Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
March 31, 2005
5:30 p.m. Session
Unedited Realtime Translation


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

[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
The chair will yield to Mrs. Mary Alvarez.
>> It gives me great pleasure to introduce Desiree Valdez, my aide, to do the invocation tonight.
May we please stand, stay standing for the pledge of allegiance?
>>> Desiree: Let us pray.
Dear God, we ask you as we gather here this evening to give this council clarity of wisdom and sensitivity needed to make the decisions we've elected them to do.
Father, we ask that all who enter this chamber be blessed with integrity, honesty and patience.
Let us also remember all those who protect us and our freedom near and far.
For this we pray.
Amen.

>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: (No response.)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
I'd like to put on the record that Mr. John Dingfelder will not be here tonight.
Item number 1, continued public hearing.
>>> Good evening.
Rose Petrucha, planning council staff.
This plan amendment requests for amendment to the Tampa comprehensive plan, is located at 3306 West Hillsborough Avenue.
It's located the southwest corner of Hillsborough and Lincoln, which is approximately 350 feet east of Himes Avenue.
The site is a little over five acres in size and it currently houses a vacant 8-screen movie theater.
The site has been marketed for several years, but conditions have not been favorable for this particular use.
The amendment is being requested to provide an opportunity for redevelopment of the existing site and the existing structure for another type of commercial use.
The current land use plan classification on the site is community mixed use 35.
And that category is suitable for general commercial professional office and multifamily development, but it does not allow for outside storage uses.
The heavy commercial plan classification that's being requested on the site, and if approved, the corresponding zoning classification which allows for an automobile sales will be requested.
This proposed development would bring an established automobile dealership to a convenient location near the Dale Mabry Highway of Hillsborough and the intersection.
It would provide an opportunity for reuse of the vacant commercial structure, furthering the redevelopment and reinvestment in the Hillsborough Avenue corridor.
The Planning Commission heard this request at a public hearing on February 14th, and found it consistent with the goals and objectives and poses of the Tampa comprehensive plan with regards to redevelopment and redevelopment opportunities.
That concludes my presentation.
>> Would you like to say anything?
>> BLAIR KURLAND: Schiff Lockery, 1211 Westshore Boulevard.
I'm here on behalf of the applicants, Ralph Goeto.
This property has been vacant since 1999.
And it is in a current state of disrepair.
The vacant status serves no good purpose and perhaps even a negative purpose being that it's a vacant movie theater.
The applicants are proposing to bring this site back to life and to redevelop it using the existing structure and incorporating innovative technology to create a real state-of-the-art facility.
We have received unanimous recommendation of approval from the Planning Commission, and support from the Planning Commission staff.
We received support from the Plaza Tierra homeowners association and the president submitted a letter into the record at a previous hearing.
We have also received support from Monsignor Higgins of St. Lawrence Catholic church, and I have a letter from Monsignor Higgins that I would like to submit into the record.
I would also like to bring your attention to a transportation study that was prepared by links and associates that was submitted with the application.
That concludes that the proposed use of an automobile dealership on the site will result in less impact than the current movie theater, particularly with regard to late night trips.
At this time I'd like to introduce Ms. Hammond to discuss the request and the consistency with the comprehensive plan.
>> Good afternoon.
My name is Ethel Hammer with Inglehart, Hammer and Associates.
My address is 5444 Bay Center Drive, suite 122, Tampa.
I'm going to give a brief presentation and see if you have any questions.
I'm going to focus on three issues, and those would be consistency with the comprehensive plan, compatibility with surrounding land uses, and the redevelopment aspect that Blair touched on briefly.
At this point, I'd like to use the Elmo, put a little area up there, and kind of give you a little tour of the neighborhood.
For those of you that are obviously familiar with Hillsborough Avenue, you know that this will not be the introduction of a new use to Hillsborough Avenue.
There are quite a few other automobile dealerships in the immediate neighborhood, and as a matter of fact almost across the street to the north is Bill Currie Ford.
To the immediate east of our site is an adult use club.
To the east of that is an auto repair, auto body shop.
Across the street is the department store.
We have a convenience gas station on the northeast corner, mini warehouse.
This is an adult education school across the street.
And then again as was mentioned there are shopping centers nearby.
We have the Catholic church to the west, who is in support of this petition.
And then the automobile dealership.
And of course on the immediate west of Dale Mabry we have more auto dealerships.
So that is a use that is consistent with the land use trend in the immediate area.
As the Planning Commission pointed out, we believe this is a use that is compatible with and consistent with the policies in the comprehensive plan.
We believe that this is not a new introduction of this plan category.
It is in the immediate neighborhood, including immediately across the street to the north.
And just so you get a better picture for the need for redevelopment, I don't know if you can see, but we even have the front porch of this theater area, so it's an area that has been occupied, shall we say, by some of the residents in the neighborhood, and we would like to see this become a more contributing structure to the fabric of this neighborhood.
I did meet with the plaza terrace neighborhood association, and I will say that they were very much in support, not only of this use, because they know the Gettel family but they were very pleased that this theater would go away and that some use would come to the neighborhood that would be more compatible with what they see as their neighborhood.
So thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Hammer, just a second.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
Immediately to the west of there, you have apartments.
>>> To the south.
That's correct.
Yes.
I'll get the area-wide.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: To the southwest.
Did you also have any remarks from those neighbors there?
>>> We contacted the owners of the apartment buildings, and they were in support.
Apparently there has been a lot of criminal activity on the back side of this movie theater.
So they have been delighted that something is going to go in there that will stop the activity.
>> What about the access to their property from Hillsborough Avenue as you're coming east on Hillsborough?
Will that have any effect on your property there, or their property?
They do have an access to their apartments?
>>> Yes, they do.
And, as a matter of fact, that is going to be -- one thing I should have mentioned is we are committing to do a PD on the record, even though we could ask for Euclidean, we have promised the neighbors that we'll do a PD.
We'll work out access issues with them.
We are going to put conditions on it such as no loud speakers.
We will not do test runs through the neighborhood.
I mean, we have made all kinds of commitments as part of our discussions.
And access is going to be something that we are going to address in the PD and work out with them.
>> And the lighting, too, to address, make sure that they are not affected by the lighting.
Some automobile dealerships have lots of lights in there.
And landscaping, too, will be addressed, right?
>>> That's correct.
We have committed to work with them on the landscaping as well.
>> Thank you very much.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One more question.
The one thing you didn't mention was the fact that right now that site of zoning is completely paved, and I just wanted reassurance when you come back with a PD that there will be stormwater addressed, that you will have some, you know, unpaved areas that you will deal with stormwater on the site.
>>> I think when we address the landscaping, that is when we'll contribute to some additional unpaved areas on the site.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Ms. Hammond, you made a comment to Ms. Alvarez.
She asked about the tenants of the apartment complex.
I don't know if she had phone calls but I had approximately six to maybe ten phone calls from residents of that apartment complex.
I know two residents personally, and they had also talked to people that they know, and they were all in great support of this project moving forward.
And they are tired of looking at the abandoned building and the transients that are through there.
And one thing I really don't is you showing my SOFA.
(Laughter)
Seriously, everyone is in great support in that neighborhood.
And I think this will be a great addition.
Many things have been planned for this particular facility that have fallen wayside.
And I give great appreciation to the Gettel family for trying to improve certain sections of town.
>>GWEN MILLER: Did you collect rent from him?
(Laughter)
>>> Exactly.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on this item 1?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive future land use element, future land use map for the property located at 3306 west Hillsborough Avenue from community mixed use 35 to heavy commercial 24 providing for repeal of all conflicts in ordinance, providing for severability, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Item number 2.
