to --






>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul SENA has a question.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to speak about residential uses
being viable on heavily trafficked streets. I want to say that
Tampa, blessedly, is growing. And I have seen significant
residential investment on some very busy streets, from Swann to
MacDill to Lois to Dale Mabry, where previously, a decade ago, the
common thought was, if a street is busy, there won't be new
residential homes built along it. And we have seen case after
case of new investment along these streets. So even if the
existing structure is deteriorated, that's not to say that as the
whole neighborhood improves somebody won't build a new structure
on it. And I really don't think that argument holds water anymore
and I think the Planning Commission should revisit its thinking in
this way. And I also don't think the proximity of the cemetery is
a cause to assume that you won't have homes across the street.
For one thing, they won't throw wild parties. And it's a very
stable use, and I just -- the evidence that's been presented about
the origins of this neighborhood is impressive and I think it's
viable that single family homes can exist on this street.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I absolutely agree with you. When I was a
child, from time to time I delivered bread with my dad, for him,
in this neighborhood. It was a wonderful neighborhood, and then,
of course, as some neighborhoods go, deteriorates and now we see
it on the upswing. And you are absolutely right, that is not to
say we won't see some residential interest in doing something
there. I don't have access to my office computer but we have
people that -- I guess these streets are close to it, Alfred and
some other areas -- that those neighborhood residents are
completely committed to making this neighborhood better. So Della
curry often turns in code enforcements for this same neighborhood.
Doesn't appear this neighborhood is willing to let their
neighborhood deteriorate. Again I don't typically do this, Madam
Chairman. Mr. White thought we had this closed and I think he was
going towards a motion to deny and I would love to yield to him if
it's okay with my colleagues.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you. Anyway, I would like to restate
the motion, basically, for denial of the petition based on the
incompatibility statements that I made earlier.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say aye?
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open Item Number 5. All in favor
say aye?
>> Evening, council members, David hey, planning commission
staff. 0417 located at the northwest corner of south Packwood
Avenue and west Cleveland street 0.94 acres in size. The site is
predominantly vacant with a two-family house and a small parking
lot which serves the uses along Kennedy Boulevard to the north of
the site. As you can see on the existing future land use map,
there is urban mixed use 60 along Kennedy Boulevard and community
mixed use directly across Packwood Avenue to the east.
The site is currently residential 20 and that category
continues to the west. If approved the site will transition to
community mixed use 35 which will be compatible with the
surrounding uses established along Packwood Avenue thereof
planning commission recommended approval of the change to mixed
use 35 at their public hearing held on February 14th.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Steve Michelini: We are requesting CMU 35. This is
between Kennedy Boulevard and Cleveland street which is a high






traffic corridor. Also designated as high to moderate density
infill development to support the retail and commercial that is
supposed to be occurring in the renovation and rehabilitation
areas along the Kennedy Boulevard corridor. It's consistent with
your Kennedy Boulevard plan and long-range planning concepts for
this area to support things like light rail and also the commuters
within the commercial district to support the new residential as
well as the new retail and commercial establishments along that
corridor. Certainly I'm available to answer any questions you
might have. We've looked at this area for a long time. There nor
current residential uses in here. We have a lot of commercial and
commercial intensive uses and very few residential uses north of
the Cleveland area. Between Cleveland and Kennedy.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public wanting to speak on
Item Number 5?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
[Motion Carried.]
>> You require a supermajority in order to pass.
>>GWEN MILLER: Go get Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I did get districted T. Ultimate
proposed use for this is what?
>> Is residential.
SPEAKER 2: Multifamily residential?
>> There will be -- yes, single family attached,
semi-attached, a series of different designs in that area.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White? Would you read the ordinance
please? (Reading of the ordinance) 1807 west Cleveland street.
117 south Packwood Avenue, 105 south Packwood Avenue. Residential
20 to community mixed use 35. Providing for repeal and ordinances
of all conflicts, providing for severability, providing an
effective date.
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning commission staff?
>> The petitioner for this next agenda item wants to speak
to the City Council.
>> Blair Curlan, ^ law group, Westshore Boulevard. We
would like to request a continuance to get an opportunity to be
heard before the full board. And I do not believe there is anyone
in the audience --
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public to speak on
Item Number 6? Okay. How long do you need?
>> We would request to be on the March 31 St. Agenda.
>>THE CLERK: You have just scheduled one so far. Motion
made, seconded, carried, to be continued, 5:30.
>>GWEN MILLER: Open item 7?
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning commission staff?
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff. I think you all
are familiar with this area. The deciding question is just under
a third of an acre, .31 acres, does have a North Boulevard -- the
request is to change the land use from residential to SMU 6. It
is located in Riverside Heights neighborhood. The request for
approval of consideration for office residential use. This was
held at a public hearing on February 14, 2005, in front of the
planning commission. Upon receiving comment from public on this
request, the planning commission found this inconsistent with the
Tampa Comprehensive Plan and forwards this on to City Council.






>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Amy singer, address 3424 west Minnehaha, but the address
in question is 3622 north Boulevard. I feel like I am fighting
the uphill battle because I get to go second but part of the
concern of the board was that the area really isn't blighted but I
brought some pictures that actually shows some examples of what it
is -- some pictures that shows what it is in the neighborhood that
I believe the Planning Commission sees when they still recommended
consistency based upon the theories behind this mixed use 6
creating this buffer, because the area has decreased or
deteriorated over the years as a result of North Boulevard
becoming more of an arterial road between MLK and Kennedy.
I haven't seen the property and the pictures that one of the
community members presented that counsel member Ferlita was
relying upon to say that there were some nice ones in the area, or
recent sales. But I would submit that they probably aren't
actually North Boulevard addresses. Yes?
>>ROSE FERLITA: I don't think I alluded to that. I think
they were on the corner of each of those streets respectively with
Boulevard on the side.
>> Thank you. Our house does face North Boulevard and that
is significantly different. We have 230 feet of frontage on North
Boulevard and for that reason, it makes it that much much more
significant. As far as being able to put a for-sale sign in the
yard and sell it as residential, we tried. One thing at least in
my opinion we found is because it is on frontage, people don't
want to live there. I was raised in that house. When I got
pregnant we moved out. A car crashed into my neighbor's house.
Dog got run over. The house was broken into on three oh cases, my
car was broken into. There were at least two drive-by shootings
that I can recall and I didn't want to stay there. We found that
in trying to sell the house, when listing it, people don't want to
buy it unless they buy below property value because it is
frontage. That is my experience. That is why we have had
difficulty. We have been approached by a number of people who are
interested in putting a professional office there but don't want
to buy it because they don't want to go through this process. We
would like to sell it. The tax assessor's office last year
appraised this at 174,000 dollars. We couldn't sell it for 102!
And that's a problem. So I wanted to address that: Somebody had
brought up the idea of putting in a residential office as opposed
to a professional office and why couldn't we just do that? Why
couldn't I run an office out of my home sort of thing? But there
are criteria within the current comprehensive plan and zoning that
prohibit that because there is not at least 50 percent I believe
of the block in the neighborhood that's being utilized for similar
uses. Additionally I believe it is 25 percent or less of the home
has to be used for that purpose. And if you use more of the home
than that it's not a possible use of that home. As far as the
delivery trucks go, I get FedEx and UPS deliveries at my house all
the time. I mean mail order things, special delivery packages,
and that's going to happen whether you have an office or whether
you have a residence.
(Captioner break one minute.)
Staff recommended that there would be no impact or low
impact by allowing the use of a professional office such as this.
If I'm not mistaken the increase in population is plus 1. The
increase in nonresidential buildout is only 197 square feet and
the approval of the fire men's union application which was last
year, which is the construction located I believe at the corner of






Adelaide and North Boulevard actually has some statistics
regarding the traffic, average daily traffic volume at that time.
And it listed the volume at 12,886 vehicles per day. And adding
one additional person in proposed increased population I don't
think will increase the traffic substantially that that should
have an impact on the neighborhood. But other than that they have
spoken to no real impacts. As far as their concerns, I lived
there. Didn't like living there because of the noise, traffic and
crime. But even with the increase in values of the property there
is dedication to yes raising it up and making it better but I
think also because of approving these businesses. And yes it's
gone from MLK and Columbus in and now we are looking at that inner
portion of North Boulevard to be considered but I think that's a
major contributor as to why the neighborhood is being improved
because we are creating those buffers. I think the bottom line is
that although they have these legitimate concerns, without
something concrete they have no competent and substantial evidence
to support denial of this petition. I believe the standard upon
which the board has to base this decision is competent and
substantial evidence, which I would submit would be the staff's
report and review, they found consistency.
One of the other things is by allowing this special category
of mixed use 6, siphoning control. It is very specific that
whether the structure is knocked down or rebuilt or remodeled or
refaced it all has to be controlled via this council. You get the
final say so, you are the final arbiter of what goes in there.
For that reason the impact can be controlled, from drainage and
storm water to so did to egress, ingress, size of the building.
All those things, potential concerns that the community has, can
be dealt with when the council looks at the actual proposed
development and I think the land use category actually
specifically spells that out. By allowing only low intensity
uses.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What are the total dimensions?
>> My recollection 230 by 135, 150, something in that
ballpark. 230 is the frontage.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And it looks like medical relatively
modest size house.
>> 2000 -- no, 130 I'm sorry by 105. 130 is the North
Boulevard frontage.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Have you been approached by anybody
who's talked about multifamily on that parcel?
>> No, I have no.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So your focus is strictly the RO?
>> At this point the professional office. We have had a
couple of attorneys. People who live in the neighborhood who see
the opportunity to put an office close to home so they don't have
a commute. At least two that I recall and I wasn't involved in
the sales, so --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where is your driveway?
>> It's on North Boulevard.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that wants to
speak against Item Number 7 please come up and speak if you want
to speak.
>>GWEN MILLER: Before you start, if we have the same
people, is it going to be the same testimony as you did for the
past one.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Please give the abbreviated version.
>> Tracy Torreville: 708 West Ohio. First of all, I want
to mention, yes, this is a larger lot. I have the records and






assessed value. 2004 the value was 146, which varies differently
from what she brought up. I will give it to you, it has the
dimensions.
>> And I live on the same street as the house that's facing
North Boulevard. If this is proposed and they decide to turn that
into some type of a business, I will be looking at it through the
privacy of my bedroom window. As far as animals and other things
that happen on that corner, North Boulevard, yes, there was a
house next door to her where the accident did run into those
people's homes. But those people have lived there since probably
30 years or more, and they are still remaining there. The problem
is, on the corner of Indiana and North Boulevard, there is like a
small indention on the roadway where cars will come across and
vision is blocked because of palm trees and therefore when vision
is blocked it's easier for accidents to happen. The end of the
cemetery is directly across from her so it's a little jag there.
I would like to have the privacy of my home. I don't want to look
at a parking lot. I don't want to look at businesses there. The
possibility of maybe putting a couple of houses on there? I don't
know. They would still have to be able to face North Boulevard,
not necessarily Ohio at this point.
We just want our neighborhood. That's basically it. We
just don't want businesses there. So that's really, you know, we
can't control something when somebody silts. And I personally
don't want to keep coming down here having to change things
because somebody brought the property because somebody else
brought the property and there's a business involved in going
across this. So thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next?
>> Gene Biddle, 70 West Ohio. You asked me to make it
brief. My biggest concern, you have a picture of that property.
The driveway is from that wall, there's the garage. That's their
only way in and out. You got to back out onto North Boulevard.
How they going to bring any -- if he's a lawyer, how is he going
to have his client come there? There is only room for one car in
the driveway or one in the garage. They will have to park in the
grass or build a driveway in the back of the house to go out on
Ohio. They will have to. You can't get anybody on the property
with the driveway the way it is: I have lived there 40 years in
that neighborhood. If you get two clients in there they will have
to park around the corner of Ohio against the corner. They will
have to bust open the curb and go out the back of the property and
out Ohio I guess. I don't know how they are planning on doing
that. Like my wife said they will see that from our bedroom
window and they will have to put concrete to park their own car,
the people that work there. I told you I would make it brief and
that's a big concern. It's a safety thing.
>> Linda Valdez Rodriguez. As I told you before I live at
704 west Ohio. I have known this family for some time, and the
gentleman here bought it from the original owner, and -- but my
concern is, it's hard to go against what others, you know, when
you know -- when you have known somebody, but my concern is, like
the rest of them, that house would be a nice home for a family.
It was up for sale. I had a family member call about the house at
one time, and it was told that they were looking for commercial
buyer at one time. Okay? So I believe as you suggested that
maybe it could be maybe two houses put there if you could say.
And so I would like to see it remain residential area and that
home be, to stay the way it is, for safety reasons as well as it's
just not a good place to have a business. Thank you.






>> My name is Joyce Rumfeld, 805 quest Woodlawn. I am
really against this one because it's a larger piece of land, a
larger building can go on there, and it will -- there will be more
activity. These aren't parks they're putting in. They're putting
in commercial property. That's why we're here. That's why we go
through this process, because we know that it does change the
dynamic of a residential community that is charming with brick
streets. This whole stretch it is residential. We've seen
property for sale and it sells in a week. We've seen properties
that have made a lot of money. I don't think it's a matter of
this property on North Boulevard selling. I think it's a matter
of how much money they want to make. And I don't say they don't
have a right to make money, but I do say with the property value
increasing they could sell that and make a lot of money still.
One thing that has gone on down this stretch close to Columbus
which we know is bad, and Martin Luther King, which we know is a
bad neighborhood, there are two offices that are for sale down
there, two of three of the rezoned offices. This picture Tracy
took actually shows for-sale signs, and I regret that I didn't
take pictures of them but it's commercial use for sale. So let
them go there. The other thing I find is when you have
professional offers there, people are there during the day. They
aren't there at night. And you know what happens? Drug deals go
on in parking lots. They're vacant properties at night and they
attract people hanging out filtering up, whatever, filtering down.
This stretch is nice, and it's next to a cemetery, and the
cemetery is as quiet as ever, subsequent on Halloween -- except on
Halloween. But I fear if we take that one big lot and say, okay,
we're going to let them do what they want there, which basically,
we are, we aren't saying tonight, your driveway has to face North
Boulevard, that will come up during the site plan review. Right
now, all we're saying is that can be a professional use office,
and it would just be a shame to make it that. It's a huge lot.
It could be a large building. It could be a lot of things right
smack in the middle of this area and nobody wants it there. You
know? It's like some of the offices aren't bad-looking, but some
of them, they're really not doing much. And some of the offices
are for sale now. So come on, if at one point in time, people
weren't buying property in this neighborhood. Maybe then was the
time to make these professional offices when people weren't buying
property in the neighborhood. People are sucking up the property
in this neighborhood like you wouldn't believe. The development
north of the river, north of Blake high school, is all going to be
upscale. People want this property, and they don't can care if
they have to live on North Boulevard the way they don't care if
they live on Westshore. Thanks a lot.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, you want rebuttal?
>> Madam chair, you had invited people to speak if they wish
to speak in opposition, just for the sake of allowing people if
they wish to speak in favor.
>>GWEN MILLER: I asked people if they wished to speak and
nobody has come up. That was it.
>> As far as the property assessment issue goes, it was
assessed at 174,000 dollars. It has since been changed and I want
to make sure you-all were aware of that that that was an issue. I
didn't want to tarnish my credibility. I have a copy of the tax
bill. It has since been changed. The second was concerns about
the driveway and the parking. It currently is a residential
driveway. It has been used as a circle driveway because there is
a designated alley between that house and the house to the north






of it so you pull into the alley and circle around in front of the
house. I don't know that that's relevant because the end result
is when that site is developed as a professional office those
alleys can be designated as far as where the egress and ingress
will be. Approximately 40 feet of land between the house and the
property line that could be serve as a drive to parking on the
side of the house or behind the house. But again, we are not at
the stage yet where we are talking about specific site development
and counsel would council would have the opportunity to be the
final arbiter on those issues. The one thing that hasn't been
mentioned is that currently, the way that it is zoned, a larger
building could go there. A larger structure could go there, more
driveway could go there. And those things are always a
possibility, so to say now that somebody is going to come in and
put in some huge office building, that is not going to happen. It
is going to be something that is compatible with the residential
look that is in that neighborhood. That is part of the policy and
procedure that is part of this actual category and part of
something that would be considered by the zoning committee and the
site plan development committee when it came to that point.
Somebody made a comment about if we were talking about a park,
nobody would be here in opposition but trucks have traffic too,
they have -- because they are public locations versus private
offices where you have a minimum of traffic coming in and out.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Actually dog barks.
>> Again I would reiterate based on the evidence that was
presented in the staff reports for the planning commission, the
use that we're seeking or the amendment that we're seeking to
change this to mixed use 6 is consistent with the plan. The
category exists to create that buffer. I submit that there is
still a problem. There is still lots of traffic. There is still
a need to continue that, and the property values have increased
because of that. And because it is consistent with the policies,
procedures, the theories and philosophies behind the existence of
this category, and because it would have a very low density and
low impact on this neighborhood, staff recommended that it be
approved. There's been no competent substantial evidence
submitted to the contrary. Unfortunately, only emotional plea
with his this board that it be denied. And without something
competent and substantial to statistically refute those findings,
I would request that the board approve our petition and grant the
amendment.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have any questions from council members?
Move to close.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The petitioner was very articulate, but
I would move to deny based on incompatibility. It was stated in
this hearing that the majority of the issues -- all the
surrounding land uses to this are single-family residential uses.
There is no nonresidential use for two blocks to the north and I
think three blocks to the south. The introduction of a
nonresidential use at this location would be a significant change
in the existing land use patterns. And therefore, I believe that
we have enough testimony to support this motion for denial.
>> Second with discussion?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Saul-Sena, I wholeheartedly support
your motion and I think there's a couple things we need to put on
the record. First of all, you are right, the petitioner was very
articulate and gave us good reasons but not substantial enough to
make me realize I should support this. Some things in terms of
likelihood of businesses, deliveries of federal experiential I