We need to open.
>> Move to open.
>> Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that's going to speak on item 2 or 3?
Please stand and raise your right hand.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: When you state your name, please reaffirm that you have been sworn for the record.
Thank you.
>>> Good evening.
Annie Hart, administrator for the Historic Preservation Commission for the City of Tampa.
And I have been sworn.
The property before you is the Plant-Hatton house in Beach Park.
This property was brought forward to the HPC at the request of the owners Jay and Callie Hatton, and also they wanted this beautiful home recognized for its wonderful architecture.
The Historic Preservation Commission reviewed this property and found it significant under criteria C for its architecture.
Other properties in Beach Park too have since come forward for designation so it's kind of exciting to see the momentum growing in Beach Park. The neighborhood association has submitted an application and another for the house across the street from this one which is also a 1920-25 Beach Park home.
So I have some photographs to show you.
There's the aerial view of the location.
The historic plat map of the Beach Park neighborhood.
There was a survey done several years ago in Beach Park, and they identified 58 resources in that neighborhood.
So we are hoping to encourage other property owners that have the intact revival style home from the 1920s.
They have maintained their architectural integrity to come forward and hopefully we can bring those forward for designation.
This is a Tampa Tribune article from June 27, 1926. The property was originally built for Philip Plant, the grandson of Henry plant, and his wife Constance Bennett, a film actress.
She starred in approximately 55 films in Hollywood.
She is a name you typically would see in a role of supporting actress and she was in numerous films.
This is a scene from the east, the east facade of the property.
The courtyard, which is the north side of the house. The northwest side.
And then looking north to the accessory structure.
There's a photograph of the access try structure and also the yard.
And then here are some of the architectural details of the property.
You can see the Mediterranean revival style echoed in the porch support, the chimney detailing, the wrought iron, and the other wrought iron below in the corner is on the window in the accessory structure.
And there's a detail from the second floor balcony and also the front porch.
The Plant-Hatton house is approved for its architecture and a local landmark.
I have a copy of the report to receive and file.
>> Rose Petrucha, Planning Commission staff, and I have been sworn.
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed historic landmark designation on March 14th and found it consistent with the comprehensive plan policies of the future land use element and the historic resources element.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 2?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida designating the Plant-Hatton house located at 4505 west Beachway drive Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section 3 hereof as a local landmark providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
(Motion carried)
Need to open 3.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>ANNIE HART: Historic Preservation Commission administrator for the City of Tampa.
And I have been sworn for this item as well.
This property is the George Guida Sr. house, 1516 North Renfrew Avenue, and brought by the West Tampa citizens.
They brought it to the Historic Preservation Commission.
They worked diligently to move this forward and to unite with Tampa Preservation, ink, in its preservation effort.
They also united in the drive to mothball the property and preserve it.
And they had a donation drive that resulted in Tampa Preservation, Inc., being a major donor, another anonymous donor put in $15,000, the F.E. Lykes Foundation contributed $11,000 and another group contributed $5,000.
So this has truly been a community preservation effort and it's exciting to bring it forward to you.
The Historic Preservation Commission reviewed this item and found it significant under criteria B for persons significant to our past which is George Guida, Sr., known as Mr. West Tampa, and I have a short presentation on this property as well.
This is the house and Mr. Guida.
Here's the location at 1516 North Renfrew.
And it borders McFarland Park.
This is an aerial view.
There's the 1990 survey shows as one of the unique features the heart-shaped driveway on the property.
There's a sample map.
And here is the property when it was under construction in 195951.
You can see the beautiful facade.
There are not a lot of structures in the 1950 era.
A lot of them as you know in the post war era were production type houses and not designed such as this one.
So it's very important to recognize this architecture.
There it is nearing completion in 1952.
There's the patio area.
Portrait of the family in the mid 1950s.
And these are some of the current -- actually these are not quite current because the preservation effort has been moving forward.
In the last month they have completed almost all of the mothballing.
It's 95% at least complete.
And it's been a wonderful effort that they have put on.
So maybe at second reading I will be able to show you the after-shot.
But again there are the elements.
You can see that the house is very much intact.
It just needs a new occupant.
There's the patio area again.
And the detailing of that barbecue.
Mr. Guida owned a tile business in west Tampa on Howard Avenue and you can see the evidence of that.
And then this is known as George Guida memorial drive which enters the McFarland park area. And there's the plaque which stands at McFarland park noting him as Mr. West Tampa.
Thank you.
I have a copy of that report to receive and file.
>>> Rose Petrucha.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I guess this is foe for Annie Hart.
Ms. Hart, who owns the house now?
>> It's currently owned by the City of Tampa.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to echo what Ms. Heart said about the community effort to save it and it's been the hard work and generosity of a host of volunteers who recognize this as a 1950s landmark, and have succeeded in successfully mothballing it and are looking for resources for restoration.
But 50 years ago so close in time to our lives it's hard to think of it as historic.
So it's more challenging to get your mind around something from the 50s being historic.
But this is the first effort in our community to recognize something that -- from that era, and this is a particularly distinctive example.
So this is exciting.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 3?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida designating the George Guida Sr. house at 1516 north Renfrew Avenue Tampa, Florida more particularly described as a local landmark providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict providing for severability, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: We will be in recess for a couple of minutes.
(Recess)
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to order.
Roll call.
[Roll Call]
>>GWEN MILLER: At this time I am going to recognize Gloria Moreda.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
I am going through the list of the agenda, identifying the cases that have been requested for continuances.
Item number 7, which is ZO-5-33, council has already continued that case, and it is going to be scheduled for May 12th.
Or it has been rescheduled for May 12th, I should say.
Item number 9 -- it's actually already been scheduled.
>>GWEN MILLER: Already scheduled.
Okay.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Why don't you have a vote to remove it from the agenda.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, are we keeping track of how many we are adding as we go?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Yes.
The next one, item number 9, ZO-5-36, they have asked for a -- request a continuance.
And the next available would be May 26th.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: How many do we have?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: You have two continued cases.
>>GWEN MILLER: I mean regular.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: 10.
So that will fill out that date.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Point of order before you vote.
Sorry.
If these are being continued, as a continued public hearing, the first question is, that is number 9, is that correct?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: That is number 9.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Does that then first have to be a vote to open the public hearing?
>> Yes.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to open number 9.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: See if there's anyone in the audience.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That would be my next question.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience to speak on number 9?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue to May 26th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: May 26 at 6 p.m.?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Item Z, Z05-36, they have requested a continuance to May 12th, at a day meeting.
And I did want to speak on that because that is unusual.
They are asking for a waiver that it be continued, not to a night meeting but to go to a day meeting.
This is on independent parkway.
There is no residential around this location.
Staff does not have an objection to the continuance to a day meeting.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let's open the public hearing first.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to open.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Now to waive the rules?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: The question is whether anybody in the audience wishes to speak to that continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the audience want to speak to item 10?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Then that will be a motion to waive the rules.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to waive the rules.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to waive the rules.
(Motion carried)
Continued to May 12th in the morning.
Till what time?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: 10 a.m..
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: The next item is Z 05-34, item number 11.
The petitioners have requested a continuance.
They would like the next available, and that is the June agenda.
It will be June 23rd to stay with the planner assigned.
>> Move to open.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public to speak on item number 11?
>>> Yes.
I would --.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I would just ask that you speak to the issue of the continuance, please.
>>> Good evening.
Keith Bricklemyer, council members.