think probably more businesses will have deliveries as opposed to
residences. She alluded to some unfounded fears versus valid
concerns and I think the points Ms. Saul-Sena made are very valid.
I think neighborhoods will always come to us in terms of their
emotional pleas and that's with what everybody does for their own
neighborhoods much that's fine. We appreciate that but we never
use that as the basis to deny something or approve it so based on
the compatibility, land use criteria that Ms. Saul-Sena referred
to I am in whole support of denying this petition as well.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: These two have been really tough.
Because they have been good arguments on both sides. But I think
the most excelling evidence against both of these unfortunately
was the drawing that this petitioner put up that shows seven
blocks -- it's kind of a doughnut hole. You know? But it shows
seven blocks that I can see from here that haven't, as somebody on
the Planning Commission staff said, haven't hit the tipping point
yet. And right now -- you showed it yourself, ma'am0. It's all
red. It's all red. You have the blue on the top and blue on the
bottom but they are still holding out in trying to preserve that
red area in between. And I think we have to honor that. There
are a few policies that the planning commission staff have
attached -- B 21, B 21 a and B 26 that talk about protecting
neighborhoods and recognizing the important of stable
neighborhoods to the economic and social health of our city,
recognizing that established neighborhoods shall be protected by
restricting incompatible land uses. And I will say, Linda, in
response to what you sus said in south Tampa, in my district, if
you go up and down Azeele and Euclid and El Prado and Westshore
and Bay to Bay and MacDill you find a lot of these residential
uses. I think some are illegal. But the reality is most of the
uses on the arterials in my neighborhood have already turned and
are doctors, lawyers, process servers, what have you. (Arterials)
I think it can be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. I
live three blocks off MacDill. In our house we transition with a
dry cleaner and restaurant and a multifamily that happens to be
owned by Ms. Saul-Sena and come down to my house which is single
family detached. It can work in certain neighborhoods. In this
neighborhood it is a strong sentiment that it is incompatible and
inconsistent with the current condition. I think it is not my
neighborhood but I will respect the fact that it is their
neighborhood and I will support the motion that Ms. Ferlita
seconded.
[Motion Carried] carried. Petition denied.
>>GWEN MILLER: We open the public hearing on Number 8.
>> Steve Michelini: Some planning commissioners said we
should do more work with the neighborhood association. We have
done that, been in touch with the neighborhood association. And
we respectfully request that this be continued.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public wish to speak on Item
Number 8? You want to speak on 8? Please come up. On the
continuance. Do you agree for the continuance?
>> Yes. I haven't been sworn.
>>GWEN MILLER: You don't need to be sworn.
>> Okay. I am Karen Crawford, 1406 South Moody Avenue. I
am here on behalf of Bayshore Gardens neighborhood association.
We reviewed the planning commission's report and agreed with it
and did oppose the land use change at the planning commission
hearing. That will be our position tonight, in 30 day, 60 days,
in however long it takes. And I just want to question, you know,
really, what will change with a continuance? You have a 21-page






report from the planning commission that tells you this is
inconsistent with the Tampa Comprehensive Plan. Secondly, these
five single family lots lie in Palma Ceia and you yourself have
requested the planning commission look at this area and consider
some lowering of the land uses because of the problems with the
densities and the townhouse development. So it appears to me that
if you are at all inclined to deny this request for an increase in
density, which is totally inappropriate in this area, I mean all
the lots in the block are single family homes, I just would say
that there's really no need to continue this and put the
neighborhood through this. Now, I know Palma Ceia has got the
whole neighborhood that will come out and speak to this. But I am
just questioning why we need to go through that. I mean the
petitioner set it for a hearing tonight. I feel like you do, if
they set for it a petition, they should be ready. On a land use
change you are not going to look at site plans or elevations, they
are irrelevant to this process so I would request you to deny this
petition tonight. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> My name is Jeff Patterson and I have a home that is
immediately contiguous to this property. I am here as a matter of
fact because I am an awkward position because we agreed my wife
would be the family spokesperson for all public hearings.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are afraid of public speaking.
>> Yes, it is without my purview. I am a homeowner but
because of my business and my job, my employers requested that I
try to stay out of this kind of forum to speak. However --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sir I will interrupt you if I K. I want
to speak on the issue of continuance (the.
>> The reason I was here is there was an e-mail circulated
from the petitioner saying it's not important to show up tonight
because you know we are going to work it out, we are going to talk
to you, we're going to do some things to try to come up with
something. So there are a number of people opposed to this who
are living on my block, my neighborhood, who are very opposed to
this who did not show up tonight because of this e-mail and
because of the talk that wept through the neighborhood, because of
this e-mail that said, hey, we will fight it on another night.
But precisely because of what happened on agenda item 4 I am here
tonight and several of my neighbors and people from my
neighborhood association are here tonight. We are prepared to
speak against this agenda item. But we don't have -- at least I
don't have the visuals that I would have, the photos that I would
have, the maps that I would have. But we are prepared to speak
against this. And we would prefer as the previous speaker said,
if your inclination is to vote against this, we would prefer to
vote and get this out of the way because this has been tried on
this specific property to do the exact same thing a number of
years before and we don't want to have to keep putting ourselves
out to come before you to oppose these things that's why we would
like to do it tonight.
>> Immediately following the hearing we made a commitment to
the neighborhood association and planning commissioners. It was a
close vote from their side and they asked us to commit to meeting
with the neighbors. We met with them impromptu immediately
following the meeting. They wanted to have a meeting. They said
yeah, let's talk about some issues. So we didn't dry E bring any
documentation, any presentation, as they didn't, because I told
them we weren't going to be presenting any case this evening and
hopefully that would be a continuance so we could continue to try






to find out what the issues were. I don't want to go too much
into the record but there are apartments and multifamily dwellings
close by. We weren't trying to sand-bag them and say why weren't
we going to put a presentation on. I sent them an e-mail
confirming that I was not going to be putting a presentation on,
at the same time requesting a continuance from the clerk.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Michelini, tonight there are two
neighborhood representatives here. You understand if we continue
this, there could be 50 neighborhood representatives here.
>> I understand there are no guarantees about anything. I
understand they have concerns. We asked for an opportunity to
talk with them one on one to figure out what their concerns were.
If we can meet them, we can. If we can't, we can't.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would suggest if we continue this
tonight, give and you chance to meet with the neighborhood. If
you can't meet with their concerns, just withdraw. That's just my
idea.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any other council members?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You know, what's good for the goose is
good for the garden. This is exactly what I am talking about.
There is no difference between what I am hearing in this argument.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I am happy to hear it tonight.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: This argument for continuance -- let me
finish -- I mean, I don't see any difference. That gentleman
asked for a continuance, everybody says no, you are scheduled, go
forward. That so forth thing. And you've got neighborhoods here
who said they are ready to argue against it, to go forward. And I
just think we need to be consistent procedurally and it has
nothing to do with you and this petition or anything else. But --
>> I understand. The difference is we were in touch with
them immediately, and there's been dialog with them from the very
first evening after the planning commission here about this very
issue of not continuing, and this issue not being heard. So it
wasn't as if the message wasn't out there. We never planned to
put on a presentation this evening. We told them that. We made a
commitment to that. We didn't bring in any of the drawings. We
brought in none of the drawings that we presented at the Planning
Commission hearing, which we normally would have done. And they
said they didn't bring theirs in either. So I mean, if they're
going to have an opportunity to present their case, we need an
opportunity too. All we are going to does argue about what the
report says or doesn't say, or my memory versus their memory.
>> Ms. Crawford made a good point though this is a amendment
about raw land, not PDs, not about drawings, not about promises.
Because between the plan amendment and the rezoning, you can do
anything and change your mind and do 100 different things, you
know, in terms of what you ultimately might want to do for the pro
so I guess I'm a little confused in that regard.
>> Well, there was dialog with the neighborhood association.
The dialogue we had with them was they didn't object to a
continuance.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There are three neighborhood
associations I don't know which one you are talking B. the staff
report says it is virtually adjacent to -- and you probably had to
notice three neighborhood associations, Bayshore beautiful, Palma
Ceia and Bayshore Gardens.
>> All the say, there wasn't a distinct difference. I
didn't come in here and suddenly ask for a continuance. It
Hillsborough anticipated in the plan for some time. It wasn't a
surprise to anyone. The testimony they gave you was they came






down to make sure I was going to come up and ask for the
continuance.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Michelini, I would have less of a
concern with this and the direction you are going in if some of
those neighborhood residents were here simply to say that they had
communicated with you and the people that you represent and were
planning for it to go forward. Although they're not as many
people here for this one as there were for the other two. The
same argument can be made. Mr. Patterson and the other
individuals that came up and spoke --
>> I wasn't trying to lull them into complacency.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Oh, no, not at all. Although it seems like
it was an agreement that was okay with both sides. Not
sarcastically but earlier on that other petition, when someone
wanted to continue it I said it is like coming to an exam without
studying it. You are anticipating you will have a continuance but
in fairness -- and maybe you have good reasons to continue it and
some of the residents in the surrounding area seem to think that
you-all can come up with something. But we have been put in a
predicament that we can't make different rules for different
petitioners. So as much as I remember Mr. Patterson being here
and there was discussion about this same parcel. I don't know
what to tell you except I can't change my position based on the
same type of cry tear I can't remembering and not support a
continuance for one and support for it another. So -- I move to
open the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
[Motion Carried.]
>> Rose Patricia planning commission staff. The plan
amendment site is located in the vicinity of Mississippi, Georgia,
and Carolina in the Palma Ceia area. Site is approximately 20.8
-- the printing company has been in operation in this community
for over 25 years. A change in the use from the current
commercial light industrial operations to a residential
development is being considered by the current property owners.
The intent of the requested petition is to designate the parcel
north of Mississippi with a residential 20 future land use plan
classification to serve as a transition from the higher plan
classifications of residential 35 designated south and east of the
subject site. The intent of the petitioners is to redevelop the
total land area, which is currently occupied by the printing
company operations. The total development of that land area is
for residential purposes with the possibility of developing town
homes with where the current parking lot lies. The current
conditions, there is an apartment complex to the east, printing
company is to the south which this is going to be going away for
future residential development. What we did was, we looked at
this neighborhood in this area. What is compelling in this area
is that the block face in this city block right here, bounded by
Carolina, Mississippi, Neptune, and Georgia, of these 12 single
family homes that are on the city block, eight of these lots have
been built with family homes in the last 15 years. So this area
is a desirable area for single family development. The other
factor we took into consideration in this particular area is that
these road systems right in here are very narrow.
Many of these areas, many of these road systems are only
about 30 feet or 40 feet platted widths. They are very small,
narrow road systems. I will show you some of the homes that were
built on this city block in the last 15 years.
>> Before you go, on Carolina, and I do note that your






photograph of Carolina shows a rather narrow little unimproved
road, but on Carolina above and to the north of this property, are
these homes facing Carolina? Do they drive in and out of
Carolina?
>> That is correct. All of these homes that have been built
on Carolina -- these homes are built on Carolina. They access
Carolina. They go down that narrow road.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So transportation has allowed them?
>> It's a one-way system. Single family development,
one-way system in that area. Cars drive north on Carolina and
then exit on Neptune. What was amazing in this particular block
area is this area Hillsborough vacant for probably 80 years and
it's only in the last fifteen years that a number of homes have
been built in this area.
>> I think there are a few older homes that got knocked do
you understand and replaced with single family.
>> I think in the area on Neptune street, there was a home
torn down and three homes built in that area. Okay. These are
bungalows right on Georgia, some built in the 30, some built in
the 40s, and some houses built in the '60s. I think that is giving
you enough of the character of the area. Okay. Based on the
compatibility and the policies of the plan talking about the
protection of single family areas, the trend toward single family
development being continued in this area north of Mississippi, the
plan commission found the requested amendment to residential 20
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. That concludes my
presentation.
>> One other quick question. If you put up that only
colored map that shows the lots -- lots -- if you went back to
the natural progression of, I think they look like 50-foot lots --
are they 50?
>> 50 by 100.
>> If you went to the natural progression and brought this
out, it appears to me you would have two lots facing Georgia, and
three lots, single family lots facing Carolina.
>> Correct.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the side of the two that are on
Mississippi, one on Carolina, one on Georgia, would you have sort
of a trafficy situation on the side of those two. But there's
other single family homes up and down Mississippi that do have
their side on Mississippi?
>> Correct.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And where would they be?
>> This lot here faces Georgia. This is one particular one
that would be kind of opposite this walk here.
>> And they have a six-foot fence sort of buffering the side
of Mississippi, I think?
>> Let me see. I think I have a photograph of that one.
That is that one here.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right. And point to the Mississippi
side.
>> Mississippi would be right here.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: All right. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> The property involved is currently a commercial parking
lot. What was being proposed on Carolina was that the first lot
was being proposed as a single family residential structure --
here. And the second thing that was being proposed was an access
driveway for rear access garages that would have faced
Mississippi. Obviously, the South Carolina Avenue is a one-way






street. It goes right next to a very intensive apartment building
here, Hillsborough Printing office here, and if you go down the
street on Mississippi, these are duplexes and various multifamily
uses all the way around here. There was another apartment
building down there. One thing that has been happening near the
railroad traction has been townhouse style developments to buffer
the family residential that occurs immediately behind them. The
case in point is Watrous and I don't know what that north-south
is -- I think that's Armenia? Just behind Maria's detail shop and
the Cicio and Tony's restaurant, just a little bit south of them.
So there are a number of uses that end up buffering these types of
single family residential structures.
Q. How many multifamily were you proposing?
>> Seven.
>> Seven plus this one single family?
>> There were eight total.
>> Thank you.
>> And those would have faced Mississippi, and the -- I
think the zoning on Hillsborough is CIO?
>> (Inaudible.
>> On the Hillsborough Printing, 24? Nonconforming. It's a
nonconforming commercial parcel that's currently zoned RM-24.
Anyway, the elevated highway with the Crosstown and the railroad
tracks, those create ideal buffers for any neighborhood to the
east, including the apartment buildings that are there already.
In terms of going to the west, you have a couple of small single
family residences I show you a picture of and immediately
following are a number of townhouses, duplexes and other
multifamily types of uses. Anyway, we weren't trying to introduce
a new development concept into the area. We thought that by
putting a single family house immediately adjacent to a single
family house that, would create the same kind of development
pattern that exists and the others on Mississippi would help to
buffer the other houses that lie to the north of that. The houses
south will probably undergo some type of redevelopment, more
likely heavy, intensive, 24 units to the acre development.
I wasn't prepared any more than that. Obviously we had an
agreement. I thought that everyone else agreed to that too. And
they are going to speak to that. Apparently they are going to say
yeah, we remember that, we are not going to present something. If
I had come to you and present the a case after I told them that I
wasn't going to present a case, I would have been -- you would
throw me out of here. I made a commitment to them and I stood by
that commitment. I'm just sorry that they don't -- well, perhaps
they will get up and tell you the same thing. Anyway, we
appreciate your good consideration.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public that would like to
speak to Item Number 8?
>> My name is Jeff Patterson, again, and I live adjacent to
this property. My professional address is 200 south Parker
street. The only agreement I had that we had an understanding was
that we had an initial meeting after the planning commission
meeting and we talked about this but both sides were intransigent.
People have been opposed to any change in the zoning here. We
don't want to go to R from R 10 to R 20. We don't see a need for
this. The tale of this is in the map, exactly as was in the other
case, it was all red and single family uses. Here on think it is
all single family uses except for these apartments and that issue
has come before this council before because there was a property
owner who has purchased this property and seeks to tear down those






apartments and build a nice condominium complex. It is in the
works to do that. That is acceptable to us. We have been talking
to him.
After we worked out several things on that particular
property usage, we would rather see town homes on that particular
property than the current dilapidated apartment complex that is
there. In terms of the parking lot we are not accepting, we are
not prepared to accept, a multifamily usage. The reason being
that even though it is a business parking lot right now, it is a
fairly benign usage of a parking lot. Occasionally I have chased
off teenagers that have wanted to park there. On another occasion
I chased off someone trying to consummate a deal with a prostitute
there. There are business people gone by 5 p.m. in the evening,
gone by the time I come home from work, not there on sat or Sunday
so we are not affected very much by the fact it is a business
parking lot. However the trend in the neighborhood as you might
know is for single family homes and you can see that from this
map. It is all new suburb beautiful here on this map, you know,
our street here, it's all development here, this home on the
corner of Georgia and Neptune recently sold for 770,000 dollars.
The petitioner told me he had concerns that he couldn't develop
this parcel of property for single family homes because it was
contiguous to this feeder that goes from Howard to Mississippi to
Estrella over to MacDill and he didn't think he could make that
into single family homes and I'm not just buying that argument. I
believe you can make nice single family homes there, and you can
make a really good profit on a real estate investment by doing so
and that's been proven by all the development on South Carolina
and along Neptune. Petitioner, my concern was here on South
Carolina because it is incredibly narrow street as Mr.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Pointed out he didn't even know cars
could go up and down there. And the petitioner said we will widen
it. That's not what I want. That's not why I moved there. As a
matter of fact, one of the reasons I moved there is even though
it's a one-way street up to Neptune and you turn left, it's almost
like living on a cul-de-sac. There's virtually no traffic on that
street. You know, dominoes can't find us. One time when I had to
call the police department they couldn't find us on South
Carolina. It's not often people go there. You either live there
or you are lost. So I played the point to the petitioner even as
it was you wouldn't be able to take a U-Haul truck in there, he
said we will widen it. We just want to develop it for family
homes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: In your specific block in the 8 or 9
homes that Ms. Patricia pointed out, if you could point to that
block?
>> Yes, well, there's a nice home there. (Laughter).
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't want to put you on the spot
about any particular home, but go back to the map. I'm going to
guess. You mentioned 7870,000 for that corner house.
>> Right. (770,000.
>> I will guess, what is the vacant lot value in your
estimation for tear-down?
>> This lot right here, Mr. Dingfelder, when I first moved
in, it was part of this parcel back here. They subdivided it and
the lot sold for 35,000 dollars. Three years later the lot,
unimproved, nothing on it, sold for 75,000 dollars, and I believe
the home on it now is in excess of 400 to 450.
>> In my neighborhood which is about five, six blocks away,
the lots are now approaching, I think almost 200,000 for the empty






lots, 05 by 100, and I am going to guess that is where close tore
where we are now. I think you are 150.
>> Sir, if I had to move out tomorrow I could not afford to
move back in the next day.
>> The homes on your block are about 400,000?
>> Yes, sir.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Point on there where your house is, would
you?
>> He doesn't want do that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I'm sorry. I am so sorry.
>> I was up in Citrus County for a week on the disappearing
child thing.
>> Thank you. That's why we agree with your wife.
>> Hi, any name is Annie Ellis, 1612 south Arawanna Avenue.
>> Can you point to it on that map?
>> I can point to the vicinity. I don't mind, actually, I
really don't. But I did want to use your map to show a few
things. There were some things that were alluded to in the
planning commission meeting that one of these areas over here it
was a double lot and I was split in half and what recently
happened is there has been a proposed home. It's two houses in
from Mississippi. There is one house here and this is the lot
that that this house is proposed on. It is going to be valued at
600,000 dollars. It has a porte cachere and detached garage in
the back. Two story and porch in the front. So this is a house
that will be new construction, not even built yet, proposed, for
this second lot in on Mississippi and it will be facing Georgia,
as in all the house that is they go down the line. Everything
faces. And over here on ara wanna, you can see, we all face the
street. Everything is all facing in. So it would be totally
inappropriate to have a face of the buildings facing out to
Mississippi with the drive in the back. That would create the
drive -- really, completely adjacent to the homes back there.
Now, yes, there are some duplexes over here in this arbitration
however, they have been there for a real long -- area, they have
been there for a long time. If you kept going, that would turn
into Estrella. There are some apartments down there but there are
also five, I believe, new homes that have been built in the last
few years and they are beautiful, they are all very expensive. I
couldn't give you the numbers on it. But they are all very
expensive. We have another two homes on Habana which is right
over here, and there is another housing construction down the
street here on ara wanna, north ara wanna. All the houses on my
street on Arawanna are all original houses and they have all been
almost beautifully restored. It is a very tight knit
neighborhood. Also, just to touch on this, there are several oak
trees on that existing property which is the parking lot. Kind of
a pervious system there because it's been there so long but I
would venture to say about five large oak trees on that property.
I don't know what they would have to do if they put on town homes
but I would suggest they would have to take some of those down. I
would suggest this is not on the periphery. This is the interior.
The periphery would be where that railroad track is on the
Crosstown. This was alluded to that this is only 75 feet from
here to here? And it is 259 feet 11 inches. I rolled my roller
on it. And it is not the -- it is the periphery, excuse me. This
is the area that would be the buffer. This is the area where
those apartments that are coming down would be a beautiful
townhouse. We have been working with the developer on this
property here on Estrella and that is going under construction in






a couple months. These are the peripheries and that's what we
expect. But the things we don't accept are the areas that are
interior that are changing the continuity of our neighborhood. So
we ask that you look at this and thank you very much for your
time. I really wasn't very prepared but I think I did a pretty
good job. (Laughter).
>> Good evening, Laurie Jennis, 2234 Barcelona street. I am
here as president of Palma Ceia neighborhood association. As I
did before the planning commission, I am representing the entire
neighborhood association. We had several discussions on this
topic and it was unanimous across our community, we oppose any
changes, especially increased density from R-10 to R-20 in this
case. In our neighborhood. As you know we are asking the
Hillsborough Planning Commission to study our neighborhood and do
just the opposite so in this particular case we are unified,
opposed to it.
Contrary to what was said, I spoke to Mr. Michelini and the
developers and we told them in no uncertain terms that we were
opposed to this petition. What we did offer, because they were
chastised in front of the planning commission for not coming to
us -- there were several residents that were most affected by this
petition there at that time, and they expressed their
disappointment in opposition to this petition. So we have
extended the olive branch to them, in the case that they are going
to be developing the Hillsborough Printing property, we know that.
It will be a high-density involvement. We hope that we can work
with them in a high-density situation like we did for the other
development, shroud, and our goal is to work with the developer.
In this particular case we were hoping they would come with single
family homes and we wouldn't have a problem. We were also hoping
to see the plans which we still have not seen for the Hillsborough
Printing property. It will be a pretty big change to our
community. Estrella and Mississippi are very narrow streets,
highly traveled because they are one of two arteries between
MacDill and Howard. So it could increase traffic problems in the
area tremendously. At the planning commission some of the
neighbors represented said there was trouble with storm water
runoff and storm water flow. There are issues with traffic and
parking and public parking, and residences. So in all, in
summary, the neighborhood opposes this recommendation. We agree
with the planning commission's recommendation and the
recommendation with the board on February 14th. This is not good
planning for a neighborhood. It is not consistent with the goals.
I is not consistent with the Tampa comprehensive use plan for our
neighborhood and it would not be a good thing for the
neighborhood. So please take it into consideration. Would he
appreciate your time this evening.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, petitioner? We have one more.
One more. Jewel can you see my face? My name is Vicki palia, I
am president of Bayshore garden neighborhood association which
starts right at the Crosstown expressway. We weren't officially
notified of this or included in this process at all. Karen
Crawford did Andy T attend the meeting and participated because we
were very concerned as this and any development that occurs on
Mississippi is going to have a dramatic impact on our
neighborhood. We didn't meet with petitioner before the planning
commission, we haven't heard anything since the planning
commission meeting, and we support what the planning commission
said. The value of single family homes in our neighborhood is
something that we really care about. We're working in our






neighborhood also in different ways with Palma Ceia in preserving
the character. Because of the crosstown suppress way this is a
very narrow road. You increase density on this road there is
nowhere to go except underneath the Crosstown and on this 30-foot
road that does not have sidewalks for pedestrians. So anything,
any increase in any density is doubling the impact of pedestrians,
on sewer, on the infrastructure, and on our neighborhood. We
can't change the zoning on the south side of the street. There
was some confusion at the planning commission in the discussion.
That's going to be a high-density development, and we hopefully
will work together on that to make it the best development. But
this development on the north side of the street is zoned for
citizening family homes and I ask you to help us save that
character.
Q. I think you have heard from everyone about how that
is incompatible with single-family houses. We obviously think
that lots face Mississippi are not necessarily compatible.
You haven't had new sending family residential built on
Mississippi. Have you had convergence of single family on the
corner. We weren't asking to put a town next to
Mr. Patterson. We had a single family house that faced
Carolina. It's a one-way street. I mean your design, at
least your preferences, seemed to be on other developments to
have rear access developments, whether they're -- if it's a
house it's a rear access garage or a townhouse or whatever it
is. We were proposing very upscale townhouses here. These
were not going to be 2 or 300,000 dollars. These are 200,
300, 400, 500, 600,000 dollar town homes. There was a
reference made to new suburb beautiful. Town homes that back
up to the railroad traction. Another is right across the
street from them. You S have multifamily on both sides of
here, north and south, east and west from here. You have
apartments, variety of things. If we are going to match
dollar for dollar regarding the value, a townhouse probably in
this area is no less expensive than a single family house.
They are keeping track. In terms of storm water, we have to
meet all the storm water codes, we have to put in sidewalks.
We asked transportation, does it meet the per transportation
guidelines, meet the technical standards? It does. Were we
going to increase traffic? No, there were 7 additional trips
per day. We ran it by the transportation department, there
was no objection. There were no objection to any technical
standards that you have from any city department. None. The
issue was, is this neighborhood -- is this in the periphery or
is this central to a neighborhood? And my contention is that
it's on the periphery, it's immediately adjacent to -- on the
periphery, immediately adjacent to limited access high, a
railroad track, and a cross-street that runs east and west and
in terms of adding additional density and traffic impact to
the neighborhood, there were 7 trips additional impact to the
area versus 5 single family homes. Again, I think there's a
fairness issue here. We talked about a continuance, they
agreed to a continuance, they told us they were going to agree
to a continuance, they wanted to makes sure I was going to
come in and request a continuance. I think it is a bad
precedent to allow someone to do that. I just won't do that
again. When I make a commitment to somebody and we did make a
commitment, we had an understanding, they came up and said,
oh, we were going to tell you that we had that agreement. But
they sat down and didn't tell you that. They told exactly the






opposite. I am here telling you we had that discussion, we
agreed to the continuance, I did send out the e-mail I
respectfully request your consideration.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close the
public hearing.
[Motion Carried.]
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Michelini, I am not going to get
into that continuance issues does sound confusing but it does
sound like there were going to be something more to be presented
because it is not a --
I will move to deny this. The bottom line on this and I
won't belabor this. The planning commission staff recommended
denial. The planning commission in a very unusual move
recommended denial, admittedly a close vote but still they
recommended denial. And the Planning Commission staff, by the
way, included numerous provisions to indicate that this proposed
comprehensive plan change was inconsistent and incompatible with
our existing plan including policies B 21a B 26, B 23, objective D
3, et cetera. Mostly related to neighborhood protection and the
like. What I can see, Mr. Michelini, with all due respect to you
and your -- especially with all due respect to your clients, is
that they want to build eight units including 7 multifamily unit
and one single family units. If we say each one sells for 500,000
dollars, then they get to build 4 million dollars worth of
residential houses. If it was limited to 5 units, which it would
be under the zoning right now, that is 2-1/2 million dollars.
Okay? I think this is what this is all about. It is an
additional million-and-a-half dollars or more, potential on this
land. It doesn't have to do with the building of single-family
houses on this side of Mississippi, because once you put up that
wall will be able to sell single-family houses on this side of
Mississippi, you are going to put up a 6-foot Cypress fence like
everybody else, and they will sell for 500,000 dollars or more.
You can guarantee it. So there is no competent substantial
evidence to support this. There is plenty of it to deny. And I
move to deny.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. All in favor
say aye? Opposed nay.
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: We will now take a recess for five minutes.
(Recess)
[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is now called back to
order. Roll call? Ms. Kathy Coyle, would you please call up?
>> Katherine Coyle, land development. I do have a couple
continuances I am aware of. Item Number 12, east Davis Boulevard.
They are requesting to continue. They have site plan issues. The
next available date would be May 9 to meet your public procedure.
All in favor of the motion say aye?
[Motion Carried.] None in the audience who is objecting to
the 12th. Continue to June 9. 6:00.
>> The second one I'm aware of the petitioner just let me
know is Number 15, file VO 513 the 80 percent rule at 413 - 413
1/2 South Paloma. The next available date would be June 9.
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone here in the audience on Item Number
15?
>> John Grandoff on behalf of the petitioner.
>>GWEN MILLER: You want to speak about why you do not want
us to continue Item Number 15, why you do not want us to continue?






>> Joe Williams, 2521 west Swann, here for the Homeowners
Association. They just continue to push it back and we feel we
are here, prepared to talk on the petition. We have been sitting
here all evening and I think it is a pretty simple request and we
are here to fight the petition. So that's our take.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Grandoff, do you have a basis for
the continuance?
>> Yes, if I may be heard for a moment. I have a letter I
prepared at 5:00 this afternoon when I heard there was going to be
a five-person board, I delivered it to Ms. Miller. Essentially
this is a quasi judicial hearing. I would like courtesy of a
7-person board on this application this evening. I am not pulling
any punches. I would like that courtesy, I am prepared. I have
done my homework. I would just ask for a courtesy on the
petition.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: For clarification, for anyone who is
watching, we have abolished the 80 percent rule process but
counsel may want to confirm, this is a process carried over from
before.
>> Morris Massey, legal department: Yes. In fact, we had a
conversation related to this petition. It was one that was
started before we enacted the ordinance permitting the 80 percent
rule. They had asked for a continuance. We had had some
discussion about how they would apply to new ordinance and the
decision was made by council that pending application we would
traditionally still apply the 80 percent rule but after adopting
the ordinances prohibiting the 80 percent rules no more new
ordinances would be brought before the council.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like Mr. Shelby, to clarify what
would happen with only five I members, if there were four votes
against it or three or two.
>> Shelby: Let me say with members. This being a quasi
judicial hearing it doesn't require a supermajority vote it
requires a simple majority of the entire board which would mean a
vote of four, regardless of how many people are here, would it
require either action in support of or action in opposition to,
still requires a vote of four. Anything less than that would then
be automatically continued at the next regular meeting. So if the
board is not fully present, you have a legally sufficient number
to conduct the hearing. If council wishes to go forward. And
then have the absent members review the record as council has done
recently in the past. If council does not wish to grant the
continuance. Assuming council wishes to accept it as a basis for
a continuance, council can do that and continue the public hearing
to a later date. Hope that answers the question.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you. I think that is really an
important distinction. So there has to be four votes either way,
regardless of the number of council members?
>> Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Young lady, you want to speak?
>> Well, this is the third time I have been here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Come to the mic and put your name on record.
>> My names Norma Lopez bean and this is the third time I
have been here and every time there is some reason why we can't go
through and it is getting old.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I am going to -- that is enough for me.
Grandoff: Can I clarify the three times? Because this is unique.
This is a totally new application when he to file. We lost one
hearing in August over the hurricanes, we were at the convention
center. Previously we continued last spring. Tommy Eure my






client had emergency appendicitis. This is the third one. No one
wants to go more than he does tonight. But I'm trying to
represent as best I can exactly what Mr. Shelby advised.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I appreciate your explanation and perhaps
you think you have a better chance with 7 within 5 but at the same
time I have to weigh that against the fact that this lady just
referenced the fact that he has been down here three times. So
based on that I would like to move for it to be heard tonight.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think we need a motion if it is
on the agenda. If we just leave it open.
>>GWEN MILLER: It is open. You want to close it back?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did we open it?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yeah, we opened it. Leave it like it is?
MR. SHELBY: Just leave it for later in the agenda. For
purposes of the record I would suggest you continue it to be heard
in the course of sequence.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say aye?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So we will hear it in a little while.
>> Thank you. I skipped Number 13 VO 5. West Gray Street,
they would like a continuance also. There are some tree issues
they are trying to work here with staff.
Number 15.
>> Good evening. My name is Sharon Miller. I live at 2413
West Gray Street, the property that is directly across the street
that would be affected by this development. My neighbors and I
are not opposed to the neighborhood improvement. We are opposed
to the number of units.
>> Shelby: Ma'am, rather than talk about the issues
themselves, the issue now is whether you are in support of a
continuance to June 9th or you are in opposition to it and you
wish to have it heard tonight.
>> My question to you is, if we support the continuance, do
we have leeway to come back and talk about the development itself?
>> Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, you do.
>> Okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you oppose the continuance?
>> No, we do not oppose the continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. Next? The other two are opposed to
the continuance?
>> No.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. So we have a motion to continue to
the 9th at 6:00. Number 13 to June 9th at 6 p.m.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Item Number 16 ZO 525, 910, 918, 3934 and 940 Channelside
at 12th street, CD 1 to CD 3. The administration is actually
asking for continuance of this one. We are in support of
continuance and we are requesting council waive their rules and
allow it to go for AP 16 at 6:00. We have three case, this would
be the fourth. We have some Leniency on this. We have hired a
consultant to look at the channel district plan and come up with
criteria for larger scale developments. The whole basis of the
continuance is simply because that study that's being done could
potentially impact this project and future projects and we want
the ability to have that weighed into the record.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Whoever is doing that study, will they
have enough time to assess something by April?
>> Yes. I have been assured by Mark Huey that that is
underway.






>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Massey, a rather unusual request
with an unusual condition. Why would any study that is going on
after the petition is filed have any impact or even be allowed as
evidence for delivery?
>> Morris Massey:
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sorry to put you on the spot, but that's
just a little -- you know --
>> Massey: I'm not familiar with the study. Actually, this
is the first I have heard of the basis, frankly, tonight. I
wasn't aware that the administration was aware of the support of
the continuance to address some issues related to the project.
Obviously, you would be looking -- I mean, would you have to
legally apply the code criterion in existence at the time. I'm
not sure what the study is intended to address, you know.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is the petitioner also asking for
continuance?
>> Massey: The petitioner and also the neighborhood is
asking for continuance.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't have objection on that basis but
we need to exercise caution -- we can't change rules in
mid-stream.
>>I understand.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion and second for
opening the closing the public hearing?
>> Shelby: Clarification from Ms. Coyle because it requires
council to waive its rules. You want the extra hearing on a
particular date?
>> No, it is already scheduled on the 9th.
>>Shelby: It was to add an additional case.
>> So that would make it 4? And the basis for that waiver.
>> They are working on transportation mitigation as well.
There are issues with the site plan development itself and the
administration is weighed in that they are also in support of the
continuance.
Shelby: But that particular date in question, the 14th, I
just wanted to be clear.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I want to know why that date too and I
didn't hear the answer.
>> I would ask the petitioner for clarify why such a short
time frame.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: I am representing the petitioner on this,
key developers. And really, with the study underway, I don't
think you want to us go into specifics. I probably could, but you
may prefer that I wait. It was more a suggestion of the staff
that we put it off than our initial request. The reason for that
particular date is that we are very anxious to get moving on this
project.
This is a project that already is going to be under
construction soon and so the developer really didn't want to wait
any longer, but agreed to the continuance because of this ongoing
study.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience who came to
speak on item 16? Now you can make a motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to continue it to April 14th.
Seconded. Carried.
>> One more. O two more. Potentially. Two more. Sorry
about that.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Excuse me, Mr. Grandoff. Please don't jump
out the window. It's not that bad.
>> Coyle: Item Number 17, ZO 528, Dale Avenue and Horatio






Avenue. The petitioner needs to work out some issues with the
site plan. We have one slot June 9th.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. All in favor?
Opposed? Any one in the audience that has come to speak on item
17? Make a motion to continue? So moved. Second? What was the
date? June 9th, 6 p.m.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say aye.
Opposed, nay.
[Motion Carried.]
>> 04110 item 19. The petitioner has approached me and
asked for potential continuance and he stated that the neighbors
have not opposed a continuance. I will let him clarify that. I
can tell you the next available date on a hearing that I will
attend is July 21st at this point. If council would be so
inclined to allow them to go on a night that is not mine, the next
available date is May 26th. Gloria Moreida will be handling this.
The it will stand as is unless there is additional site plan. So
the date is May 26th if you will allow that.
>> Truth Gardner 101 south Franklin Street. We spoke with
Linda Pierson who is representing the petitioner as well as Jake
who is representing the board, and they agreed to the continuance.
They're fine with it. We are fine with it as well. We will
continue working with them. And if you would be so inclined we
would respectfully request the May 26th date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that came to speak on
item 19?
>> Ms. Pierson, would you speak on the continuance, please?
I've identify who you represent, I guess?
>> Linda Pierson, DS Pierson, 200 West Platt. I am told, we
are in support of the continuance, and have no objection.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And you represent --
>> 345 Bayshore.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, we had two dates, July 21, May
26, which one do you want?
>> May 26th.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion to move it to May
26th, 6 p.m.? Seconded.
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we will start up with hearings. Okay.
Anyone in the audience who is going to speak on items 9 through
18, please stand and raise your right hand. Anyone who is going
to speak on items 6 through 18, please stand and raise your right
hand. (Oath was administered.)
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open Item Number 9. We have a
motion and second. All in favor say aye.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Katherine Coyle, land development. I have been sworn.
This petition is for a special use request at the property at 8857
North Florida Avenue. It's to construct a drive-in bank window
canopy with two pneumatic tubes that connect to the existing bank
use. It is a Washington mutual. The property is at the southeast
corner of Busch Boulevard and Florida Avenue. The property sits
south of the CSX railroad tracks, a large strip center occupy it
is property currently immediately north of and adjacent to the
Home Depot. The plan shows a single drive-through lane located
between the multitenant and the Home Depot buildings. The use to
the east is a mini storage facility and apartment complex. The
parking area has been restriped and new landscaping has been
planted for the Wal-Mart approval back in January 2003. If you
recall, council approved the Wal-Mart grocery store at this end of






the site, the Firestone sits out front. This is the home depot.
And the aerials that you have before you, the green stripe is
where the drive-through will be. I do have some site photos as
well. This is the rear of the building.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Does Home Depot have any objections?
>> I have not are had any objections. This is an area in
the back of the building. This is a close-up view of the wall and
connecting fence and the property behind Home Depot. This area
right here is where the tubes will be and where the building is.
This is a frontal view. That is the Beall's outlet. Washington
mutual sits just to the north. And that's a further view behind
Home Depot. I noted on the reasons of recommendation I went
through the criteria for a drive-in window. They did meet all
those criteria with no waivers. I also noted on council's Pages 2
and 3 reasons for consideration under special use criteria. City
staff has no objections.
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning commission?
>> This one can be abbreviated too. Tony Garcia planning
commission statement yes, I have been sworn N. we only have one
comment and because of the comment we found it inconsistent and
the comment was because of traffic circulation and that happens to
be at an intersection internally within the center because it lies
between the Home Depot and the Wal-Mart in the area. We were
concerned because it is in proximity to an already congested
intersection within the area and we thought increased traffic that
would be directed to the site because of the drive through would
make a congested traffic situation worse. We looked at it from a
congestion/safety issue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> My name is Scott Harris. I am from Washington State. I
represent Callison Architecture, who is the petitioner. I just
found out about the additional comments suggesting that the back
of the space was a safety issue. We feel that right now it's
actually a bit of a safety issue because it is a free-for-all back
there. There is no striping, no designated places for cars or
delivery trucks that do go back there. And with the addition of
this canopy, we are adding paint-striping as well as an
opportunity using paint-striping for customers through the
drive-through canopy to be able to turn around in a designated
lane, yellow paint-striping per the code and be able to exit
without any interference with anybody else. If another vehicle
was to cross over there that, it would be the same as if they were
crossing over a double yellow line on a busy highway.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in opposition that wishes to
speak in opposition to Number 9?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion to close.
[Motion Carried.]
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move an ordinance
approving a special use ordinance S 2 approving a bank drive
through canopy in the CG district in the general vicinity of 8857
North Florida Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida more
particularly described in section 1 here of providing an effective
date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and a question on the
motion.
>> I would.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would support the motion over planning
commission's staff. Yes, you have a busy intersection there but
add this banking service it would just be a little bit busier. I
think it is closer than being closer to neighborhoods and other