Actually, our request originally was to go to May 12th, and apparently May 12th filled up.
We thought the next open agenda was the 26th.
Is the 26th filled as well?
By virtue of the other continuances that occurred.
So we are being pushed substantially down the road. The reason for our request is that staff had made some requests of us that require us to file a revised site plan and we didn't have time to get that in to meet the 13-day requirement.
So I would request that you hear us at the earliest possible time, if not May 12th, May 26th.
I understand that it would require a waiver.
We make that request.
It's simply a matter of time is money, and we'd like to finish the process.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Moreda, do we have anything?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: You have already ten new cases and three continued.
>>GWEN MILLER: To May 26th, too?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Would you like May 26th?
What about May 28th?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: May 26th is filled now, right?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: May 26th is Tampa General Hospital.
That was the special meeting.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: It would be May 26th.
It's April 26th, is it not?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: He was requesting May 26th.
Keith: Originally May 12.
That's filled.
Hopefully we don't have to go beyond May 26th.
>>GWEN MILLER: May 26th is open.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: May 26th is full.
We have ten new cases.
>> You just scheduled one today.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: You would have to waive the rules for a fourth continued case.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: There might be a possibility we might get a continuance or something.
>>> Jean Johnson, president, Temple Crest civic association.
The residents of Temple Crest, procedure we have right now is very distressing.
It seems that the petitioner should have all their T's crossed and I's dotted before we get the neighborhoods down here.
Calling City Council office and GTE calling the chamber, no one knows about a continuance.
If we could have known about it ahead of time and known for sure, then we could have notified the neighborhood.
It's just very distressing.
If you feel like this is something that's necessary, this continuance tonight, then we'll agree.
Otherwise, it should go forward.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think based on the fact that since citizens have come down in good faith we should consider going forward.
Keith: If I may respond.
I did notify Ms. Johnson.
We were requesting a continuance to May 12th.
When she called city staff, city staff did not know that, and so that's why they were not -- they simply didn't take me at my word.
I gave them that notice well in advance of this hearing.
As to the other association we met with.
They were informed.
They just didn't believe me.
>> Are you ready to go forward?
>>> No, ma'am.
We have folks from out of town.
We need to revise is site plan to address their concerns.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have you been meeting with the neighborhoods?
>>> We have had two meetings.
This association, and another meeting with the other association.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: How far in advance did you give them know you were going to continue?
>>> At least a week.
When did I call you, Jean?
Yeah, on Easter week.
As soon as we determined what the potential date was, that we could live with, that was available for staff.
So we did our best.
And I asked Ms. Johnson if there was a way we could help her notify her membership.
And we were not asked to help do that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I hear Ms. Johnson's argument.
But I think if the petitioners moved forward in good faith and this is not a delay tactic and there are legitimate changes being made to the project, I don't have any problem with granting a continuance, so long as it is fair to the neighborhood and gives them plenty of time, for you to meet with them, for them to give you comments back, and to see if there is any middle ground that might be reached.
>>> Keith: I offered that to Ms. Johnson, I sent her a letter explaining the continuance, saying we are going to file a new site plan and we would like to meet with you to review the new site plan once it's filed.
We are doing our best to work with them.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: But I would say it doesn't appear you are going to be able to get it worked out at least at this stage so it looks like we are in for maybe a contentious hearing, and I would not be in favor of waiving our new rules to add this one to either the May 12th or the May 267th agenda.
>>> So what would be the date?
>>GWEN MILLER: June 23rd.
>> That's our first meeting, in June?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: No, but we are filled up in our first meeting.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: You have a rule that it stays with the planner assigned.
Right now there are continuances --.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have three continued June 9th.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Oh, excuse me.
You're right.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Ms. Moreda, as well as Mr. Bricklemyer, just in case you didn't know, council had a long and arduous discussion about this over the past two weeks, as far as ten items, and then three continuances per night session.
Now, we may be able to accommodate this if it doesn't show a hardship on the part of the planners, if they would be able to change planners, if that might get you in a couple weeks earlier, I don't know.
I would like Ms. Moreda to speak to that.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: I was wrong.
June 9th has already three continued cases.
So June 23rd.
And frankly, there are a lot of site plan issues that I think they need to work on.
And work with the neighborhood.
I tend to think June 23rd would work well.
>>KEVIN WHITE: For everybody?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>> Keith: Thank you, council.
>>GWEN MILLER: You're welcome.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: The next item is item number 15, Z 04-139.
The petitioner is liking a day meeting for this continuance, which would be a waiver of the rules.
And again the June 23rd would be the earliest night meeting that they could go to.
They requested a 30-day continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Need a motion to waive the rules.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: To continue.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion to continue and waive the rules.
We're just waiving the rules.
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 15?
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: My address is suite 3700 Bank of America plaza.
On behalf of St. John's Episcopal church and day school this evening, we requested a day hearing on the continuance.
So we certainly would support the waiver of the rule and ask for that to be set during the day.
>>GWEN MILLER: What date?
What time?
>>STEVE MICHELINI: 10 a.m.?
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else want to speak on number 15?
Just a moment, please, sir.
>> Linda Pearson, 1200 West Platt representing adjacent property owner.
We have no objection to the day hearing or to the continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay, sir, you're next.
>> I really have no objection.
Inc. -- I can come during the day as well.
>>GWEN MILLER: May what?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: June 23rd.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: No.
30 days?
45 days which would be, what, six weeks.
If the clerk has a calendar.
>>THE CLERK: Yes.
May 19th.
>>GWEN MILLER: May 19th.
10:00.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue May 19th at 10 a.m.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Item 16, which is Z 04-159, the petitioner has advised that they need a continuance.
And they would like the earliest possible, which would be June 23rd, in the evening.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on number 16?
We need a motion to continue to June 23rd.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue to June 23rd, 6 p.m.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: That's all for continuances.
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 17.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: I think we would like council to waive the rules and take item number 17 now.
There are a large number of people here in the audience.
And I think they are ready to move forward.
The petitioner -- well, I'll let you open the public hearings.
>>GWEN MILLER: It's already open.
We don't have to open it.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Oh, it's already open?
Let me give you the site plans.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, if we could have those who wish to speak on item number 17, please be sworn at this time.
>>GWEN MILLER: We are going to swear everybody in.
Anyone here to speak on items 4 through 17, would you please stand and raise your right hand?
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: When you state your name, would you please also reaffirm for the record that you have in fact been sworn?
Thank you.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
I have been sworn.
The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property at 5202-43rd street to a planned development district, eight apartment-style buildings, multifamily, total of 216 units are being proposed for this development, it's considered affordable housing project.
The plans state that the maximum height of the property is 42 feet.
Staff has reviewed the petition, and it has been revised.
I know there were a number of objections at the last public hearing but they have satisfied all staff concerns.
We have no objections.
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff?
Petitioner?
>>> For the record, Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale Mabry representing applicant in this petition.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have you been sworn in?
>>> And I have been sworn in.
Did the Planning Commission want to give a presentation?
Council members, with me this evening is Mr. Ron Olian, as well as the Executive Director of creative choice, and we have out-of-town counsel present.
As indicated by Gloria we have had a number of comments that came through, the January date would result in those.
We stand before you this evening with a unanimous recommendation of approval.
We have with us this evening we think a good representation of the East Tampa community.
We'll let them speak for themselves.
We have had numerous meetings out in the community, civic associations, church groups, you name it.
With them there as late as yesterday afternoon walking up and down the streets talking to people.
So we are excited to represent this development to you this evening.