places where bank drive-throughs might be. So --
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion to close.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Katherine Coyle, land development: This petition is to
rezone the property at 2511 Saint is a bell Street to PD zoning to
convert the existing 1600 square feet residence to a medical
office. The office is locate has ten parking space of which only
nine are required. It will one story maintain residential front
facade. Screened with 6 foot PVC fence, evergreen trees planted
20 feet on center and continuous hedge to be installed. Office
use lies to the east which does not require any additional or
enhanced zoning buffers. 50 inch grand laurel oak sits on the
front property line shown as removed. Parks has identified the
tree as a hazard and has approved the removal. See condition on
Page 4. There is a note on Page 4 that we would like added to the
plan and this is per code -- inch-for-inch replacement required
for hazardous grand-tree removal unless arborist noting condition
submitted at time. Park department may issue replacement upon
issuance of standard report. Dave Reilly is here for any
questions you have.
Under reasons for recommendation I went through the policies
and comp plan for major facilities in this area. North of lake is
designated specifically for medical office infill. This is
consistent with those policies, I also noted, given that this is
in a residential land use the urban design criteria for signage,
parking, and residential facade.
27-130, buffers and screening, five and ten-foot buffers
require evergreen shrub and trees which they are planning. As you
will note per code they are required to put a 15 foot buffer and
masonry wall. We can require wall. In this situation they did
provide 6 foot PVC fence and additional plantings which they are
not required by code. We found that consistent with the intent of
the code and we have no objections.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Will you put that aerial on? And will
you identify --
>> What the P's are?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, the P's are interesting -- P's.
Yes, where are the residentials? Where are the medicals?
>> All the P's are parking lots. That is what P is for,
parking. A quick way to identify it, anywhere you see a P is an
office use. Anywhere that there is not a P is still a residential
use. P-1 to the east as I mentioned is a medical office. It is
actually a cleared site now and they are getting ready to build so
there is no P because it doesn't physically exist yet but it will.
I didn't identify all the parking areas on Armenia because that is
a commercial corridor but they are throughout the area --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Excuse me, our monitors are blank.
Whoever is controlling that. All right. Go ahead.
>> Well, as I said, the P's are scattered throughout this
area, the parking areas. Even on the south side of Saint is a
bell you can see there are four currently from Armenia going west.
As you get closer to the hospital and north towards Martin Luther
King, you go back to the zoning map, the RO's and OP's and CG and
CG es are scattered throughout the district. The ROs are slowly
disappearing. Like it said in the comp plan this is designated
for a major pinnacle area. I will show you the site photo. This
is the house as it sits currently. The facade, the building is
going to essentially stay the same. They will convert it into the
office use. And just some -- this is the corner to the west. And
to the southwest. We have no objections.






>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question of staff, city
statement it says in the notes that -- city statement it says in
the notes -- city staff. It says in the notes that placement of
pervious -- wait; I can't find it right now, Ah, here we are.
Note Number 10. Developer to provide half-inch retention on site
for entire property if project exceeds 50 percent of pervious
surface. Looking at the site plan, it appears that about 80% of
the lot will be impervious. But it's not obvious to me where you
can put the storm water. So what I'm wondering is, there are
notes, like general notes on the site plan, but since this is a
PD-controlled zoning, shouldn't the petitioner have to show how
it's possible to accomplish what they're committing to do? I
don't understand.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is Mr. Awad still in the audience?
There he is.
>> Good evening, Alex Awad, Storm Water Department. As we
have discussed in the past, usually developers don't want to have
to go through the engineering of a site plan to show where they
are going to put their storm water. However, they could put the
storm water in vaults under the parking lot or a swale on the side
of the building. It is possible that it could be accomplished.
So --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Have you had an opportunity to review
this particular site plan?
>> Absolutely.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay. Do you think it's possible for
the petitioner -- they can't afford to do vaults -- I mean, it's
obvious -- and there's a sidewalk where they put the swaying. I
mean do you think there's a place for them to deal with the storm
water?
>> Yes. They would have to work the parking lot, put it in
a vault, put in a perforated pipe. It could be done. I usually
don't like the note Number 10. I usually tell them to take it out
once I know it is over 80 percent. As you can tell I is over 80
percent. I would like it to be clear that they have to provide a
half-inch on-site.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you think that would be a better note
to have on the site plan?
>> Well, for the most part I have been asking them to remove
that note Number 10. It is a standard note any is over 50% it is
necessary to have a half inch but in this case it is obvious it is
over 50 percent.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe we should modify the note that
says developer to provide half inch retention on site, period.
>> Right.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just don't want them to have to
provide for the on the site plan then it doesn't is come back to
us and you are trying to figure out where to put it on.
>> I don't review it in the permitting side. However, Dave
Basiglio ^ , once he sees the plan, the PD gets to him, he has the
opportunity to read the note and provide the half-inch, they oh
have to provide it. Whatever they have to do, whatever means they
could have to do to comply with our code, and comply with this
zoning, that's what they have to do.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So they couldn't waive it at that point?
They would just say there's no place to put it?
>> Oh, no, no way.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, thanks.
>> Tony Garcia, planning commission staff: Several
comments. The land use designation for the proposed site which is






on the south and Northeast corner of Saint is a bell and Tampania
is residential as is most of the area. I is consistent with the
commercial development pattern along this area. Consistent with
policy A-4.1 of the land use development which as Ms. Saul-Sena
recognizes the area adjacent to St.) Hospital. Along with the
lots to be considered for use. Each there has been significant
development validating the need for accessibility to the medical
facility of St. Joseph's Hospital which is locate beside a quarter
mile to the northwest of the of the subject site. And reenforces
the development of the area as a office district. The planning
commission staff find it consistent with the comprehensive plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Commissioner?
>> Good evening. My names Jim Stetson, 3413 Henderson
Boulevard, suite 108, in Tampa. Staff has given a pretty thorough
overview of the project, and I think Alex had what my response
would have been for the storm water. We haven't gotten into the
engineering at this stage, and typically, we do just put that note
on it but we would be happy to revise the note if that would make
you happy. I did highlight a zoning map that does show a little
more clearly where some of the office uses are in the area.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we see if there is opposition
first? How about that?
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone want to speak to Number 10? Do we
have a motion to close?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
>> Katherine Coyle land development: I just want to clarify
for the record that there are technical requirements like driveway
standards, certain solid waste requirements and storm water that
if they state they are going to comply with them -- and
landscaping -- on the PD and they get to permitting, they cannot
waive those standards at that point. We do not have the
administrative ability to did that. If they go to permit and they
cannot provide the half-inch retention by code they either have to
reduce their development size or come back to you with something
completely different.
>> So that's why the is good to have something on the notes.
>> Coyle: Yes saying they have to comply with this code,
this code, this code.
>> Shelby: A question though. If they can't comply and
they have to reduce their site plan -- in other words, the site
plan ultimately does have to be altered? If they can't comply?
>> Coyle: Only if it triggers the substantial change
criteria. Generally if you reduce code and parking with it, it
doesn't trigger site plan with it. If you change driveway access
points, change required open space that's on the site plan, if you
are reducing the site plan and not shifting anything around to any
great extent, we can usually do that in-house. Because that's not
any detriment to the surrounding area. The project is only
getting smaller. We're allowed to do that by code.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close the
public hearing.
[Motion Carried.]
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will move the ordinance and I would
like while I am reading it to include in my motion that staff
would delete the second portion of sentence 10 --
>> Coyle: It's done.
>>>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right. So we will finish the sentence
with the word property. Developer to provide half-inch retention
on entire property. Move an ordinance -- first reading, rezoning






property in the general vicinity of the 2511 west Saint is a bell
street from RS 50 to PD medical office, providing an effective
date. Epi.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a quick question of staff. If
something isn't addressed in any way on the site plan like there
is no message about signage, does that mean that there won't be
any signage?
>> They have to follow the underlying code whatever it
happens to be when they get to permitting. Think it particular
you plan says they have to comply with section 325 which is urban
design report which as I noted in my report that they have to
create a residential facade and a four-foot monument sign to meet
the size of chapter 25 requirements.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open up the
next one.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Katherine Coyle, land development: This petition is to
rezone the property at 307 west Martin Luther King to PD zoning
district to convert the existing single family residence into a
professional office. The plan shows five parking spaces two of
which are tandem with alley access on the north. The plan toes
not show any additional building additions and setbacks are 148 on
the western side, 5 feet on the eastern side, 10 foot 8 inches on
the front yard and 33 feet in the rear. The plan notes hours of
operation Monday through Saturday 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. with maximum
number of employees of three. There are objections noted in the
report. The first objection is for the buffers and screenings,
section 27-130: I did note that we did not receive a letter from
the adjacent residential property owner agreeing to any waivers
for buffer criteria. It does require a 15-foot buffer and use of
a 6-foot installation of masonry wall. They are maintaining use
of a chain-link fence that already exists. Has consistently
approved buffer waivers with property owners consent adjacent. We
have not received a letter. Also consideration along the eastern
property boundary. This would be found consistent with the intent
of the code section and I noted three different things they could
do. Plant shrubs per 27-130 and I put them in bold. Remove,
replace and install opaque fence, PVC preferable. PVC is often
encouraged by City Council and other petitions. And where space
permits plant trees for 27-130-2-A-1. Those are the evergreen
trees every 20 feet and five foot on center. That would enhance
the landscape on the eastern side. Package 2 notes the planning
commission staff objections. They are objecting to the parking
off of the alley. Parking space must have a backup of 26 feet.
They are only 20 fee. This is a commercial property and they are
going to be offers so this there will be a certain amount of
traffic generated. They are objecting to the owner parking space
and maneuvering in the right of way and alley must be paved to
city standards from the furthest east et property line to Ola
Avenue and needs to be state as such on the plan. You will note
this is the Martin Luther King corridor. City Council has
approved a couple PDs in the last year and a half in this
corridor, land use mixed 35. It did provide an aerial as well and
I noted there's an office next door to the west, a medical on the
corner, Highland, and MLK, a bar and restaurant on the opposite
corner, and law office to south. This is a site -- this is the
house itself. This is as it sits with the property next door. It
is a fairly tight site. The house is kind of wedged in there.
The issues that we had -- and I will shoal you what's behind.
This is the alley that they will be accessing off. At that time






they had a couple people park back there because they were doing
some work. It's a very tight site, and although the land use is
community mixed use for this area, I don't know that in the future
land use really contemplated individual lots such as these being
redeveloped as office. It's very tight. This was made to be a
house. And that's the issue that transportation and land
development is having is the maneuverability and function of
parking being solely off the alley and interior lot.
We are concerned about people traveling down Martin Luther
King trying to find out where to go. Signage they will be using
will show parking in rear. Just finding where that rear is will
be an obstacle that they will have to overcome. So we are
objecting.
>> TONY GARCIA: Planning commission staff. And I have been
sworn in. Couple things regarding the size that as it relates to
the land use. As you can see on the future land use map,
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., corridor is CMU 35.
Let me give you some orientation over here. This is that
odd intersection where Highland turns where you have the option to
go clean up the street and MLK this way. What makes this site
difficult as CAT was alluding to is once you get off from this
light over here and you are traveling down here you come upon
these buildings very quickly. We do not have any objections
namely due to the fact they are able to access the fact to the
rear accessing the alley. They do have specific technical issues
as far as the amount of footage that's need to maneuver the cars
in the area.
Our other concern that we have were the hours of operation
that they specifically adhere to the hours of operation which are
noted on the site plan, and also the number of employees that
would be there. This is going to be a professional office. We
would just like to be sure that it be restricted to specifically
this type of use, and if anything else, would be considered for
the area would have to come in for another PD, for another zoning
change. We found it consistent with the comprehensive plan based
on the compatibility with the CMU category. It is within the what
is allowable in the consistency matrix for CMU mixed use 35.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to make you aware this morning at
council we were discussing PD's and we decided if there was
something put on the plan we can't enforce that we really can't
depend on it. Numbers of employees, hours of operation, it's very
difficult for those to be enforced in the future, and passed along
to future uses. So we are really trying to not depend upon them
as protection in the future when we use PD's and Mr. Shelby maybe
can explain it more eloquently. But we don't feel so comfortable
with the enforceability long-term of some of those notes.
>> That's a very good point taken. I was not available to
see counsel this morning as I had a couple other meetings to
attend but I appreciate the heads-up on that, Ms. Saul-Sena.
Adding on though that, however, I think there is some concern
about small houses like this as far as the potential -- in this
particular instance, this owner, I believe is not going to have
any customers coming on-site which is an advantage as far as not
having additional traffic on the site. But there's no guaranty
that that will occur in the future. I know what you are saying,
it's an enforcement issue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening, Steven Neimansky ^ , land source
development. I am representing Stallion Homes. Kathy gave you a
good overview of what is going on. I would like to address some






of the concerns. I have been sworn. As far as the landscaping
buffer, what we are doing is we are allowing -- we are providing
two feet on each side of the property all the way down. Where we
do plan on putting in shrubbery and vine up through the 6-foot
chain-link fence. That would satisfy the landscaping buffers per
the code. We can if we immediate to put a 6-foot fence down the
side of the property, a 6-foot white PVC fence that I think would
also satisfy code and what future development has been. The
property is CMU 35, future land use of the property and we are
moving toward that from the corridor from the map Kathy was
showing. As far as transportation shows, we have spent a lot of
time trying to come up with a viable way to do the transportation.
We have talked about using the alley way. We are requesting the
waiver for backing out of the alley way. The original request was
that we would have three spaces across the rear and we would have
one space which we were going to designate as an owner parking
space. That was told that wouldn't be acceptable. So the owner
would be able to come in, park underneath the porte cachere, back
out, and go.
So transportation wasn't acceptable with that, so we went
with another realm which would be coming in just as an egress with
an ingress trip through the alley way. You can do then some
parking spaces facing towards the west here. That was another
option that we had come up with, which would be something that we
would need to reconfigure. So right now what we're looking at is,
and per what we originally asked for transportation what, they had
asked us to do was remove the curbcut, remove -- there is a
significant amount of concrete in the front. Remove the concrete,
replant, relandscape the front area, which we indicated that we
would do. And now, we are also having these objections as far as
backing out into the right of way. So we are open to suggestions
on how to make this site work. We have said that we're limiting
to three employees on the site, the building is existing. It's a
structure that's been on the site for a significant amount of
time. He they're making all the improvements for handicapped with
the ramp. Everything is in place. As far as employees go and
what the use of the building is. They are a builder. All their
clients that they use there, they're actually out of state
clients. They are buying the houses as rental properties. So the
builder's in there, he's got himself, he's got a contractor, he's
got a secretary. That's who's inside. All the owners of all the
houses that they build are out of state. So that's why we said
three units, three employees, and that's why we are comfortable
with that number.
>>GWEN MILLER: Council have questions? Anyone in the
audience want to speak on Item Number 11?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had a question for staff. Christine?
-assume that --
>> Oh, sorry. Ding can you talk to us about the traffic
flow? It sounded to me like it was perhaps a better idea to let
them come in that front one way and exit to the rear, especially
in regard to the impact in the alley in terms of just minimizing
the confusion and, you know, backing in and out of that alley and
that sort of thing. So where is staff on that?
>> Nationally Connelly, transportation.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nationally, I'm sorry.
>> I have an older picture. I was out on site a couple
months ago when it first came out. And that's how I parked. As
you can see, MLK is a four-lane roadway, undivided. And it's very
unsafe to enter in here, and stopping here, having no decel,






whatever, it would only allow for one parking space. Still, where
are your employees parking?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, the question, what he mentioned was
using that as an entrance but then driving up the side of it and
parking in the rear. That's what they had -- and I don't know if
it's feasible but it sound like perhaps a better flow for the
vehicles.
>> He may be able to put one space here facing this
direction. Would it come in and park this way.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what he was talking about?
>> Right. It would be about one parking space. It would be
an ADA space to fit there. There is no room to fit any parking
spaces in that direction. There is not enough room. It's a
48-foot-width lot.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: He's talking about pulling in and having
them face to the west?
>> Right. It's a 48-foot width of lot, 18 and 26 is 44, and
you need a five-foot buffer, I guess?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know. It's a PD.
>> The buffer can be reduced down to one foot.
>> You can, but back here you have 18 feet, 28 feet.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is this something you guys can work on
and come back?
>> Yes. He would only be able to get two space there, an
ADA space and a regular space.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't you come back another night
after you work on it?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, I have seldom seen a site that the
word "shoehorning" seemed more appropriate for. This is a 48-foot
site.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What else are you going to do there,
leave it residential on MLK? Doesn't seem fair.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I didn't sell off the side yards for
people to build on side yards. I am talking about the rationale
of council being asked to do four different waivers many of which
we have spoken to specifically before. We don't believe in tandem
parking. We don't believe in parking --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Then what are we protecting?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I am saying the waivers that are being
requested of us are not healthy waivers and our staff objects to
them. That's all.
Is the petitioner presenting the case?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can have discussion. We may have to
reopen if we close it.
>> The land use of the site is CMU 35. The development to
the north and south of MLK is all going that commercial realm. It
is a tight site, I understand that. The property owner, when he
purchased the property, understood that it was a tight site. He
is only using it for himself and two other employees. And I
understand that. And I also kind of agree with the Planning
Commission which would be that if the property is sold, changed
hands, that it would make sense that they would have -- whoever
else would come in would have to come back to recreate a new
zoning or get their status. If was correct. Changing from for
whatever the usage is.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I think Ms. Saul-Sena was
very polite in describing how this is being squeezed into this
site. I think access to maneuver within the alley, reduce the
vehicle to 20, chain-link fence on the eastern side, masonry wall,
reduce commercial use parking, allow tandem parking for commercial






use. Kathy referred to the fact we had not gotten a letter from
the adjacent property owner that would allow the reduction of that
required buffer. I just think we are squeezing too many things in
here. As I sit in here and identified what staff identified as
long-term trends, site is also located in close proximity to
Seminole Heights which has been designated as urban village
redevelopment area. Of course -- it is up to my colleagues, I
will not support this now and I will not support it if we count.
I think there are too many things in this presentation that do not
fit. I am very surprised that people from south Seminole Heights
are not here. That being said I will not support it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion to close the public hearing?
[Motion Carried.]
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move for denial.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have motion and second for denial.
Question, Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with these concepts and
philosophies wholeheartedly, you know that, but I only agree with
them when we are trying to protect something and nobody has talked
about what we are trying to protect here. The neighborhood
appears to be to the rear. And I think there is a legitimate
neighborhood back there to the rear. But nobody is here on that.
They could come for second reading if they didn't -- if they all
of a sudden woke up and realized that they objected to this. But
I think that this is an existing loam that they are trying to use
for -- home that they are trying to use for a reasonable use. It
is not reasonable to expect residential use to be there in any
other areas of town that have four or five-lane roads in front of
them like that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just one other comment. Forget about even
discussing the naked. The fact that the parking spaces are 26
versus 206789 I think they are safety issues. I think we are
trying to make too many accommodations to fit the petitioner's
request.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion for motion for denial. All
opposed?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nay.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open item 14.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Katherine Coyle, land development. I have been sworn. I
swear. I will be brief there is no site plan. This is a request
to rezone the property at 2412 Ohio to RS ooh zoning district to
create three single family detached lots. Site is currently
developed with one single family residence. Euclidian request, no
site plan required. Council recalls a couple weeks ago just to
the north of Sher Dan and Iowa you approved a similar request for
three lots. I did provide with you a map. I surveyed the three
blocks that are similar layout. 57 zoning lots, 40 were
nonconforming, almost 70 percent nonconforming. I'll show you the
site. This is the house here. And then the empty property to the
west. And some houses that were across the street. There isn't
one particular style of home. They look like they were all from
different time frames, but I mean that one, I think it's
condemned. Basically across the street. And another house across
the street. We have no objections.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question. When we had so few
Euclidian zonings, can hardly remember what the rules are, but
there are obviously a lot of trees on this site? So they don't
have to submit a site plan about how they are going to build
around the trees so they can protect any grand trees?