Additionally we have representatives of the Tampa CDC this evening and I believe the mayor's office will be showing their support as well.
To say we worked diligently on this project for the last eight months would be a major understatement.
Revised plans, traffic studies, traffic counters, meetings, association meetings, going back to the fire marshal, restructuring, landscape proposals, and we really have hit the mark, we think, on revised plans.
It's important to note, I think for the record, we do not have one objection including FDOT.
So stormwater utilities, Land Development Coordination, Planning Commission, fire marshal, we stand before you with a unanimous recommendation of approval this evening.
Council, on the overhead, I have the rendered site plan reduction.
We are asking for approval of nine buildings, 216 units, on about 12.5 acres, south of Hillsborough Avenue just east of 40th street.
We have two large man made lakes with side slopes, we have a sanitary easement that runs through those and provide public water and sewer to the project.
We have gated access driveways to both Hillsborough and 43rd street.
We have agreed to all CPTED standards for decorative fencing, landscaping, lighted restrictions for this development.
We have a meandering pedestrian pathway system that connects all the buildings and parking areas.
We also have it meandering to the Hillsborough Hartline bus stop which they asked to us provide and we have offered to do so.
We have a clubhouse, recreation center, pool, amenities, a lot of open space, and Ms. Saul-Sena, you will be happy to know we are saving more than 50% of all the on-site specimen trees, not that other council members aren't appreciative of that.
We made a special effort to make sure.
Therefore no, variance is needed from you for removal of greater than 50%. The Florida Department of Transportation council has also reviewed this track.
We had some discussion about W staff about the access to Hillsborough Avenue, whether it would be restricted.
By restricted I mean right turn in, right turn out, prohibiting left turn westbound movements. The Department of Transportation felt very strongly as we did that this should be full access maneuver.
Therefore eastbound/westbound, right turn and left turn movements will all be permitted.
So Hillsborough will be the primary access.
43rd street, a local street, will be a secondary access.
In fact, it will have a nominal impact with, we have completed a detailed transportation study and we are projecting 12 to 15% of the traffic going to 43rd street.
We also are removing a substantial part of zoning commercial.
The northwest corner is currently zoned CI.
If that was redeveloped under current land development for a strip shopping center using acceptable standard of say 10,000 square feet per acre you would have almost 50 to 60,000 square feet generating 2 to 3,000 trips.
We are replacing that with residential.
What kind of residential?
Residential that will be offering three-story at nine buildings, with architectural relationships, striations, designs, pitched roof, gables, entryways, patios, architectural design that we feel will certainly blend in with the area.
We removed substantial restrictions in terms of anybody that's coming down and trying to maneuver into and realizes it's an incorrect place, where they don't want to pull into the site and continue: We redesigned a turn-around before the gated access.
So all those trips coming in will be able to turn around, if they are trying to find a cut-through to make a short-cut to Hillsborough Avenue.
Also, council, we have redesigned this property.
As you are aware on the 27th we indicated to you that at one time we included the Davis family parcels which are the two parcels to the southeast, that we have now -- we want to be as sensitive as possible to the Davis family.
We have rotated this building 90 degrees on its axis and rotated this building completely across the drive aisle so that all they will see is elevation, with this side orientation.
So this is the orientation, the front elevation.
You can see the pitched roof, the attractive landscaping, the landscaping, the side elevation is what the Davis family will be reviewing at this orientation south to north.
So instead of a large building next to them, they will have a small end building with windows.
We have offered additional landscaping, and we are providing 13 parking spaces.
So we think we have been as sensitive as possible to removing these two lots.
The maximum density under your current plan, council, is a res 24 and HC-24 sector in the northwest.
In the southeast we have res 20.
Average of 22 units per acre.
Our client is proposing a blended average density rate of 17.2 and no commercial zoning.
So we are trying to find a density that works well under the current plan adopted standards.
It's also notable to mention, this is a cell tower zoned to the south west, no land use conflicts there, a lot of trees and big tower.
We certainly have no conflict with that relationship.
And further to the south, council, you just approved in December of last year the adult high school with the administrative offices directly south.
So it's not RS-50 anymore.
It's actually zoned PD.
And I think their only access in the records I reviewed is the 43rd street.
So they may have more traffic on 43rd.
We are projecting a nominal amount of traffic to 43rd.
Council, it's important for you to note tonight that this development, this developer behind me, is ranked number one in Hillsborough County for funding.
Ranked number 7 in the State of Florida for funding.
That means if you approve this tonight, and in two weeks the final ordinance gets adopted, and Thom Snelling signs two forms and Mayor Iorio signs two forms and FedEx gets to Tallahassee by the 26th this project gets built.
That's pretty exciting stuff and that's why we are here before you this evening.
We also have projected tax ad valorem revenues of about $280,000 per year.
This is a minority-owned company that's investing in a minority-owned neighborhood.
I think they have made the step to offer those substantial investment dollars and committed some dollars in major investment.
I think Sam Kensey may have said it best, let Donald trump have downtown Tampa.
We need someone to go to East Tampa and make some investments.
We stand before you again with all the recommendations for approval.
We have met with the associations, northeast crime watch association, we gave a presentation.
We had the East Tampa business and civic association, Betty Wiggins, may also be here tonight.
We have agreed to all the CPTED standards for landscaping, lighting, fencing.
Let me review my notes for one second, please.
After the 27th hearing, council, we sent -- I personally sent a letter to Mr. Stewart and said, let's get together.
He made references to some concerns that the clients had, whether it be density, traffic, turning movements, landscaping, you name it, let's sit down and talk about it.
We never heard back but we did offer that to Mr. Stewart.
At this time, council, I introduce to you Mr. John Kennedy, regional program director of creative choice housing.
Thank you.
>>> Good afternoon, council.
I have been sworn.
John Norman Kennedy, born and raised in East Tampa.
North 30th street.
I am the regional program director for creative choice homes.
I was working on an assignment in Orlando when I heard about the movement towards this development, I asked to be reassigned to work on the community that's in my neighborhood.
And so I have been so assigned.
My responsibility is to make sure that the management is there, make sure that it does not become a public housing project, make sure that it does not become run down, to make sure that it does not become drug infested.
That's way do all over this country, all over the State of Florida, and I have been very successful in doing that.
We do this by strict police enforcement.
We have a zero tolerance lease.
We have a selection criteria which means every applicant that comes to this community are notified in advance, in writing, every person who applies, every family who applies, apply using the same standards.
Every applicant knows before they do the application whether or not they will be successful or not.
We do background checks.
We do home checks.
We do everything required to make the community viable for families.
We have courtesy offices.
We have trained professional staff.
And I oversee them all.
Creative choice has, in the State of Florida, approximately 17 affordable housing units.
They are class A similar to the conventional houses, conventional apartment units.
A lot of conventional apartments have been built in the City of Tampa for those who can afford them.
But I cannot find basically in East Tampa none built where it can be afforded.
This is a class A community.
It will be considered in any other community a conventional apartment complex.
It is income restricted.
You have to have employment.
You have to have an income.
An example being the area need of income is four to five thousand.
So a one household family has to have a minimum income $16,000 to actually reside in this particular community.
We have a particular concern about persons believing that this will become a project.
It will become a low-income travesty and things of this type.
Let me assure you that it will not, cannot, and would not be allowed to do that.
From the birth from the ground to the operation involved, period.
I will be selecting, or helping select the management, the manager, the maintenance employees, landscapers, be involved in selecting the contractors and everything else involved with that.
There is nothing I will not be involved with.
I will be available to anyone, whether it be council, whether it be local residents, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
They can get me.