>> Yes, it is just as with the previous PD. They go
straight to permitting. They have to comply with every regulation
we V. they can't ask for any waivers or variances through this
petition.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And when they go to permitting they have
to do a site plan that shows the existing trees.
>> Yes. This goes to permitting, don't castle, Theresa
Meyer.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff. Yes, I have been
sworn in. This entire area is residential 10. The request would
allow three parcels, each with approximately 50 feet of frontage.
This is consistent with the overall development pattern of the
area. As Ms. Coyle has told you, there are already different
housing styles and size lots. We find it is consistent with the
general pattern in the area and consistent with the comprehensive
plan. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> I'm Rosemary Leathers, 3412 Ohio Ave. I am requesting
rezoning of the property from RS 60 to RS 50 so that the three
owners will each have a buildable lot for a single family home.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience who would
like to speak on item 14? We have a motion and second to close
the public hearing.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have to read it. Move an ordinance
rezoning property in the general vicinity of 3412 Ohio Avenue in
the City of Tampa, Florida described in zoning district 1 zoning
classifications from RS 50 to RS 60 to RS 50, providing an
effective date. Motion to close the public hearing. Motion to
open the public hearing item 15.
[Motion Carried.]
>> Cath Lynn Coyle land development I have been sworn. The
petition before you is requesting a special use for an 80 percent
lot development on the property of 413 South Paloma Place to
construct one additional single-family residence. The existing
home on lot 17 will remain. The proposed home will be built on
vacant lot 16. Setbacks shown on the plan are standard RS 75
setbacks. Plan commits to comply with all development
regulations. Petitioner has provided photographs, samples of
architecture plan for lot 16. I did notice examples for your
request. This is the area in question. I noted under policy
B-3.3 from the Tampa Comprehensive Plan where we look for physical
development pattern and character of the surrounding area, between
Westshore, Azeele, Hesperides, and Swann the total number of
zoning lots in the area were 101 lots. Lots measuring less than
75 feet were 43 lots which is 43 percent. Majority which is 50
percent or higher in the study area were not developed as
nonconforming lots or less than 75 percent so we did have to find
an objection for that. However, on Page 2, under findings of fact
I did note the remaining 80 percent lot development regulations as
they did exist previously. And I noted under findings of facts,
the specific criteria that they did comply with. They are
requesting two lots, no more than three, under provision A; under
B, I did note that on block 28, which is the subject block, it
does contain 20 zoning lots, 12 of which are nonconforming which
is 60 percent of that particular block. All of the conforming
lots in the study area measure between 61 and 71 feet. They did
meet rest of the criteria on Page 2 and Page 3. They have noted






specific maximum square footages for the house on the site plan.
New house is planning to go built at capped at 75 feet. They did
state on the plan specifically that no variance shall be permitted
beyond this request.
>> Tony Garcia, planning commission staff: I want to leave
Ms. Coil's map up briefly when I talk about this area. The land
use for the area is primarily residential 6. Again the unique
character of this area is, feature of this area or the streets,
you don't have a regular grid pattern here which lends to more
nonconforming patterns as far as lot construction is concerned.
As she did point out there are a lot of nonconformities on the
lot, for the lots of the particular block in yes. We felt that
the creation of one more additional house in the area would not
pose a significant impact to the area and would be minimally
disruptive to the adjacent area. There are a variety of uses in
the area. We felt the request would be compatible with the
adjacent uses that are in the area, adjacent residential homes
that are in the area because there are a variety of different
sizes. We do not feel that this would set a precedent as we have
noted in other 80 percent rear requests or PD's as they are being
done now as we did two weeks ago we showed you one where that was
a precedent we don't feel like this would create a significant
precedent in this situation. We feel like it would be minimally
disruptive to the area so we feel it is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> One moment. John Grandoff. Good evening, Madam chair,
members of the City Council. My name is John Grandoff, suite
3700, Bank of America plaza, and I have the pleasure of
representing Mr. Tommy Eure.
Tommy, would you please raise your hand? I have been sworn.
Tommy lives on Paloma Avenue at the Paloma Place which is
413 Paloma Place. He's lived here since 1956. In 1956 he
purchased two platted lots. He built a home on one, one has
remained vacant until this time. The application this evening is
for you to -- and I am asking for your approval of this vacant lot
that Tommy has held for so many years. Let me show you a site
plan over here for a moment. This is Paloma place. Westshore
Boulevard would be back over here. One street off of Westshore.
Tommy's existing home is here. The home that he is proposing
would be next door to Tommy. He would continue to live at his
home. We have limited the square footage of his loam, the
proposed home, to 2750 square feet to 3,000 square feet. We are
providing the following performance standards -- a detached
garage, a 45-foot setback on the rear, 15-foot setback on this
side to accommodate a driveway, 7-foot setback on this side which
is Tommy's side of the property. We will convey additional
property to create that additional setback. 25-foot setback from
the front. These lots measure 64 feet by 130 to 124 own on
average. It's a curving street. Tommy's home is on 69 feet by
137 to 130 feet. Again, to account for the curve of Paloma. The
total parcel is 17,000 square feet, which is almost half an acre.
The average area of each parcel is 8700 square feet. This is an
RS 75 zoning district so the requirement is 8700 square feet.
This is requiring 8700 feet square feet her parcel. We do not
have 100 feet of frontage for the second lot. It would be 64
feet. The comp plan requires 7,062 square feet as a minimum.
Code requires 7500. Our actual lot square footage is noted on
each site, 8100 square feet, and on Tommy's house, 9200 square
feet of land. So we have an extensive amount of property for him






to work with. Two things I would like to point out in the general
notes. Number one the property will comply with storm water
regulations including the storage of first one-half inch of
runoff. The second item I would like to bring forth is that all
dwellings will be designed with a detached garage. In keeping in
character with the instead of these front-end loaded garages that
I don't care for, no one cares for, Tommy has a detached garage,
his neighbor will have a detached garage.
I take issue -- I respectfully disagree with Kathy's
analysis. I think you can reach whatever streets you want to
reach and come up with an acceptable percentage of nonconforming
lots. I think what counts is what is going on on that very street
on Paloma Place. Also, I would like -- may I borrow your map for
a second?
>> Garcia: Sure. Grandoff: I promise to give it back. I
admire her map. It's very well done. Just one brief thing I'd
like to point out. She has this one as nonconforming -- as a
conforming lot. It is a nonconforming lot. So it should be blue.
What I would like to point out tonight is the blue and I have the
deed and the ownership. So you see on Tommy's street, this green
here, Tommy's house would be here with detached garage. Proposed
home is going to be here again with a detached garage. Now, going
down this street, I will try to superimpose this. Let me do it
this way. We have letters from everyone on the street -- and I
have put a red L, everyone on the street, letter of approval,
approval, approval, approval, Mrs. Bean is here this evening, she
did not provide a letter of approval. I will explain why.
Obviously she can speak for herself. On the opposite side of the
streets approval, approval, approval, approval. This gentleman AP
proves. This gentleman, his family has three parcels. That's why
you have one L for three parcels. So everyone on the street
except for Ms. Bean is in support of Tommy's application. When I
spoke with Ms. Beane at our last meeting in November, her concern
was storm water runoff. She has a new home also built on a
nonconforming lot. She's not built slab on grade. She's
concerned about storm water runoff on her property. That's the
reason I reported to you the condition that requires us to treat
the first half-inch of storm water. I believe my client will not
be able to obtain storm water approving through Mr. Awad's
department unless that is taken care of. So hopefully her fears
would be allayed on that issue. So those are the letters.
So let's speak about the existing homes. Going back to
Paloma Place I made an existing count and there are seven homes on
the left side, which is existing Tommy's home. Four, five, six,
seven, and then five on the east side. One, two, three, four,
five, all in support. Of those homes, eight are nonconforming.
One, two, three, four, five, six, seven -- I lost the other one --
eight are nonconforming. Again, I don't want to be splitting
hairs but I think there's an abundance, competent and substantial
evidence, that the neighborhood supports it and they are a
predominance of nonconforming lots with homes on them as proven by
Kathy's diagram. Now, of these homes on Paloma Place, on the west
side, their average square footage is 2900 square feet. We
calculated this before we finished the site plan. On the east
side of Paloma Place the average square footage is 3400 square
feet. If you average all homes on nonconforming lots on Paloma
Place, you come up with a final averages of 3120 square feet.
So I went to Tommy. I said, Tommy, this is what we need to
do. We need to be consistent with the neighborhood, we need to be
with the comprehensive plan, (Inaudible ) 2750 to 3,000 square






feet. That puts us right smack in the sweet spot of this
neighborhood as to their home square footage on a gross basis on
nonconforming lots that support the project. Let me just show and
you couple photographs. This is Tommy's home here.
This is the property. I have other photographs of
Mediterranean revival homes in Beach Park. We anticipate the
design will be of that type. I have reduced site plans if you
would like to look at those. Here's the letter of support, which
we received. You will note all the addresses on Paloma Place (off
mic). I would like to give them to the council. Going through
the staff report, the waste water department, no objection.
Hartline, no objection. Dave Reilly of the landscaping
department. There are no grand trees, we have no objection. We
do not abut a greenway trail. Tampa fire rescue no objection. No
objection from the water department. No objection from
transportation planning. The police department files a suggestion
of crime prevention through environmental design which are designs
you can use now to avoid burglary and those kinds of things. We
are going to take those to heart. Excuse me one moment. I'm
trying to be as rapid as possible but thorough. Just give me one
second. Tony Garcia's report -- I will cut to the chase. He
finds the project compatible with the land use plan and he says
the request is consistent with the pattern of residential
development and is in character with adjacent homes in the
immediate area. That is a finding of fact looking at Paloma
Place. Other than Kathy's lot count in which she's counting from
Swann, Westshore, Azeele, and Hesperides, which I think is
entirely too large, her report is no different from the
application. Where we differ is consistency. I think it is
consistent for Paloma Place and that's where we proved it.
CHECK I will wrap up right there. There are a few other
items that would maybe gild the lily, and at this time we would
request your approval. I would like to reserve my time on
rebuttal to speak to you. I am trying to be as brief as possible.
I know the hour is late. I would respect your family wishes to be
home one day also.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience have wish to speak on
item 15?
>> I was sworn in. I am Lisa Johnson, I live at 4310 West
Beachway Drive. I am here representing the Beach Park Homeowners
Association. I'm the board secretary. I am reading a letter
signed by Amy Purcell Reynolds, president of the Beach Park
Homeowners Association, since she is out of town and couldn't be
here tonight.
(Reading) "We have a longstanding position of supporting
Beach Park setback laws and ordinances. Every year twice each
year the membership votes on currently zoning land -- continue to
work to maintain the current zoning.
Therefore, as always, the Beach Park Homeowners Association
opposes the 80 percent rule request on Paloma. The zoning is RS
75 and we do not want to have one conforming zoning lot now become
two nonconforming zoning lots. The petitioner will continue to
state he has two platted lots, but the zoning is what is current
and what should be considered. In order to get the two lots with
the existing house, the existing lot will have to be replatted
with the new lot line. The current house is not sitting on a
conforming lot all by itself, even if the other lot is large
enough. Current house is too close to the only platted lot line,
so both lots will have to be replatted and will become
nonconforming lots. The petitioner could have asked for the side






lot to be played in separate ownership but would have had to get a
variance at that time since the was not within the setbacks of RS
75. Street has major flooding problems already in addition to the
new structure on the side yard will not help the problem.
And I am very glad this is it is last 80% rule request to be
presented before you, and we hope that you vote against this
request to create two nonconforming lots. The city staff has
objections to this request, the Planning Commission has included
comments that they are comparing the area just east of Westshore
Plaza, north of Kennedy, with their town homes to this same street
in 100 percent residential historic Beach Park. It makes no sense
to compare multifamily high density land use north of Kennedy to
Beach Park's RS land use and it's signed Amy Purcell Reynolds.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> I'm Norma Lopez Beane and I live at 415 South Paloma
Place. This house would be right next to me, 413. One the
reasons my late husband and I decided to buy that home, we liked
the character of Beach Park. I think character is important. I
respect it. I do not want to see the character of the
neighborhood changed. I have already heard someone who lives less
than five minutes from me say, well, if they can do that, maybe I
can do it, because I want a smaller home and maybe I can build it
next to my existing home so where can you stop? How can you give
one person permission and not turn around and give it to someone
else.
We have a serious flooding problem in my street. Not just
on storms, but when we have a heavy rain, I can't get out of my
driveway. You will see me out there, the sidewalk in front of my
house is the lowest of anywhere on Paloma Place. I have to go out
there in the summer when it rains a lot with the blower or a
bedroom so I don't breed mosquitos there. I have no curb in front
of my house because it's been washed away by rains. Now, I have
called under three different administrations, and I respect them.
They say they have other priorities, they cannot correct this.
And I can understand that. There are priorities. But I can't see
where a house that will be less ground for the water to go into,
but mostly I -- but other than that, I just think we are going to
ruin the character of that beautiful, historical area, and they
did name some streets that don't -- are not like the rest of Beach
Park. And I don't think that was correct, some of the streets,
Hesperides, some of the streets they named. This is important to
me. Now, I am a widow. I am 69 years old. I plan to stay in my
house as long as I physically can. But even if I left, I would
want to preserve that neighborhood the way it is. I think that's
important. And I hope you will think that's important too. Thank
you. Ding ma'am, have you been sworn?
>> Yes, I have.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a question.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I did too.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is your house to the south or the north?
>> My house would be right next to the house they want to
build there.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So you would be --
>> So I would be most affected difficult the mouse.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Right, right. So is the area where the
new lot would be created, the new house would be built -- was that
the yard of the house next door?
>> That was the yard. In fact, Mr. Eure on many
occasions -- I didn't know it was not a I didn't know it was a






buildable lot. He offered to sell it to me. Never telling me it
was not a buildable lot. Of course I would have bought it if it
was a buildable lot but I resent that. He said I am giving you
your last chance. Do you want to buy it? And I resent that.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I did have a question, Ms. Beane. We
had a similar issue a couple blocks further South Beach Way, I
think it was, or something like that. And some of the neighbors
along that street support add similar situation because --
supported a similar situation because they were very concerned
that a McMansion would be built. And if I lived on your street I
might have a similar concern that at a certain point, Mr. Eure
might just -- it's not a historic house necessarily. Co-knock it
down and sell it and somebody could build the big McMansion there.
I don't know how you feel about it.
>> We have two that I would consider mansions on either side
of Paloma across from me. Okay? They are definitely estates.
Okay? I don't think Mr. Eure's house would be torn down because
those little Mediterranean-style houses are gems and he has kept
it very well and I do not think that someone would tear that house
down. Ding so that doesn't concern you though?
>> No. Well, even if they did tear it down it wouldn't be
as close to me. When Mr. Eure told me one day, well, I think I
got my lot, what do you think? I said Tommy, I don't like it, I
never knew it wasn't buildable. But if you sold it, you sold it.
And I think he was dishonest representing it to me that way. And
I don't think that house would be torn down.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next?
>> Grandoff: I forgot. Mr. Eure wanted to speak to you.
>>GWEN MILLER: All right. This gentleman wants to speak.
Grandoff: That's fine.
>> Joe Williams again, Swann circle. I live in one of those
nicer house. My lot is 130 by 110. I am in the Beach Park Civic
Association. If you look at the property they are talking about
doing, right here they just about it a $3 million house; right
here they just built a brand-new house. And right here they just
completed and the couple moved in with their two children in
December, a 6,000 square feet house. The lot right here, which is
one lot removed, was just sold three months ago for 750-, the
house was torn down, it's back on the market now for 925,000.
Without a structure on it.
>> Where is your house in relation to that amount?
>> My house is off on Swann circle. I have a 130 by 110
that I bought about four years ago much and the deal is that, you
know, we want to see our lots bigger, not smaller. That McMansion
doesn't hurt us. If you look at the money invested in Beach Park,
here is a gentleman who has been here 50 years that wants to sell
a side yard that will increase the density in our neighborhood,
and we are not building 2700 square feet houses in Beach Park.
Look at the new homes that are under construction. There
are over 80 homes that have been teardowns right now. I pay
enormous tax to the City of Tampa because we bought our house at
existing fair market value. He can stay in his existing home,
won't be assessed the amount of money his home is currently worth.
We understand he may need the money to sell the lot. But sell the
whole property. Have it torn down. Build the McMansion. That is
what Beach Park homeowners is about. That's what they are
building in that neighborhood. And our Homeowners Association
does not support this. In fact, I think the time that he's will
to wait in front of council and all these delays, I would like to
see how much his land has appreciated based upon us fighting his






petition. So it is all about keeping and preserving our land.
All these people coming in behind me building these big homes,
that's why we are coming there, that's why we are paying the
enormous amount of taxes to the City of Tampa. It is nuts we have
to pay that tax base and then our land is being pushed down by a
2700 square feet house. We do not support it. I joined the board
a year-and-a-half ago for some of these same reasons, that we just
don't support it, we do not want this petition to go through, and
we hope that council will side with our Homeowners Association.
We have 650 voting members in our Homeowners Association 1300, I
got to believe is one of the largest in the estimate we vote twice
a year. It is 100 percent of the Homeowners Association and pays
the tax base for the City of Tampa. And I we do not want to go.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: For the record, were you you sworn?
>> Yes, circumstance I was.
>> Excuse me, I'm not familiar with all the regulations.
>>GWEN MILLER: Give me your name first.
>>O Tommy Eure. I'm sorry.
>> Were you sworn, sir?
>> Yes, I was. I have lived in Tampa for 55 years. I have
lived in the house that I live in now for 48 years. And I bought
the house and I bought the lot next to me. There was a house and
a vacant lot here and a vacant lot here. Well I wanted all three
of them. But for two months I cut the grass and I couldn't take
it so I had to give up one of the lots over here, and they sold to
it a builder and built a house on it. Now, they are all 67-foot
lots. Beach Park, when they laid out the sidewalks and all, on
the sidewalk, there's a pin where each lot begins. When I moved
there, there were five houses on that lot. There are ten houses
on that block now. I bought it so some day when I can retire, I
can sell that lot and retire and live in my home that I live in.
I have been there for 48 years. I want to die there. My wife
died there. My son was raised there. And I have put a lot of
money in that house. And I want to stay there. But if I can't
sell the lot, if you can't build on it, nobody wants to bite,
naturally -- I will have to sell my home, because I can't pay the
taxes. And that property is what was my ace in the hole some day
that I could sell and retire and live in the house and die in that
house. They have built houses all down across the street from me
on 67-foot lots. In fact, two doors from me, there was one house
that straddled two 67-foot lots. The man owned it died. A
builder bought it, came to here, got permission to lift the house
up, turned it up, moved it over on one 67-foot lot, and built
another house on that one. That was approved. So I didn't
understand at the time I bought that lot that I that was going to
be a problem. Nobody told me they were going to change the ruling
to 75 feet -- -- to 75 feet. But I'm stuck with this lot, and if
I don't pay taxes on it, you will take it up, you will confiscate
it and then sell it to somebody who will build a house on it. I
just want to have -- I have a buyer and he's willing to build a
beautiful home on it. If I can get approval to build the house.
And he's willing to pay the price and I can retire my home and
stay there and live there. I'm 85 years old now and I don't have
long to live so it won't be too long. And that's all my request.
That's why I came here. I didn't know I was going to have to come
here. In fact, I didn't know I was going to have to get a lawyer,
but they told me, get a lawyer. So I got a lawyer.
>>KEVIN WHITE: That's half your retirement there.
>> Mr. Eure: As far as the drainage, we haven't had any
problems. The people next door to the lot that complained about






drainage, we haven't had any major flooding since their yard man
has stopped blowing the trash down the storm sewer, we stopped
that, and when we have a heavy rain, yes, the streets will flood
out there but it doesn't come over on the property. Her house is
built way up high. And we haven't had any major flooding or any
problem at all. And I have lived there for 48 years.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank, sir.
>> Mr. Eure: So thank you. (Sworn).
>> Good morning. My name is Sharif Albana. I live at 3422
Beach Way Drive. I came here to support Mr. Tommy Eure. I have
known about this case two years now. I have nothing to lose. I
am just doing it as principal. As you know, Beach Park area, have
you nonconforming blocks and conforming blocks. He bought his lot
in 1967. In the late '80s, when you changed zoning, nobody sent
him a letter saying well, now, you don't have this lot anymore.
Four years ago you changed the 80% ruling and you took it off the
books with just a small article in the newspaper. And this man's
retirement -- he bought it, and you took it from Beach Way Drive.
I am not here to be an example. I don't like the 80% rule or 20%
rule. My case was only 20%. My case, my neighbor wanted to see
this. As of today, my house, first floor is out, second house we
have permits, we have storage, we confirm, and my neighbors across
the street and next door to me, they come to me every day and they
thank me for what I did on Beach Way Drive because I improved
beach way drive and you are going to have nice homes and the value
is going to go higher and we are paying taxes. Mr. Tommy been
paying taxes for 50 years. If you don't have approval, he is the
only one that has to approval it improve it. No one else. If he
is going to sell his house after 50 years. With all the
neighborhood support, I also have letters from my neighborhood.
(Off mic)^
All the houses are built in 67-foot lots. As this is had
last hearing for the 80% rule, and I hope you approving it, and
makes Beach Park resident to live whatever years he has to live
left. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Mr. Grandoff? ((Inaudible).
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a procedural note, for future
reference, if a petitioner has his client here, his client
shouldn't probably speak during the community participation part.
He should probably speak during the presentation or the rebuttal:
Because this is sort of double dipping.
>> Mr. Grandoff. . I was in a hurry. I forgot about it, is
all. This is a very reasonable request, folks, and I will tell
you why. This is normal Beane, she came up in opposition.
I hope you can see it. This is her home from the lot we are
looking at.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's not easy to see.
>> Mr. Grandoff: That is her home built in 1982. 66-foot
lot. She's one of the blues. You remember I told but the blue
and the reds? She's one of the blues. 3,170 square feet. We're
building a house smaller than Mrs. Beane on a nonconforming lot
just like her, on a street where we have everyone write a letter
of support except Norma. Her issue of storm water, I think that's
solved. Here is another view of her home. She has a detached
garage. We are going to have a detached garage. It is going to
virtually mimic her home. You see her detached garage in the
back? That is where we are going to put the detached garage.
When I walked around with the engineer looking at the
neighborhood, I said this is what we have to draw; this is the
side of her home as I am standing on the side of Tommy's lot,






asking her to approve. I think that is very fair, folks. Very
fair. Mrs. Reynolds' letter was read into the record.
Mrs. Reynolds is in the real estate business, and she has a
listing -- she is the president of the Beach Park Homeowners
Association. She has a listing on this lot right here. She lists
two houses away -- -- she lives two houses away. The listing is
699,000 dollars. There is a contract pending, scheduled to close
March 31st. I have the MLS report on it. She has a for-sale sign
on it, 699,000 dollars. Heated square footage is 3,208 square
feet. Four bedrooms, three baths, two half-baths, with a guest
house. A lot 55 feet by 120 feet. Tommy Eure, 69 feet by 137
feet. I'm just talking about fairness, folks. Here is the
ownership, it's 4523 Azeele. I provided this to Mr. Dingfelder.
You will see I highlighted the assessed square footage is
4,100 square feet. I just gave you the heated square footage.
You take all of the square footage on 55 by 120 feet, it's over
4,000 square feet. This gentleman, if he had recorded a deed,
this whole problem would have been solved in 1989 if he had got
the letter, which he says he did not receive. And he had called
me and says, John, I am in a tight spot. I have a 60-plus lot,
the rule is going to go to 75 foot, I would have said, Tommy, you
prepare a deed right now and deed it to yourself and you will be
vested.
I did it for numerous people. There are numerous people in
Beach Park who are okay right now because they did that. Tommy
didn't. And I think it is unreasonable he be penalized. He has
come forward. ^ we are damned if we do, damned if we don't. We
show up with detached garage, it is incompatible. We show them --
I don't know what you are supposed to do at this point. I will
close at this point. CHECK.
I think this is a very reasonable request. I will even
offer to you that I bet you this is the last request that you will
ever hear. I promise you. I give you my word. I won't take
another. I can't. But I think this is very reasonable. I think
the equities are with us. I think there's competent and
substantial evidence and I respectfully ask for your understanding
and approval this evening.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It seems the best way to split the baby
is if Mr. Eure would sell half of that yard to Ms. Beane, they
would both be conforming. Then you would have two conforming
lots. Just a thought. That would be such a positive solution,
and I just wondered in your client had considered that, in the
spirit of conformity.
>> Grandoff: I don't think Tommy's interested.
>> Tommy. Eure: I don't think Ms. Beane is interested.
Norma Beane, only after she refused to sign the okay, I said
Norma, why don't you buy the lot? Only then, I suggested kind of
facetiously, why don't you buy the lot? Oh, I can't afford that.
So -- that's all. It was not a side yard. That's also the man
said building a house --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think you are getting the hook.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close the
public hearing. What.
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: What is the pleasure of the council?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Madam chair, a lot of times these 80% rules
are very difficult. I was going to yield to Mr. Dingfelder but he
alluded to me. I am going to have to in essence of fairness and
what I've seen in being compatible with the neighborhood based off






of the land use map provided by Katherine Coyle and the
presentation made by the petitioner move for approval of this last
80 percent rule. And the only reason that I am even willing to do
this is because of the compatibility and conformability of the
neighborhood and that seems to be the general many pattern and
consistency of the neighborhoods. Some of these, every one of the
80% rules over the past years I have been on council have been
contentious issues. I think like I said in the essence of
fairness, I don't know whether he got his notice back in '82
often. I don't even know write was in '82 (or not). But, you
know, it comes to an essence of fairness at some point in time.
And like I said, we are not asking for anything that's out of the
norm. We are not looking to split this lot into a 50 foot lot and
bring 1200 square feet home into a neighborhood or an 8,000 square
feet home into the neighborhood. So like I said, I would move for
approval and would be happy to read the ordinance.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second. Could I make a comment on my
second? I think people would watch us periodically would know I
don't reward greed. That's not what we are seeing here tonight.
Mr. Eure is not a land spec later. He has lived there almost 50
years and as he said he was counting on selling the lot. And I
think that's a reasonable expectation for somebody who spent their
entire life on that particular parcel. I worry about private
property rights and I think denial of this particular case, and we
take them on a case by case basis, would be unfair toe to his
private property rights. If this gentleman instead of sitting
there at 80 years of age, you know, was a 30-year-old person who
had just bought it in the last year or so thinking they were going
to turn it and make a quick buck I don't know that I would feel so
sympathetic but in this case I do feel sympathetic. Another fact
thing that has a big factor on me was the same way on beach way.
When that immediate naked is in support of it, I respect the
neighborhood association's opinion but when the immediate
neighborhood is feeling differently then something is is wrong
here. I think the immediate neighborhood need to talk to the
neighborhood association and everybody needs to get together on
these signals. We are getting mixed signals. But when we get
mixed signals, I will lean toward the immediate neighborhood most
of the time. But I support the motion.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Along the lines of fairness I would lean to
the immediate neighbor and that would be Ms. Beane. I think staff
state I was inconsistent with future land use policies and I don't
think it should be done. It was not a buildable lot and I would
weigh in with what the civic association has and they have always
been of that position. I think by the way when Mr. Grandoff
brings up what Amy per sells does as a Realtor versus what Amy per
sells represents the association that is a very tacky comment.
And I'm sure if Ms. Reynolds were here she would be standing
objecting to those comments. I think that is I inappropriate. I
don't think that spoke to the issues. I think at this point it is
not a buildable lot. I appreciate the concerns that were being
said. But I don't think that is a fair thing to do. I will tell
you on the record Tommy Eure and I are acquaintances but I move on
this I will not support the motion. ( -- 3-2.
>>GWEN MILLER: You have to bring it back next Thursday
morning, 10:00. Grandoff: Thank you for your time.
>>GWEN MILLER: 18 is a continued public hearing.
>>MARTIN SHELBY:
>> Katherine Coyle, land development, I have been sworn.
This petition is to rezone the property at 1405 and 1413 South






Howard Avenue, 2307 south Mississippi Avenue and 1316 south
Alabama Avenue to redesign the parking areas for the existing
two-story commercial building. This is the building that contains
Bella's Restaurant. Petitioner professes to move the two
Dumpsters off of Alabama Avenue, consolidate them into one, and
relocates it within the redesigned parking area adjacent to the
building. The wood storage for Bella's will also be housed in new
storage structure located next to the Dumpster. Vehicular access
will remain the same for the main parcel located on Mississippi
Avenue. Parcel B which is to the north also maintains vehicular
access to Mississippi. The plan shows 14 parking spaces installed
and used for employee valet parking only. Ten of the parking
space are laid in the tandem formation. Five and six-foot
sidewalks are proposed along Mississippi Avenue adjacent to both
parcels. You will note back of my report you will find my report,
planning commission's report, zoning map, and I did include the
historical site plans from '85 board of adjust hearing along with
the approval letter and the land use case that was approved in '89
by City Council just for reference. I did not ten waivers
associated with this site plan. They are listed on Page 1. Many
of which are a result of the current and existing site
constraints. Under findings of fact, I went briefly through the
history of the site, the board of adjustment ruled on this
property in 1985, case BOA 185195 granting and or denying the
items below. The are northern parcel B was not part of the
petition at that time. That site plan is referenced in this staff
report and it's labeled in very large black lettering. The waive
of the six-foot landscape buffer on Mississippi was allowed,
reduction to three, granting egress and ingress in the R 3 zoning
district, granting waive r to eliminate the labor and board ruled
you shall be erected on the north side of Alabama street.
Note, no wall was installed at that time. Then again in
1989, the property petitioned City Council for a special use.
They were granted off-street parking with associated waivers;
parcel B, the northern parcel, was part of that petition. That
site plan is also attached to the staff report. Dumpsters were
shown on Alabama partially within the right of way, which we no
longer allow under current code. Wood structure was also
constructed along Alabama Avenue. Northern parking area to have
one way ingress from Mississippi, existing out onto Alabama
Avenue. The northern parking area contained 12 parking spaces,
six-foot standard, six were compact. The small retention areas to
be constructed in the corner areas of the parking lot on the
northern side. And the main parcel adjacent to Bella's had 60
parking spaces. There were a total of 72 approved in 1989. The
current proposal reduces the available parking on the southern
parcel from 60 to 49. The current proposal eliminates the use of
public right of way for garbage collection and Dumpster location,
and the current proposal adds public sidewalks along Mississippi
Avenue to provide a dedicated pedestrian connection to Howard
Avenue. We have no objections give the history of the site and
the site constraints that are there. The uses are existing.
They're essentially reconfiguring their parking area. We are just
in hopes that they actually do it. They are in code violation
currently, and they are before you through this rezoning to try to
make the situation before. The neighborhood is here as well.
They have been working with them at least. This is an area -- I
did provide the aerial showing the site. I'm sure you are aware
of where it is; the surrounding area. On March 7th, they did
appear before the ARC. I did provide those recommendations to






you. They made three. The ARC wanted the note added to the plan
for the ARC to rule whether or not a fence could be installed up
to six feet in height, surrounding the property. Basically, on
all sides, including Howard Avenue. The petitioner and I spoke,
and I spoke with the neighborhood representative as well. I
don't -- I'm not really sure what the intent of the ARC was,
six-foot fence on Howard Avenue? That really didn't make any
sense. It doesn't make sense to wrap the entire site with a
six-foot closure. Especially in a historic district. So I would
caution council to -- how they would consider that first
recommendation. The second one is to add a note to the site plan
stating the archway structure on the site will be removed. It is
not currently on the site plan. You would think it is being
removed because it is not shown on the site plan. I have spoken
to the petitioner and he is willing to note on the plan that it is
removed. And parking calculations the third recommendation, to be
provided to city Tampa City Council by a registered design
professional because the ARC has concerns on the reduction of
parking. As I stated in the report, they are going from what is
approved to 72 space down to 63. It's a net reduction of nine.
And that is something that council has to weigh in with the facts
that I have given you, and you also need to look at the way that
the parking is laid out. It meets the needs of solid waste as far
as putting the Dumpster inside the site as opposed to on Alabama
Avenue. Also moving the wood structure in and they do have
circulation on-site for their loading and unloading of deliveries
which in the past they have done in Howard Avenue right of way.
So those are some additional things that you can weigh in. We
have no objections.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question, Ms. Coyle. When you
say you have no objections, does that take into account the fact
that they are losing nine parking spaces?
>> Yes. It does. Basically, we had to weigh in, as I said
well we look at the 72 parking spaces that were approved in 1989,
a couple of them, by today's standards would not be functional.
So if they had to meet today's standards with that old plan,
probably anywhere from two to four of those parking spaces
actually don't function properly. And, if they go and follow that
old plan, you've got Dumpsters in the right of way and the wood
storage bin in the right of way. Alabama Avenue is probably going
to be referred to as an alley. Because that is how it is treated.
It is a public street, mind you. It is only 30 feet, but it is
treated as an alley. The neighborhood has provided you with an
extensive report as well. Probably about a week ago. And they
did give you pictures of the condition of the Dumpster as it sits.
I have witnessed myself, they have issues with the Dumpster.
>> So.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So your recommendation is kind of taking
everything into account, it's a positive recommendation, like the
trade-off is you lose parking space but you get a better Dumpster
location?
>> Yes, and as long as you do it per code, better
landscaping designed and sidewalks. Many.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am trying to get a better handle on
this parking situation. How many current spaces are there in the
main loft and how many current spaces are there in the remote lot
or can you each determine how many space there are in the remote
lot because it's grassy?
>> It's kind of hard because they don't necessarily park the
way the plan shows they are supposed to park. The main lot was






supposed to have 60.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that what it does?
>> You know, honestly, I didn't count them. I believe
Melanie did. You didn't count them? No?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So it has 60?
>> 60. When you look at it, it is laid out as it is on the
site plan.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That is a calculation of the restaurant
and the other uses in the building?
>> The 72 is a calculation of what was approved in the '89
plan, 12 on the north and 60 in the regular parking lot. I
believe it is 103 is what they would be required by code, today.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the reduction in space is 103 to 63?
That is what the waiver says?
>> Yes. I was actually documenting the waiver per today's
calculations.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because it is not just Bella's
Restaurant. It is also a variety of different uses along there.
It's a workout club and --
>> I think some retail and office and maybe a personal
service of some sort.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Miscellaneous small services.
>> Yes.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Kathy, so I better understand what we are
looking at, you are going to 49? The current is 60?
>> Correct on the main site.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. Mr. Garcia?
>> Tony Garcia: Planning commission staff. Yes, I have
been sworn in. Just a couple of additional comments. Going off
of what Mrs. Coyle state. The land use 25 and 35 respectively PR
uses existing on-site and looking at it as one council member has
stated, looking at the net gain or trade-offs in lieu of the loss
of nine spaces, would it improving the current situation on south
Alabama street where there have been Dumpsters. The proposal
would relocate those Dumpsters internally onto the property and
provide appropriate buffering and sidewalks would provide for
pedestrians safety along Mississippi Avenue would be available for
potential customers access. Planning commission staff had no
objection, found it consistent with the comprehensive plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> David Mechanik, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa,
Florida. I have been sworn. I am here on behalf of Soho
Investments, and Mr. Tom Krauss, who is an owner of Soho
Investments is here with me this evening. I will try and be
brief.
This is a somewhat convoluted fact situation but I think as
you heard after some questions with the staff, we are facing a
difficult situation because we have an existing building with
existing businesses which do include the restaurant, Bella's,
there are retail uses and there are office uses in this be
building that are existing today. The waivers that were
mentioned, are either being requested to simply reflect what City
Council approved in the 1989 plan, or are a reflection of the
improvements to the site that we are proposing to make as part of
this particular zoning site plan -- zoning site plan. With
particular reference to the parking and Mr. Henry, the engineer
for the applicant will give you a more detailed discussion of the
parking, but in fact, the reduction in the parking was approved or
the, if you will, the significant proportion of the reduction
duction was approved in '89 going from whatever was required at