I'll be there.
Answer your questions, answer your concerns, or bring our corporate to anything you might want to discuss.
I don't know what else I can say other than the fact that this is what East Tampa has been vying for.
We offer it to East Tampa.
And I will hope that the council give us the direction and the go ahead to put this unit in East Tampa to make it viable and to grow.
Thank you very much.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
There are two large proposed ponds.
How deep will they be?
How do you protect kids from them?
How will they be maintained?
I need to have a sense.
>>> I'm not part of the architectural design but we have a similar community in Gainesville.
He can answer that.
We have a similar community in Gainesville, the Pines, highly protected.
They are protected by trees, by shrubs, and basically the water that's in there, if it becomes necessary, it will be filtered, it will be treated to make sure there's no mosquitoes and no algae and things that incur, and that's some of the things we had to do for the city of Gainesville there.
>>> Michael Horner: Ms. Saul-Sena, your concern was?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The pond, that they are safe.
I didn't know if they were going to be grassy and just filled with water when there's a heavy rain.
>>> We do have a lower water table there.
This is an elevation of grade difference of approximately eight to ten feet. The center of this pond currently is about 12 feet below the grade elevation of the surrounding perimeter.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There appears to be trees in the center.
I'm just wondering how do kids not drown?
>>> That's a good question.
We will have probably an effective berming system, low-rise fence with impervious water pass through.
We don't want to remove the amenity of a sloped pond especially when it goes out and has a little island to capture those cluster trees.
We have been talking to CPTED as well, Hamilton engineering, and we think we can on the top of the bank, not the bottom of the bank but at least on the mid side, on the perimeter, we probably have a low-rise, pervious opportunity for a screen fence that would prohibit people from walking down or rolling down.
So it would be a 4 to 1 slope.
It would not be a 3 to 1 or 2 to 1.
One you could gradually walk down with a walk mower, push mower and have gradual resistance.
Anything that's 2 to 1 by city or county standards you have to have a fence.
Fence is not required for 4 to 1.
But we'll probably consider that when we get in the design of the project and the ponds.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 17?
>>> I'm Stewart, and I am not sworn but I would like to present --
>> Would you raise your right hand?
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>> I do.
If you are bringing affordable housing, affordable housing ought to be needed.
If you check the census data where they are attempting to build this house, these apartments, you will find that there are 1,233 households in this census tract, 1390 housing units.
Since there are more housing units than households, why do you need additional housing?
Secondly, there are 432 owner occupied housing units on the market.
The rent paid is 34%.
The HUD acceptance standard is 30%.
Therefore, they are not cost burden and existing housing is already affordable.
Three.
If you would check with the Williams school, which is adjacent thereto, you will find that it is already overcrowded.
To bring these units in will bring an additional -- minimum 400 children who would be predominantly attending kindergarten through middle school.
The school in the market area then would be 850, which is far over. The principal will tell you now that they are overcrowded.
The development will have parking for at least 433 cars, and particularly there may be cars traveling in and out of the development every day.
This will overburden 43rd street.
Additionally 43rd street will allow only a right in and right out from Hillsborough without crossing the median on Hillsborough.
The other thing is, we cannot live backwards.
He talked about the Davis family.
Mr. Davis was a marine and this is his family here.
He built the only place that he could build during that time.
Unfortunately, we did have segregated housing, and I think the president of City Council can tell you that many of us put houses in areas where we did not want to put them, because that was the only place that we could.
But this lady has been there 30 years.
And if you put these brick buildings up, you will effectively -- it will be taken without just compensation or law, because it is going to decrease substantially the value of our house when everything in there are single-family dwellings other than these three-story buildings.
Now you asked a very pertinent question.
And there are some concerns about those ponds.
I think that all of us are familiar with when eminent domain came to the area.
There were ponds left in the Belmont area most of which became mosquito ridden and mosquito infested.
And the other thing is, this is a private development.
And I heard all of the cushiony stuff about what you can do.
They have know power to regulate, unfortunately, the kind of people that can afford to be here.
(Bell sounds)
The other thing is, the housing in the area is 100%.
And this subpoena the census bureau.
And I have compiled for you and I would like to submit to you these hard, cold facts of reality.
And I would like the Davis family to talk about that.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need you to put your address on the record for us.
>>> My address?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>> Home or office?
>> Office.
>>> 50110...
>> My name is Eddie Davis.
I have been sworn.
I would just like to follow what Mr. Stewart here is saying.
Some of the major concerns that we have for the area.
I actually brought a map.
I think it gives a better picture of that area.
>>GWEN MILLER: Use the portable mike.
>>> Basically what we got here, in this area right in here, this is our home.
You have seen the map earlier of housing, development.
What we failed to show in some of the development is, we have got a school that is going to be built adjacent.
That also is a multi-story building, the choices of development.
What that actually does is, that encircles their house with multi-story buildings.
You know, you got a house in the middle of downtown.
Some of the other things that hasn't been pointed out, this area back in here, before they built the new Williams elementary school, that was all wooded area.
When they tore down that area in there with stuff that actually moved from this area to this wooded area, back in this area.
None of this has been taken into consideration.
Also, what hadn't been taken into consideration is the things that creative choice actually talked about.
When you looked at the map, actually over here, 42nd street is right there.
40th street is here.
This is Hillsborough Avenue.
There's no way that you can pull out of this driveway and go left or right.
And you can definitely forget going across.
Because this driveway doesn't even go to 42nd street.
You get the same effect here on 43rd street.
You have Bronson Avenue here and this development right here.
There's a home right here.
Those lights from those cars are going to shine directly in those people's houses.
As for the track and flow going out onto 43rd and Hillsborough, again you face the same problems.
You cannot turn left or right.
How my family does it now, we actually have to come down here and go down three blocks out early just to get on Hillsborough.
I have pictures that I want to show council to back up what I'm saying.
I would like to show it to you at this time.
(Bell sounds)
Basically we are talking about 43rd street.
Like I alluded to earlier, the traffic flow in there, like creative choice stated, they say there's no traffic there, they won't have an impact to that area.
I beg to differ.
This is a normal day.
Anytime of the day.
That's just that 43rd and Hillsborough.
That's the traffic pattern.
You can see here, here's a car actually trying to make a left out onto Hillsborough from 43rd street.
This other picture shows a truck trying to make that same turn onto Hillsborough.
If you look in this other picture, these drivers here are trying to make a left onto 43rd onto the north side.
They cannot do it.
I beg to differ.
>>GWEN MILLER: You need to wrap it up.
>>> Okay.
I'd like to show you one other thing with this.
Sorry I'm taking too much time.
But this is what 43rd street looks like on a Saturday afternoon.
This is 43rd Street as those school buses from Williams school actually come down through there, and stage on this track right here.
I don't know if you can see them in the background here.
But that's where those buses stay.
Now the previous meetings of council said they stated they would talk to the folks at Williams school, because actually they made a driveway, where they wasn't supposed to make a driveway, and they had some consideration busy the traffic flow there.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
You have to end it.
Next.
>>> Good evening.
My name is Harlis Davis.
This is my mother.
And we are the property at 1431 - 43rd Street.
Yes, I have been sworn in.
The first thing I want to say, I want to thank Mr. Horner for his perceived sensitivity to our problems over 43rd street.
I can tell you that if this development was being proposed for Palma Ceia, this would be a moot point.
As great of a development as is being made to seem here tonight.
One of the things that I want to do is first let you know that -- I heard someone say that as early as today, they went out and spoke with the residents in the community.
I find it very interesting because I took the time yesterday to call several civic association members and so forth and find out and nobody walked around as I have done and physically talked and met with the residents that are immediately affected by this project.
And of course for the benefit of this meeting, it was very convenient to come in this evening now to say that somebody did go out as early as yesterday, because they knew that nobody had taken the time to speak with those residents.
I want to take this moment to read to you a signed petition here, and I'll submit it to City Council.
Do I submit it to you?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, sir.
>> Our petition reads the residents against rezoning.
Zoning hearing, I guess, it's supposed to be Z-09.
Tampa hearing date was the first of January 27th of '05.
To honorable members of City Council, by copy of this signed petition, we wish to express our strong opposition to the proposed request for rezoning of the subject property for the purpose of planned development and the construction of multifamily apartments.
We believe the proposed development will significantly increase the density of this area and negatively impact an already overburdened existing traffic flows of our neighborhood.
We also believe that based upon our experience with nearby existing multifamily apartments, this type of development will also further contribute to the increase and ongoing problems of crime in this community.
Therefore, we humbly and respectfully request that you deny the subject proposed rezoning request and ask that you join our efforts to improve the harmony and character that we all once enjoyed and look forward to in our neighborhood.
The other thing I wanted to point out very quickly is, we came before City Council back in '96 when there was a petition to have a rezoning for one of the houses on our street, 43rd street.
And the argument that we made at that time was we perceived there were going to be some increased traffic problems as a result of this rezoning.
City Council was sympathetic to our concerns and denied that request, based on those traffic problems.
The same issue was also raised with the school board, when the school board was --.
(Bell sounds)
-- was proposing to rezone and build the 3-story building next to my mother's house that they are proposing to do.
And City Council was sympathetic to the traffic problems, even though the school board went ahead and utilized that thoroughfare for the buses that lined up in front of my mother's house every day.
I would like to do one thing.
The neighborhood has been characterized as a blighted area and that this is going to improve the appearance of the neighborhood.
I want to show you a few things here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Why don't you pass them and let us look at them so the next person can speak?
>>> Can I say one last thing about the notice to the residents?
I have a picture here, just to show you the sign that would have given the notices, the residents the notice of this hearing, of a development of this magnitude.
Here is the sign that's posted back in the woods.
Back in the woods.
Now, here is another development.
Here's a sign that was presented for someone who was looking just to do development for their house.
Look how much notice that they gave to the residents in that area.
Why would it be necessary to do a development in the shadows?
Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next.
Mr. Davis, do you want to pass the pictures?
>>> Yes.
>>> My name is William Such, Idlewild Avenue.
I have been sworn in.
I'm also too against this proposed development.
The gentleman spoke about housing, apartments.
If he's talking about housing, how about putting housing there instead of apartments, if the residents so feel a desire.
But apartments we don't need none.
We have apartment properties on Hillsborough by hard rock cafe.
They just put AP new apartment complex on Hanna Avenue at 38th street.
We also have apartment complex on 47th street and Hanna Avenue.
We also have a couple in this area back here, you know.
We don't want this back here in this area.
The gentleman also spoke about a couple things, about people spoke, but did not want to say one thing about wastewater.
The closest main to this is 42nd street and Chelsea. The next one at 38th street and Chelsea.
With this many people using urinals, if this backs up where is it going to go?
It has nowhere to go but back into this area.
It already floods out when they have a bad rain back here.
You can't get across because it's sometimes 3 feet high.
So for the inner city to benefit us, the traffic is horrendous.
After 3:00 you can't get out unless someone let's you out.
Try to get on 46th street or try to turn to 43rd street.
45th street is just as worse.
Dante can't get out there because a real hard turn.
Sometimes we just don't want this there.
It don't need to be there. If they want to talk about housing, let's put housing there. I notice they are in other parts of the city.
Put houses there. New Tampa has wonderful houses out there.
Put a housing development in there.
That will bring up the values and also put families in there, families that have their own homes to call their own, not rental properties that they have to move in and move out.
Don't need no transient community nigh No more.
We have it in Sulphur Springs.
We have it in north Tampa.
We have it in Belmont Heights.
We need something that's going to bring our neighborhood back to what it was before, which is safe and livable.
We don't want apartment complexes there. Thank you.
>> Anyone else to speak on item 17?
>>> Good evening, council.
My name is Samuel Kinsey.
I live in East Tampa.
And I'm the chairperson of the East Tampa community revitalization partnership.
Some months ago, this council, along with the county commission, declared East Tampa to be a community revitalization area, and a tax incremental funding district.
What that means is this council recognize that East Tampa was an area that is underdeveloped and is sufficiently blighted.
One of the most blighted areas of East Tampa is a community called Galloway heights.
I'm extremely concerned about Galloway heights.
And I have had indications to talk about much of this before.
In fact when Curtis Lane became the director of code enforcement, I took Curtis Lane on a tour of East Tampa, and we went into the area called Galloway heights.
He was appalled that the blight that he saw in that area.
It is missing infrastructure.
The infrastructure that is there has deteriorated.
Also in their community there was a number of -- it was the duplex community that was bored up for many years.
In addition to that, the very day this council voted to dollar East Tampa a community revitalization area, I took Martin Neisen of channel 10 of East Tampa and he had that on the evening news that showed the blight in the Galloway heights community.
One of the reasons that this council made East Tampa a community revitalization area and a tax incremental funding district is because you recognized the blight in the area, and the need for improvements in that community.
This community is also right next door to the Engate trailer park, the trailer park that was closed down.
It is just next door and it suffers from the same kind of blight.
I'm extremely familiar with 43rd street and travel that street pretty frequently.
In fact, my community is separated from Galloway heights by Williams school and Williams park.
My children -- my grandchildren, whom I take to school every day and pick up from school every day, attends Williams school, which is on 43rd street.
I'm aware of the problems.
One of the things with progress, progress will bring some inconvenience.
Without inconvenience we cannot have progress.
For example, the widening of interstate 4.
That was about inconvenience.
The 40th street project is going to bring about inconvenience to many people.
And Nebraska Avenue project is going to bring about inconvenience.
But that's the price we pay for progress.
We made that area what it is so that we can bring economic development.
We believe that this project is needed in East Tampa, because it will bring additional tax revenues that can be used to improve the area.
In fact, I believe over the next 30 years, before our tax status expires, this project will bring millions of dollars that will go into the improvement of Galloway heights.
So I would encourage this council to use the same wisdom that you used when you recognized the blight in East Tampa.
And I know that Councilman White, because that's his district, and councilman Miller, who it was her district, you are very familiar with the blight in the area.
And the revenues that's coming from this project will help us to improve that area.
And I have spoken to city officials on many occasions, even before this project came up, telling them of the need for us to go in to Galloway heights and do some improvements in the community.
The tax dollars that comes will help us make it a better community for all the residents.
I'm not on anybody's payroll.
I'm just an interested citizen in East Tampa and the partnership voted unanimously for me to come to this meeting tonight to tell this council that we believe that this is a good project for East Tampa, and the problems of the traffic there can be overcome, if we use some sort of traffic control device.
So we are willing to work with them to have the project managers work with them, have city officials work with them, to put a traffic control device in that area that will make it easier for people to get in and out.
I agree with them, it's difficult getting in and out.
But we need a traffic control device there, whether or not this project is there.
So I want you all to join with us and getting the traffic control device that will overcome the problems of the traffic, and will bring the needed dollars in East Tampa to make that a better community.
So I ask this council to support this project.
Thank you.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, for the record, were you sworn in?
>>> No.
(Laughter)
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>> I do, council.