that particular time down to 72 spaces and again, that was to
reflect the existing condition at that particular point in time.
Kathy mentioned that we are in code violation. There has not been
a finding that we are in violation of the code, although we
acknowledge that there are problems on the site with respect to
landscaping, repaving the site, needs to be repaved, the small
parking lot needs to be repaved, which is something we would like
to do as part of this request. We would like to replace the
landscaping, and perhaps most significantly, from the neighbors'
perspective, we would like to move the Dumpsters from the alley
onto the site, which was previously mentioned.
At this point -- well, I would like to just comment on the
ARC recommendation. I think that the idea of putting fencing
around this property is -- would create a stock delayed effect. I
can't imagine that -- stockade effect. I can't imagine it would
be appropriate in an historic district or outside of one.
Especially in a retail context, you can't obscure the site and
fence it entirely N. I think it would be both a safety hazard and
a visual blight to the area. We are proposing landscape buffering
which well speak to in a moment in more detail but we think that
recommendation is inappropriate for this site. I will introduce
Mr. Steve Henley who will speak to -- Henry, who will speak to
the site reconfiguration, parking issues, and then we will speak
to the landscaping.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Mechanik, I usually don't like to
dwell in the past but I think the past is kind of relevant to this
site. I don't think I heard a whole lot on the part -- and I
don't know if you've gotten new owners are or are they the same
owners?
>> My client bought the property in 1998 so when Kathy
mentioned the fence was not put up, we were not the owners at the
time.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was 7 years ago and you bought it
with site conditions that your owner needed to comply with and I
was just wondering why are we here today doing this? I mean why
weren't they complied with? Why weren't they complied with?
>> My client add vied me he was not aware of the site plan
conditions at the time he bought the property.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: But then he got cited with code
enforcement over the last number of years.
>> No. Code enforcement citation happened last year and we
have been working ever since to develop the site plan which we are
bringing with you today. We are working extensively with the
neighborhood to try and address not only the code issues but to
try to address all the alleged code violations.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Next thing, have you seen the letter
from the Moody neighbors?
>> Yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And they list 12 points that they would
like addressed. Are you going to address these?
>> I can speak to them.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: These don't appear to have been
addressed. Are you going to wait for rebuttal.
>> I was planning to wait until rebuttal.
Q.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's fine. You can wait until
rebuttal.
>> Steve Henry, links and associates. I have not been
sworn. (Sworn).
>> Mr. Henry: 502 west laurel, 336077, Tampa. We started






the project, the owners had approached us with the project, and
they had three objectives. One was to improve the traffic
circulation to the pedestrian circulation and also improve the
landscaping to the project. As I'm sure many of you who have been
there as far as the traffic circulation, I will put up the site
plan, this is actually the improved site plan.
As you come in off of Mississippi, you come into the site,
and you circulate around into two dead-end parking rows. That's
the existing site plan. And the problem lies as you know with a
full parking lot you have to then back back, up, down, or somehow
get around that have. So that that center. That is the one
issue. The second is the Dumpsters that are shown on Alabama.
The other issue that you have seen is that there are retail doors
along the north face of the building which also serves as a
drive-up and you open up the door there is the potential of a car
coming to hit it. So we were trying to devise a site plan that
tried to fix a lot of those existing problems. Dumpsters off of
Alabama, moving it interior to the site, work with solid waste
from that standpoint. In addition, what we have done is put a
sidewalk along the north face of the building. So this allows for
people to be able to access foes retail spaces without having to
go through a drive-up. In addition we have also upgraded the
handicaps to the standard ADA with the 12-foot spaces with the
parking space with the walkway in between. So that's what we have
done, and then on the north side what we have tried to do is work
with the residents. One thing we have done is the current plan
shows an access onto Alabama. We have removed that access to
Alabama. The only access to this lot is on Mississippi. And that
was at the request of the residents. What I'd like to do now is
briefly go through the parking just so -- (off mic)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for you. Was there
any consideration for you when you were as a traffic planner given
this challenge, to say, maybe to really meet the needs of the
client, not to meet the size of the footprint but to meet the size
of the client, did you consider double decking this at all? I go
to Bella's a lot, the food is great. It's always packed. I can
never find a parking space. I don't see that reducing the parking
space will meet the needs. Did you considerable double decking
it?
>> Well the financial constraints they have, to build a
parking garage is a pretty big undertaking.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe I should word it working
differently. Did you look at the existing use and what the demand
was and figure out how many spaces you would need and how much
land you would need to meet the needs.
>> We know per code we need 103.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And your proposed site plan has how
many?
>> 63.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: With how many contacts.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Looks like about half. If you count
parcel B.
>> There are about 23 compact spaces on the main lot. 19
spaces are compact out of 49 on the main parcel. But to answer
your question, you know, we were trying to deal with what we've
got, the land we've got, the area we've got, and how to best make
it circulate as best we can.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But you didn't consider adding another
level?
>> From my client's standpoint they were not willing or






financially able to build a parking garage at that location so we
have to deal with the land that we've got. What we're looking at
on here is the parking -- let me pull up the existing site plan
and start with that. As Ms. Coyle had indicated, this plan today
which is the approved plan, has 60 spaces shown on the main lot.
Although two of those spaces really aren't usable. I will point
it out here. As you see, this is the north side. The one space,
looking at here, which is facing Alabama, you can see that bottles
there because in order to get access to retail space they had to
put that there and you couldn't park there. The second one is
adjacent to the walkway to get to Bella's. So the reality is
there is only 58 spaces today on that lot. Bell As. If you then
look at, if you had to bring that lot up to 88 compliance for the
parking, you would actually -- the ADA parking space; if you pull
the Dumpsters off Alabama and pull them interior as we had done,
that would be another two space you would lose so that actually
puts you down to about 55 spaces would you have on the main lot.
The north lot is AP proved for about 12 space so that gives you 67
spaces realistically if you brought in the Dumpsters and had ADA
compliance. The proposed plan for you tonight has 48 spaces on
the main lot, 14 on what I call the north lot for a total of 63.
So it's a difference of about four spaces is what we are looking
at as the difference. And I've got Allison Utter here who will
speak to landscaping. Significant upgrade for landscaping so I
would like her to talk about that unless you have more questions
for me.
>> I'm Allison Utter. I have been sworn in. 3418 Riverview
drive, Tampa. On the landscape, we want to take what was on the
site and improve it. Improve on what's existing. There already
is a nice buffer between the commercial area here and the
residential neighborhood. It's an existing oak tree that goes --
oak tree cluster that goes all the way along the west side. We're
going to preserve those oak trees on the auxiliary parking lot.
We're going to continue by adding additional oak trees and
completing that screen between the commercial areas and the
residential areas. We're also providing a screen of cluster of
trees in the buffer between Howard Avenue and the parking areas.
We're also replacing -- we're taking out several oak trees that
are existing on the site that are in poor condition because they
have a small root area, and just don't have any room to expand.
We're also going to provide right now where the Dumpsters are on
the outside of the fence adjacent to the alley, we're going to
provide new landscaping and irrigation so there will be a variety
of colorful plants and it will be better on the side that faces
the neighborhood. We're also providing a shrub screen all the way
around the auxiliary parking lot and in between the parking and
Mississippi Avenue.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ma'am, on the Alabama side, I must
assume you are going to build a permanent masonry wall. Right?
>> Right now there is a six-foot wood fence and we are going
to retain the six-foot wood fence at this time.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: But does the developer have any
objection to replacing -- Mr. Mechanik can answer this, instead of
a shabby falling-down fence that won't last more than five or ten
years, it is appropriate to buffer residential areas with masonry
walls. He can answer that. My other question is, on Howard
Avenue, you talked about putting in trees and landscaping? But my
recollection is, that's a serious swale there.
>> It is a swale, yes. The idea is to landscape the swale
with wetland-loving plants, different native grasses and so forth,






and trees that will take periodically, Cypress or -- we were
talking about river birch, but they are types of trees that can
take periodic flooding and drying.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You will irrigate the whole thing?
>> Oh, yes. It will be drip irrigation.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>> Mechanik. I guess I will try and answer that question.
I was just advised by the engineers and someone who had
represented the prior owners that a masonry wall, apparently there
is not enough physical space given the root system of the trees
that are along the alley there.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can vault up and over. They do it
all the time.
>> Mr. Mechanik: I can't speak to the technicalities of it.
I was just advised that there wasn't enough space to do that. We
would certainly put up the most attractive space that is available
within the physical site constraints of the property.
Mr. Dingfelder, I decided I would just go ahead and respond to the
14 point. Number one, the proposal to have the site automatically
revert to RM 16 and CG zoning, I don't think that's a legal
condition where you would have some of that automatically trigger
a rezoning. But we did agree to a condition at Ms. Coil's request
that said if we proposed a change in intensity of use that, that
event has to be brought before City Council. So any change in
intensity which would dictate any additional impacts resulting
from that change would have to be brought back before this
council, before it would be implemented. Number two, a time frame
for completion of the plan and the construction --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You must be looking at a different list.
But I'm sure the list you are looking at is a good list. I'm
looking at a list of -- a two-page list, 1 had through 12, that
starts with parking, Dumpsters, log bins?
>> I just have the list that Ms. Crawford gave me before the
hearing.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't you do it on rebuttal?
>> I will speak to it after ward, then. Okay. That's fine.
Just to conclude our presentation, we think that there are a
number of significant improvements with the plan that we're
proposing to council today. The improvements include new and
better landscaping, paving of the small parking lot, moving the
Dumpsters onto the site and then clog them with the -- enclosing
them with the fence. Closing access to Alabama which was
specifically requested by the neighbors. The existing approved
plan has an access point onto Alabama so this was something which
we believed was of benefit to the neighborhood and we were able to
make the change to accommodate, with adding sidewalks onto
Mississippi, and the improved traffic circulation that we are
proposing in terms of the redesign of the site also allows us to
put small trucks onto the site for loading and unloading. And I
would analogize this very similar to a situation where it exists
downtown where you have buildings very close to the street and
you, in fact, do have loading and unloading autumn all the time on
public streets. This proposal would allow some of that loading
and unloading to occur on private property, reducing congestion
and interference with neighborhood traffic. Like I say, we have
worked extensively with the neighbors. It's our understanding,
and they are obviously going to speak for themselves, but it's our
understanding that this proposed plan is viewed by them as an
improvement over the existing situation -- an improvement and we
would respectfully request council's approval.






>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You guys are zoned parcel B?
>> Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone from the public wish to speak on item
18?
>> Shelby: Would the following people raise their hands,
Ron how will, Linda Hamilton, Ron Zussman, nick Chapeman? And Tom
OKOCHAMINO.
>> I have been sworn, Karen ^ , south Moody Avenue, Bayshore
Gardens Association, here on behalf of the residents of Moody
Avenue who have signed the list of concerns on the petition.
As you know we are a 100-year-old neighborhood. We have
provided with you a packet of the 20-year history on this parcel
and I would be glad to answer any questions you have concerning
that packet. Ms. Saul-Sena and I were much younger when the
neighborhood and council addressed these issues in the late '80s.
Our meetings with many people have brought us full circle back to
City Council to get what we were promised 20 years ago. These two
parcels are currently zoned RM 16 and CG but the petitioner is
requesting a PD for his convenience in an attempt to resolve all
issues for code enforcement violations by noncompliance with the
original site plan. In addition the use of this property has
intensified over the course of 20 years, increased restaurant
seating, more personal services that require more parking, and
these have made the problems worse in the neighborhood.
Mr. Mechanik has worked very hard. Many have been resolved. Some
still need council's input at this hour of the morning now and the
others just can't be resolved given the current conditions. Our
hope tonight is to ensure current compliance with the plan as
approved, to require a date of completion and urge that any future
development or change in the use of this site should return to the
RM 16 and CG zoning and meet all of the current city codes that
are being waived during this process. The neighborhood prepared a
list of its concerns, tab one in its packet, and we filed it
officially with this hearing. I will speak to the items that we
think need further clarification. Number one on the parking
issue. The waiver of the 40-plus parking spaces won't make the
automobiles disappear. We have asked the petition tore look at
other adjacent off-site parking for his employees or valet
parking. We have been told that he will use the spaces at the
DeSoto believe that he also owns but he still needs to look for
more to alleviate parking on the rights-of-way and in the
neighborhood. We have also requested the petitioner make a
good-faith effort to work with the other merchants to help bring
the trolley or other mass transit to Howard Avenue as a way to
continue to address this parking shortage. Number two, Dumpsters.
They have agreed to move the Dumpsters or should I say our own
public dump out of public right of way and enclose it but a note
should be added to remove existing concrete Dumpster pad and I
think he said he would do that because they are sitting on the oak
trees. Landscape buffers. They have agreed to maintain the
six-foot fence on the south side of Alabama. However the
neighborhood agree a fence or wall must be included on the site
plan to protect the landscaping and screen the automobiles,
especially on the north lot, where the employees coming and going
in the early morning hours negatively impact the neighborhood
adjacent to this lot. If you will note, there is no fence on the
site plan right now on that northern lot. We think that is
absolutely necessary. In addition, it will help eliminate illegal
parking along Alabama. I believe -- I talked with Mr. Acosta.
His request for fencing around the rest of the property, I think






what he was referring to was a short maybe masonry-type wall that
would protect the landscape and maybe some wrought iron on top of
it. But I'm not sure. But that's what he indicated. On number
7, pedestrian-friendly, sidewalks are being incorporated in the
plan. The neighborhood did request sidewalks -- I mean
landscaping over sidewalks on Alabama, because otherwise, they
would just park on the sidewalk. And also, for buffering. The
neighbor on the corner of Alabama and Mississippi who is here
tonight is willing to grant an easement to the city to continue
the sidewalk along Mississippi which as you are all aware we have
been trying to get sidewalks along Mississippi for years.
So we would request if there is any way to help us, the
money paid moo the sidewalk fund that this developer is going to
have to pay, that it be used by the city to continue the sidewalk
along Mississippi. On the sign, 8, it's part of this PD process
that the sign be brought into compliance with the ARC and Soho
guidelines. On retention, Number 9, it will still be pumped
openly into the easement in the street. There is no tie-in to the
stomp water system on this site. Our hope and what Mr. Henry has
explained is this new landscaping will absorb some of the this
runoff. We would like to reserve the right to have the examined
by a proper city official because we don't know if it I is going
to work. On the loading bays we would like council to address 18
wheelers on our narrow neighborhood streets and maybe consider
some kind of study banning 18 wheelers in historic neighborhoods
and require suppliers to deliver in smaller box trucks. I know
this is done in other cities. We have asked the owner of this
property to insist on box-truck deliveries with his suppliers.
Intersection improvements, we also mentioned to you that we need
to encourage transportation to address the south Dekle, Southview,
quagmire any time you review a property in this area. We have
asked that they participate in the improvements the Berns park.
This will benefit as a business owner and a good gesture to
surrounding neighborhoods of his commercial property. If you
approve this PD you will permit a commercial use on a residential
piece of property and you will allow numerous waivers concerning
parking, green space, setbacks, removal of trees and everything to
accommodate this existing condition. Due to the historical
difficulty with the enforcement on these parcels and the ongoing
impact of the overutilization of these sites we would respectfully
request that you add specific additions to this site plan which
would enable the neighborhood to support this rezoning request. I
have taken the liberty because I knew it was going to be so late,
none of our brains would be functioning at this point, that I
suggested some conditions to facilitate this process. These have
been discussed and I gave them to Mr. Mechanik tonight. We had
discussed all these issues so they don't come as a surprise.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank for you taking the liberty to
draft them.
>> We would like to see them all in the site plan. But
would you like to consider them. Number one, future redevelopment
and use of the site should return to RM CG and CG zoning and
finish all the things that are being waived. Time frame
designated, plan for parking and construction. They should
continue to secure additional off-site parking, copy of the lease
agreements, whatever they work out with other business owners.
Parking should be straightened. Fence wall added on the side of
about. All landscape -- (reading too fast for the late hour;
Captioner distress.)
Thank you for your careful consideration. I would be happy






to answer questions but we need to resolve this issue.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I see the oaks they are referring to
object the left side, Ms. Crawford -- on the left side. Obviously
your house abuts that alley along with some of your neighbors.
What is the preference of the neighborhood in terms of the
preference of the wall, should they try and build a wall,
unreasonable or is a fence adequate or what?
>> I don't think it is unreasonable to ask to look at
building a wall because we have continual repair problems with
that fence. In fact, there is a whole four-foot section on the
end that is completely gone now that used to be there. It will be
an ongoing maintenance issues. We are also concerned about the
oak trees and roots that are there. The fence is sitting
literally on the top of the oak treatment it's a o'clock-tree
abuse situation. It's really a problem. But we would like them
to look at it.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There are ways to vault over the roofs.
>> Right. I am not an expert on horticulture. They could
look at it, yes. And they definitely need to add it on the north
side.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Your preference is a wall.
>> Yes, because it would last and look better longer.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I wanted to say, you have been very
patient. This has been going on for 18 years, and the stack of
correspondence that you shared with us of promises by the owners
of this property for 18 years -- it's not fair. It is absolutely
unfair to your neighborhood that you have had to put up with this.
>> And we ended up as 18th on the agenda. It's par for the
course.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't know, but it's crazy that it's
taken this long and it's been that arduous and that we're still 40
parking spaces shy? I just hope that we can solve some of these
things that, the property owner will prove to be good to their
word and if not, that city code enforcement won't take 18 years to
get often it. It is really just -- get on it. It is --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Embarrassing.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Appalling. I saw these letters of
neighbors and property owners, and the owner promising to solve
it. It is really galling.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else who wants to speak?
>> Good evening, council, my names Roger Grunk. I'm a
resident at 1906 Morrison Avenue. I have been sworn in. Yes, I
am a board member of the historic Hyde Park neighborhood
association and a commissioner on one of the city's two
architectural commissions. The number people who I run into
concerning the historic district are the majority of them are in
favor of the district. But they keep asking me, why it seems that
residents are held to standards that the developers are not? And
I don't -- I can't really answer their questions, but my question
then becomes, why is it that some commercial establishments like
the Bern's hotel have to meet the standards and this project
doesn't? Also, the Whaley's shopping center, retention is under
the parking. To it seems unevenly applied. So we're hoping that
you will keep this applicant's feet to the fire. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next.
>> I haven't been sworn in. (Sworn on oath.)
>> My name is Brent Barris, 3405 west Barcelona street. I am
a representative of Palma Ceia neighborhood association and as the
association, we support Bayshore garden neighborhood association's
efforts to get this PD in compliance with something that would be