Everything I've said is true.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
Once again I ask everybody when they come up to reaffirm that they have been sworn.
I put a little sign to remind everybody.
Thank you.
>>> Good evening, council.
My name is Betty Wiggins.
And I have been sworn.
My name is Betty Wiggins and I'm CEO of the East Tampa business and civic association.
The geographical footprint of our neighborhood association includes the area in which this project is proposed which borders a neighborhood called Galloway heights, as you've heard so much about.
Our Board of Directors of the East Tampa business and civic association -- and we have one of our board members here to attest, and the membership have gone on record as supporting this development for the following reasons:
Number one, as you have just heard, the locale of the project is -- the proposed locale is in a very physically distressed area, and the project will help to ameliorate the blight in this area.
Number two, there is a dire need for decent rental housing.
I can attest to that because I work in one of our -- one of our main focuses is in affordable housing and there is a dire need for housing, affordable housing, rental, as well as home ownership.
And if you don't believe it you can write an ad in the Florida sentinel and in 24 hours the unit is gone.
So there is a need for affordable housing, decent housing of this type in our neighborhood.
Number three, as Mr. Kinsey has so eloquently expressed, the tax base from the project will help to generate additional public funds for much-needed improvements in the total CRA area.
For many years, the community has advocated for business persons to invest in our community.
The type of investment that this project will bring -- jobs and economic development to East Tampa.
And while we are the first to acknowledge that this project will not be a panacea, we feel that it is an appropriate beginning.
And we feel that the problems, the perceived problems, certainly are ones that can be overcome.
So in closing, I would like to urge your support of the rezoning.
And we ask that if there are any problems that have been pointed out, or that come up, that you, City Council, do whatever you need to do, meet with the developers, work with transportation, your own transportation as well as FDOT, whomever, school system, wherever those problems are, to iron out those problems, and please vote to help bring this project to East Tampa.
We need it.
Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Good evening I have been sworn.
My name is Carolyn Joseph Marshall.
And tonight I'm just representing the Community Development Corporation.
We have very much community minded.
We have spoken with the representatives of creative choice.
We have met with them.
We have gone a great -- done a great deal of due diligence to make sure that what they are bringing in our community is going to be something to benefit us.
We have also told them that we are going to stay on them and make sure they follow through, not just come here and tell us this is what they are going to do and don't follow through.
Therefore, we are going to be working with them.
We have not entered into any agreement.
But we are going to be there.
And we are going to make sure that this goes through, and that it does help our neighborhood.
East Tampa is an area where everybody wants to buy a piece of the pie.
Now that we have a TIF district.
Everybody is sending us let towers buy our property.
Everybody is coming in and wants this and wants that.
And we have to pick and choose who we want to come in into the neighborhood, and who we think can improve our neighborhood.
I think these people have approved it and from some of the projects that they have done, and I think we should support them, and we are asking you to support them.
So this project can move forward.
You know, I don't come out and support everything unless I check it out.
And you all know I'm like the dog with a bone.
I will not let go.
And you know that.
And I will be watching.
And I ask you to support them.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Good evening, council.
Madam Chairwoman.
Ed Johnson, manager of the East Tampa CRA.
And I have been sworn.
I just would like to adjust a few comments about the creative choice acquisition incorporated, the proposed developers of this project.
I recall several months ago when they came to our community, and they came and they talked to us, and they asked us, what will it take for us to be recognized as a quality developer?
And my answer to them is show 'n tell.
And I think they did that.
They met with several of the community based organizations.
They met with our East Tampa community revitalization partnership who you have designated as the entity to help us drive our CRA redevelopment efforts.
I think they have gone the extra mile to ensure that what they bring as far as the community development project to our area is quality.
As you know, you heard earlier that this development is going in for 9% tax credits at the Florida housing finance corporation.
9% tax credits allow developers like creative choice to build market-rate, quality projects.
It is not -- it's not a typical apartment complex that's stuck in the middle of nowhere.
They are required by the State of Florida by accepting those tax credits to live up to certain standards.
And those standards have a lot to do with ensuring that the development is safe.
Councilwoman Saul-Sena was concerned about the ponds.
I don't consider them ponds, looking at what we have in East Tampa.
I consider them lakes.
They have done a very good job of designing what those lakes will look like.
It almost looks to me like a lake front property, you know.
It's built with quality.
And I think you are going to see that as this project goes on.
So I'm here to support this.
Our CRA effort is -- and my staff, all unanimously support this.
I have talked to the administration.
The administration is in support of this project.
And as you heard earlier, $280 million of additional tax revenue into East Tampa is significant.
I don't think we need to miss this opportunity.
Granting this application of course is going to allow them to make the -- meet the time line requirements of the state to get their application in.
They are rated pretty high.
There are a couple other developments that were rated by the housing finance authority in the state.
Some of them are down -- about 107 of 156.
This group is rated number 7 statewide.
I think that's significant.
It also tells you that the housing finance authority has finally heard us in our quest to make sure that we build these type of developments in inner city communities.
It has been negligent for many years.
Most of these developments have been done in the suburbs, everybody done out in cow pastures but not in inner cities.
This is an opportunity for us to put something of quality on the map.
And I wholeheartedly support this and hope you do, too.
So thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Petitioner.
Any rebuttal?
If you are going to speak, please stand up if you are going to speak.
>>> I have been sworn in.
My name is Doris Davis and I live at 5114 north 43rd street.
I have listened to the people stand, and made comments, and gave you figures and all of this.
I have knocked on every door, just about, in my neighborhood, or surrounding area.
I'm behind Williams school.
So I'm familiar with most of the faces that stood up.
So these people are getting up here saying that they live in the neighborhood, or Galloway.
That's on the other side of Williams school.
I'm directly affected because I'm right behind Williams school.
And adjacent to the property that creative choice is talking about building these three-story buildings.
If you noticed when my son stood up, and he was showing you the pictures, you would note that my piece of property was cut out.
So if they are making sure that this and that and all that was taken care of, then I'm cut out.
And I'm right next to the area that they are talking about building.
Officer Adam is outside the door.
Atkinson.
I think that's his name.
I'm sorry.
He owns several pieces of property in the area.
And he didn't know anything at all about this.
And I can truthfully say that the neighbors didn't either because I was knocking on their doors.
One other thing I want to mention is the ponds, or the so-called lake.
Around there, we all have well water and septic tanks.
If anything should happen, our well water or groundwater could become contaminated.
And I am concerned.
And another family that was here, she was also concerned but she couldn't come tonight.
These are the things that I want to mention to council.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
>>> For the record, Mr. Johnson is here, approved by the state.
And I want you all to check.
It filled the threshold and the application is incomplete because it did not meet the threshold, and it has not been approved.
That's an absolute lie.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Petitioner.
>>> Michael Horner again.
I have been sworn.
I'll be very brief.
We're gracious enough to let us go first.
There's people here that paid their money too and need to be heard tonight.
I'm a little offended by some of the comments, but we understand.
The reason that comment was just made by Mr. Stewart, it's true, what is the defect?
We don't have zoning approval.
We ranked in every single category except zoning approval.
So we're here tonight to cure that defect.
Parking and traffic.
This has some of the lowest automobile ownership characteristics in the area.
Although we had to produce one and a half to two parking spaces per unit.
Typically only one parking space is really needed for each unit.
Very rare do you have more than one automobile per unit.
Plus we have the Hartline transit stop right there.
This will be a not-automobile-dependent community.
This will be a community that's dependent upon the transit.
And one automobile per unit.