beneficial to the neighborhood. It seems as if we have the tail
wagging the dog here. We've got a structure that has uses in it
that dictate 40 more parking spots than this site has. Where
those 40 cars go? They go on the neighborhood streets. Palma
Ceia also experiences that, and on that behalf we ask you to
support Bayshore Gardens in their efforts to try to come to an
agreement with the developer on this.
The other hat I wear is, I am the owner of the construction
company that owns the house that Karen was speaking of at 1402
south Moody. You have a willing owner at the time right now that
would like to cooperate with the neighborhood association, with
the developer, try to get sidewalks on Mississippi, Mississippi is
narrow. I can't grow grass in that area anyway because the people
walk along that area. And I would like to see an allocation
either in the sidewalk fund or the money to go to this area, while
you have a willing participant. Oh, I have also seen site plans
that have off-site improvements. For example, ARAWANNA had at the
South End had improvements along Arawanna, curbcuts that they were
going to put in. And if we could allocate on the site plan for my
section there while we have me -- I don't plan on owning this
place indefinitely -- that's the whole point of having it -- but
while you have me, please use the sidewalk funds to ease the
pressuring on the neighborhood.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
>>Elizabeth Johnson, 1819 Richardson place. I'm speaking as
a member of the historic Hyde Park neighborhood association. Our
position is a little bit different from Bayshore Gardens, only
because we in principal never support PD's where they're used as
we believe they are here to enshrine existing code violations.
And another reason we want to be here is because we want to
enlighten you about what we think the ARC was after when it talked
about the short masonry wall. Regarding my first point, what we
heard the developer say was that they bought it when the site
conditions were in place. Commissioner Keith Roberts on November
10th also spoke about the existing code violations that
Hillsborough perpetuated over the years. There are ways that this
developer can address these problems and council member Saul-Sena
alluded to them very nicely. He can build an appropriate parking
garage on the property in keeping with the historic guidelines or
he can insist on a less restrictive use of the existing building
by his tenants. He doesn't want to do those options because of
financial constraints. Now, our neighborhood appreciates what
Bayshore garden has done. And if you-all go through and abide by
each of their condition, then that might be looked at more
favorably by our neighborhood but as Mr. GR U.N. K has state we
get concerned when we are asked about our double-hung windows but
a commercial owner seems to allow more freedom. That decimate it
is whole meaning of the ARC and the guidelines. I wanted to read
because there was some confusion from the city. This is probably
what the ARC was after. On Page 94 of the guidelines it states
because of the negative impact of vehicles and machinery adjacent
to historic fabric, every attempt should be made to obscure
parking from the view of pedestrians by landscaping, fencing,
walls and general arrangement of the site. So when we talk about
a short masonry wall along Howard Avenue, that is not nonsensical.
It borders a historic district, and under the guidelines we're
supposed to respect that. Finally I'd like to talk about this
condition about if any change in development occur, could we
possibly return to the RM 16 and a CG zoning? I believe that you
could put that condition on there, and at least it warrants






attention by your legal department (RM-16).
I would suggest at the very least, my position would be,
number one, do not pass this PD because it enshrines existing code
violation. If you are going to entertain it, just to help this
poor neighborhood -- Karen is much more patient than I would be --
then please consider all twelve of their conditions, including the
first primary one. If the developer can't do it, then he ought to
build a parking garage on the property then he ought to abide by a
less intensive use. To do anything else lets him be treated
differently than anybody else. Thank you.
>> Shelby: We have four names, Steven M. Crawford, Chris
Nash, Amy Nash, and is that FOOZ Dotsen? Four names.
>> Good morning, everyone. I first would like to
acknowledge my neighbors for participating in this process.
>>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record.
>> Vicky Pollier, 5913 South Moody Avenue. I have been
sworn in. It is late for all of us, but I don't want that to
detract from the issues at hand. We are finally having our chance
to speak to you and we really appreciate that. And whatever hour
it is, I am going to try to take my breath and speak my whole
speech and follow the points that we really feel are important.
Either there is this code enforcement, code violation issue --
Karen and I have been calling code enforcement for 15 years. We
don't know why it didn't get resolved. We don't know why cases
weren't started. But this is what we were dealing with. And
that's why at the intersection of Howard and Mississippi as you
can see by the sign -- Alabama and Mississippi. Thankfully now
our Dumpsters are clearing and with this new plan the Dumpsters
will be inside. But there are some issues with this development
that are somewhat unique to our neighborhood. And I just wanted
to show this to you. Our block -- these homes back into Alabama
Avenue. Like if we are going to call it that. Something that is
13 feet wide I don't think should be called an Avenue. But this
is Alabama Avenue. This is Moody and this is Mississippi. This
is the small parking area. The homes in the 1400 block on the
east side of the street -- many of these houses do not have
driveways. They park and they access their garages from the rear
from, Alabama. They also have parking garages. And so many of
the homes also have garage apartments on both of those blocks. So
keeping Alabama open, keeping Alabama safe is very important to
our neighborhood. The north parking lot, which abuts on the
current plans they have three new oak trees, and I think it's
called fire brush screen? I don't know. But fire brush I know is
only about 18 inches high, and I truly feel like that is not going
to be enough of a buffer. We really want a something substantial
here as -- here is a photograph of this big large oak tree that's
existing. They're going to be planting three new oak trees there.
That's Alabama. And then the buffer of landscaping was discussed
that will be running along there. If we don't have some sort of
fencing, I can guarantee that every fry night, those little fire
brush plants that are 18 inches long will be parked on top of.
Because if it's not blocked, it's going to be illegally parked on.
So you mentioned the mace on fence on the south wall. Some sort
of fencing on the northern lot is imperative. I think that -- you
know, one thing that we keep talking about the usage of this
property -- you know, 20 years ago, when Bella's opened, none of
us knew what was going to happen to the rest of Hyde Park. At
that point there were a few offices in that building. Now it is
special services. And the usage and the intensity of Bella's has
significantly increased over the years. The bar has been






expanded, which is part of the variance process that we went
through. The tables outside the, the cafe tables have been
expanded. The usage of the property has increased. And that's
when they have 104 parking space. I see it going more successful,
not less successful. We are going have this beautiful park across
the street soon. And where are these people going to park? We
know that there's no easy answer, but just because you don't have
the parking spaces doesn't mean that the people will not be coming
there. You know, Karen mentioned the idea of the trolley and that
is snag we would like to see. We would love to see looking at
other options and we appreciate Mr. Curtis allowing parking at his
other property, at the DeSoto. But that still is only another ten
spaces. The sidewalk is a real issue for all of us. Actually, I
went to the property last week to look at the issue of fencing on
the west side and whether or not that would be an issue. And he
was uncomfortable going down the street with me in my wheelchair
because there is a 7-inch granite curb and there is no place for
me to go. And that is true for children in carriages and
bicycles. And we understand that there is no room for delivery
bays. And we appreciate that there are going to be changes in the
configuration, but this truck is a regular in our neighborhood.
In this picture he is parked right on Mississippi, right at that
intersection, which as you know is a very dangerous intersection.
He also often parks on Howard. Not to pick on SYSCO. There's
Pepsi, and he was parked in the 13-foot alley, so that means there
is nobody going up or down that road. Other cities have limited
parking and put stipulations on -- I asked a Tampa police officer
what to do about it. He said, well, call me and we will write him
a ticket if he's blocking traffic. I don't know how reasonable
that is, but I do know that 20 years ago we wouldn't have
tolerated semi trucks blocking traffic on Howard Avenue three or
four times a day at businesses. And that is whap what is
happening now. I always say when I come before you that one of
the successes of the Soho district is because of the presence of
the neighborhoods. And it's this interaction of neighborhoods and
businesses that makes it a wonderful place to live and a wonderful
place to do business. Mr. Mechanik and Mr. Henry have been
unbelievably forthright with us and worked with us. They have
made some huge changes in the plans that we sincerely appreciate.
But you know, we have been made promises now by developers and by
property owners for over 20 years. I know it's not this developer
and not this lawyer. But for 20 years we have been made promises.
And, you know, we need to solve these problems. We need creative
ideas. We need to be promised that they're going to be fixed and
taken care. I really appreciate the time. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Anyone else like to speak?
Mr. Mechanik, rebuttal?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Mechanik, have you had a chance to
see the draft conditions from Ms. Crawford?
>> Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are you okay with them or do you need to
speak to them.
>> I need to speak to them. Some of them are okay. Some of
them are already really addressed. But I will be trying to go
through them. I would like to just point out, and I think
Ms. Pollier just indicated that, I can only speak to the issue
since I have been involved since last summer and we have worked
very hard to try to make this situation right and improve the
situation south there. And I'm very hopeful that we can through
this process, you know, come to a conclusion and, in fact,






implement what we are proposing to do. Condition number one,
while I do have a concern about an automatic reverter to some
zoning district as to whether that's legally enforceable, I just
spoke to my client, and I think we could agree to a condition like
that. I think it's worded in a way that I'm a little bit
concerned legally what it would mean if there was any change in
the zoning reverted to RM-16 on the small lot, presumably we would
lose our right to park in that lot which creates an even greater
problem than we would have today so I am just concerned about the
legal implications of that but we are agreeable to some form of
that condition. You know, if we can work that out with the legal
department and the neighbors, that makes sense. We are not
disagreeing with the idea behind that condition.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have a commitment to less
intensity? To less traffic-creating zoning use?
>> We actually have a condition that Kathy added that we
agreed to this week that said if we make any what, if anything,
change to intensity of the use, that that be brought back to City
Council.
>> Kathy Coyle, land development: I neglected to mention
this, I had placed a condition on the plan, bottom left-hand side
of the site plan.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That is not the same intent. This
intent is not that it could get more intense, but if anything
changes, it has to get less intense. I think that's a pretty
critical difference. Maybe you can work than that.
>> This particular note he addresses any changes in
occupancy that requires more additional parking.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, any changes it has to go back to a
lesser intensity. You wouldn't think of it getting greater but if
this changes, it has to be less. Like you give up your liquor
zoning.
>> Sour saying not allow them to go to a use that is similar
intensity.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that is what the neighborhood is
saying. You are 40 parking spaces less than what you need. If
anything is changing, it needs to be less.
>> We Mechanik: We W can work on language that address that
is issue. Council should be aware we can't prohibit someone
coming before council 15 years from now and asking for a change
that theoretically will be more intense. We can't prohibit them
from ever doing that but we can certainly look at language to try
to force them so that anything that occurs under this zoning is
less intense. I think that is the intention of council and the
neighborhood and I think the developers would agree with that. I
think we can work with legal council and the neighborhood on that.
Number two, time frame for completion of the plan and during
construction. All I can say is we have to go to the ARC. I mean,
even our landscaping has to be approved by the ARC. We have no
control over those time frames. I can tell you my control is
anxious to get that done.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Commit to go that time frame after final
approval with the ARC? You talked about finality earlier.
Everything needs some finality so if you said after you are done
with us and the ARC, from that point forward, six months of
construction and you are done? Or nine months?
>> I could figure out what that deadline would be, but we
need to get city permits, which is not a finite period of time
either.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You could put that in the equation,






could you put that as a note on here. I think that would be very
important.
>> We can figure out what a construction schedule would be
and agree to that.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing I would like to see tied
to that particular note, Mr. Mechanik, is -- and this is extremely
unorthodox -- but if you say, let's say you commit to nine months,
nine months after permitting, okay, that you are going to be done,
then I would like a commitment on the site plan that you schedule
an appearance back in front of City Council specifically to
basically show Compline. And that way, would it give us and the
neighborhood an opportunity and it would be a noticed, you know,
sort of appearance, that way it would give us the opportunity,
especially the neighborhood an opportunity, to say, are you really
done insist it really consistent? And is the neighborhood
satisfied?
>> We would have no problem with that. (Mechanik). I'm
sorry, have I some sinus medication, I am completely dried up here
I am having a little trouble talking. They are going to get me
some water here.
We are attempting to secure additional parking off-site. We
did agree to, my client owns the building across street, Howard
Avenue. Your zoning code doesn't allow you to use a short-term
lease as counting toward parking requirements. But I mean we will
continue to look for parking. I mean, we just can't make
commitments as to how much and where and so forth.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So what does that mean in terms of --
>> I don't know what we can commit to on that. I mean, we
can't -- we have been turned down by Bradley Engraving and the
property owner immediately to the south. Most of the parking
available, surface parks is being used by Gordon Davis for his
restaurants and for Bern's in that particular area, so there is a
lot of demand. All we can do is say we will look for.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: They mentioned the DeSoto.
>> Well, there are 20 parking spaces there which we can make
available during the evening hours.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you include that in the site plan?
>> Well, I have to talk to my client about that, because,
you know, ultimately that building could be sold and I don't know
that it could be sold with that kind of restriction on it. I
mean, it's not tied to this particular site. We are willing to do
that, but --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: If it's evening parking spaces, it seems
like it --
>> Somebody could propose to put a restaurant in the
building across the street then.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That would be cute.
>> I mean I am not saying that is happening.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Seems like that would alleviate your
parking shortage or at least get you close tore where you need to
be.
>> We are definitely prepared to allow that but I don't
think they could put themselves into a position that they couldn't
sell the building as long as that commitment ran with the land on
that property. So again, I will be happy to talk with my client
and work with the staff on it. But I just don't know what else
question do there.
Q. Old Dumpster pads should be removed. Well agree
with that. I think it is implicit in the conditions. We
would be happy to make that explicit. Fence should be






replaced. We will replace the fence. I ask my clients. If a
masonry fence will fit along the Alabama property boundary on
the main parking lot we are willing to do that. My client is
concerned about security for the putting a fence on the small
parking lot, it's not tied to anything. If you were to put a
fence or a wall that's not really anchored to anything else,
they're concerned about people hiding behind the fence.
>> How about the stem wall?
>> I'm sorry?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about on parcel B you could do a
stem wall because at least that would protect the shrubbery that
Mrs. Poll yea was talking about, the short wall.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Or the ARC I'm sure would be supportive
of brick piers. You go through ARC and they will make sure it
is --
>> Yes, aesthetically appropriate. I think we can do that.
Number 6, fence wall screening per ARC condition, I mean we do
feel strongly that putting a wall around the entire site is not --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about the short wall we spoke to
earlier? Short wall might not be a bad idea. Again, it would
keep people from cutting through, walking through. Everybody does
it right now, you walk through, bang up the shrubbery, kick up the
sprinklers that are going to be installed.
>> Part of the problem is a wall I assume will be about a
foot wide. If you look at the site plan it's so tight there we
are in some cases having just maybe two feet of land available for
landscaping. So if we were to try and incorporate a wall, we're
reducing the landscaping width. I mean there are physical
constraints here. I just don't know that -- I'm feeling like I'm
in a position like we're trying to design the site here.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let me interrupt and you second. I thought
this was going to be the game plan. The neighborhood has been
saying you have been cooperative and your client as well and vice
versa. There have been some issues that were there for a long,
long time that were a problem to the neighborhood and I can
understand 18 years of putting up with that nonsense you can lose
your patience. I mean I live in Hyde Park. I have been
supportive forever of what they are doing but it was not my
understanding -- and Karen, please correct me if I'm wrong -- I
don't think we can ask this guy to sit here and say this is coming
what we are going to do. I thought we would submit this so it
would be suggestions Karen would look at so you could come back
and tell us what you could and couldn't do. You are trying to be
nice but you are struggling here and saying yeah, I think we
could. I think he needs some time, colleagues, to digest it and
come back. In the areas of Number 4, 6, whatever, if you can't,
then in order to make the neighborhood happy we can go back to it
and say okay, if you can't do this, can you do this? But I just
don't think you can shoot right off and say what you can or can't
do. I don't think you are in a position to do that.
>> I agree. I was coming rapidly to that conclusion. I
can't design things standing at the podium here. I can we can
work with the neighborhood and this council on all of these issues
to some extent. And I guess at this point what I would really be
asking is council to give us a little time to work on these issues
and come back.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I think that would be work on the issues,
and Mr. Mechanik, I have to tell you this, have some meetings
scheduled with them so at that point you can discuss with Karen
and the rest of the group what you can and can't do and what's






suitable and what's not. I mean that's the only way to get to
this.
>>GWEN MILLER: How long would that take, Mr. Mechanik? How
many weeks?
>>Three weeks. Is that a possibility?
>>GWEN MILLER: Clerk, what date is that? Three weeks?
Let's see what the neighbors say. Could you-all come in the
morning, since you are going to work with Mr. Mechanik? Can you
come in the morning or you still want it at night? Still want it
in evenings. Okay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think they should get to be first.
>> You guys are cram packed full of cases that are new and
haven't been heard.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: But you know what? They are going to
have it all worked out by the time they come back.
>> Okay this is the rundown. If you keep it on my night, on
April 14th, you have ten new and four continued. On.
>>GWEN MILLER: That's too many.
>> On May 12th, you have ten new and three continue. On
June 9th -- I'm sorry, go ahead.
>> I don't think the neighbors want to make it that long.
>>GWEN MILLER: If we set you now at the 14th we will put
you at the bottom of the list so if you can come to the morning we
can put you on for 10:30, 11 o'clock. What morning do you have?
>> That would be the 31st of March at 11 o'clock.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Is 11 o'clock okay? Doing this with the
baby or what?
>> KAREN CRAWFORD: Actually, the officers won't be in town.
>> April 7th is the next morning meeting.
>> KAREN CRAWFORD: April 7th is okay. I do want to say,
these have all been discussed with the petitioner and we were
looking for some direction from you-all, because the owner is
refuse to go do some of this.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My direction would be that the
petitioner needs to get to yes would be my direction.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Karen, I think the reason that we're having
this conversation is to make the owner understand that. What we
are willing to lives to is when they come back, they have to show
us some due diligence on everything they have done and explain
what they can't do. There are certain things when you are talking
about the Pepsi truck there, that, it's not going to be tolerable.
We will have to talk about. Calling the police officer, giving
them a ticket, we have the same problem with the mini mart across
the street from our store, by the time the police officer comes
it's not priority one. Those are things we need to be thinking
about as well as them. You see where I'm coming from?
>> Yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Mechanik, I don't know if your
client is here or not, if the alternative is to lose a bunch of
the uses. Okay? I mean the restaurant is going to stay obviously
but if they can't meet some of the requirements they can use a
bunch of the uses until they get down to the 60 spaces that are
required. I am throwing that out there that that's the
alternative.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A year ago council made demolition by
neglect illegal. That means trying to legitimize a hardship that
was self-created. That is not a legitimate rationale. I hope
Ms. Crawford shares with you and your client the inch of
correspondence dating back 20 years on this property of promises
not met. I am sure that you can tell from council's tone that






council is getting really serious about code enforcement
violations and not allowing waivers. I mean there is a paradigm
shift. When you come back, I would love to see you get to yes on
all of these or be working on it awfully hard and be able to tell
us owner participation, have commitments ready to share with us.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need a motion to continue this.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved to April 7th at 11 a.m.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion?
[Motion Carried.]
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else come before council?
>> Move to receive following documents.
[Motion Carried.]
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to make a motion that we either
direct our legal staff to look into or come up with something
drafted within our council rules about what time we are going to
be ending these meetings. We canceled five meetings tonight. If
we had not canceled five, we would have been here until 2 or 3
o'clock.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have a rule that says don't start a
hearing after --
>>GWEN MILLER: Michelle told me that was not in the rule.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: We adopted it --
>>KEVIN WHITE: Like I said, either look into --
>> You had talked about it but you had not decided.
>>KEVIN WHITE: We need to look at it because --
>>GWEN MILLER: Next week we will have a rule that at 11
o'clock all in favor?
[Motion Carried.]
(Meeting Adjourned)