I'm a little surprised to hear the comment, that traffic trumps investment and redevelopment opportunities.
I heard the mayor's state of the city address, read the follow-up article, familiar with her and I'm trying to do something for this neighborhood in this area.
And I'm thinking, we have a crack and prostitution hotel that we're taking down and we have a mattress debris and garbage strewn open area in the back.
Our surveyors have walked.
It's a little disgusting.
No one has walked forward and said let's develop this into single family, let's remove the hotel, let's develop a mixed use project, let's have a community activity center.
So while you might be saving a few trips on the road, I can't imagine driving to Tampa and going through that neighborhood and saying, "they could have had a $20 million investment, community activism center for the after-school programs, an opportunity for renters to get a single-family home ownership, a portion of their rental proceeds.
The purpose is to get them in, safe, clean, amenity, secured environment.
And then if they approve that proceed they get into single-family detached.
This is good for the area.
We have walked it, been there, sent letters not once, not twice, posted it not once, not twice.
The Davises were not cut out.
The Davises removed themselves.
We saw the plans for three-story buildings to the south and went to them and said, be part of this, and they said no.
And we had to let them go.
I will be happy to answer questions.
We appreciate your support.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Just one question that was raised, Mr. Horner, about the school children going to James, that this development will produce 400 more children.
Have you talked to the school board about this because of the overcrowded situation at James school?
>>> I'm sorry, I'm speaking.
We have not had discussion with the school board, Mrs. Alvarez.
We will be paying taxes, impact fees, all those revenues go to assist those demands placed on any development that will have an impact on the school board.
I couldn't imagine the reason for denying a project being that you might have a little too many students attending the school.
This is why we are generating tax revenue so that we can be a partner in allowing those schools to be expanded and built.
We know there's a capacity problem.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
But have you -- you haven't talked to the school board about maybe expanding that school site to take care of these children that have -- that will be produced by this development?
>>> We have not.
But we do offer after-school program for our own on-site residents.
>> But what happens to the overcrowdedness in the schools that is already overcrowded?
Where are these children going to go?
>>> I understand.
They will have to go to other schools.
Or we will develop a partnership and generate dollars to respond the school.
They have to be taught somewhere.
They will be absorbed in the school district system.
And that's why we are investing $20 million in that neighborhood.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Johnson, you wanted to say something?
>>> Ed Johnson, CRA manager again.
I have been sworn.
Councilwoman Alvarez, yes, creative choice housing folks might not have talked to the school board, but I have, because that was a concern of mine also in doing my due diligence.
I can tell you in talking with the facilities director of the school board, they are in the process as we speak of writing a contract on the end gate trailer park site to develop a new middle school in East Tampa, and they are also considering adding an additional elementary school.
So if they are successful in acquiring the site of Engate trailer park and the site north of it, they plan to spend this year's money, which they have already in their budget, $20 million to build a new middle school.
So they are concerned.
And they want to ensure that schools are added to be able to take advantage of the number of families that will be added to the community.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much.
>>ROSE FERLITA: All I wanted to do was hear what Mr. Johnson had to add.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for the petitioner.
It says on the site plan that the units are 42 feet high, but they are three stories.
Most stories are no more than ten feet.
How do you come up to a 42 foot height?
>>> The City of Tampa has a ridge line as the top of building.
In Hillsborough County you measure halfway between the soffit and ridge so you have an attic area.
>> But even so, 42 feet for a three-story building?
>>> It's probably going to be 39.7.
We allowed 42 to allow us enough for design control.
>> But you are not putting parking below?
>>> No.
>> It's just three story?
>>> Eight units per building.
If I can make one comment.
On school capacity, councilwoman Alvarez, this is the review laid out of the city initiated study for kindergarten, James, Warren, Armwood, adequate, adequate, adequate.
They are not overcapacity.
The projected number of students, and they have responded they have adequate capacity to handle all the projected students.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close the public hearing.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
I do just want to make one -- if council is going to vote on the ordinance I do need to revise the legal description on the site plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Read the same ordinance?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before you read it I have a question for Ms. Moreda.
I would feel most comfortable.
Talking about how we ensure safety for the pond.
I was told that, well, the petitioner would have the liability if anything happened to a child.
But that didn't give me like total comfort.
So what I would like to do is attach some kind of note to the pond that if the incline is more dramatic than 6 to 1 that some sort of adequate and attractive barrier be created, a fence, or something that would be reviewed by our staff to appropriately protect kids.
It seems to me that the proposed island in the pond, or the lake, as Mr. Johnson said, would be very attractive.
But it would also be kind of an attractive nuisance.
I want to make sure that no kids --.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Do you want me to add a comment that basically says that if the lake is designed to have a slope of 6 to 1 or greater, then -- then coordination -- not 6 to 1?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If Mr. Awad is available maybe he can give us the language.
If we do this, we need to do it now.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I want to make a comment.
We may have some other comments later as well.
But I had the opportunity to, over the past month, drive through the lake Carlton arms apartment complex up in north Tampa on Van Dyke road.
And it seems the great majority of their apartment complexes, I believe that's like a 40 or 50 acre site, and it is, has several lakes in it.
I don't know what their pitches are.
But they have absolutely no -- that's part of the ambience, if you will, of the apartment complex, and part of the attraction.
I don't know how deep they are.
I don't know what the pitch is.
But they have absolutely nothing.
And there are several children.
And part of that, I don't know whether creative choice was planning on possibly stocking the lake, whether naturally stocked or whatever.
But part of the children, when I was going to the lake Carlton arms, they were actually fishing in it, which, yes, that's an attractive nuisance, you can call in, things of that nature.
But I personally just don't know if restricting that at this point in time -- I don't know how deep it's going to be.
And plus if we did that, I don't know if that would send this thing back to first read or not.
And then we might be on a time crunch.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Awad, did you hear the question?
>>> Alex Awad, stormwater development.
I was sworn in.
I pointing out the part of our code that specifically talks to the depth of retention ponds, or ponds at private properties, if we could cut that section out and put part of the plan is if that is the choice of council.
Or it is in our code.
So we could just say that they comply with our code and that would be sufficient, unless you want to make --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If you think that that's sufficient.
>>> Well, I believe that we have had a bunch of these ponds, you know, retention around the city.
So I believe it is sufficient at this time.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
>>KEVIN WHITE: The only other comments I have, I've looked at this project in several different lights, and quite honestly it's not a hard choice for me.
216 units coming into the East Tampa area.
One of the things that East Tampa has been crying for is development, development, development.
For years, way before I sat here.
And one of the things, one of the gentlemen said, why don't we make affordable housing here?
The reality of the situation, the great majority of the residents in the East Tampa, cannot either afford or cannot qualify for homes.
So something else needs to be given to them, another option.
This creates 216 safe, viable, attractive units for $216 families to move into, into the East Tampa area.
Another person mentioned what about the application requirements?
How can we segregate requirements?
Well, the new Belmont Heights estates that has just been built on 22nd and lake and south of there have some very stringent requirements to get into that residential housing establishment as well, and they do a very fine job of screening their applicants.
The ponds we just addressed.
One of the other great things that this development would do for the East Tampa area will provide a minimum of $280,000 a year to ad valorem tax base to this area, which is so critically needed as well, as well as jobs for minority vendors, jobs for everyone, and not only -- it's going to help uplift and revitalize this community.
This will be a catalyst for everything east of 40th street.
I've heard so many residents of the East Tampa area cry for development east of 40th street, and even referred to everything east of 40th street as far East Tampa, because so many people think East Tampa stops at 40th street, and the residents on that side have been forgotten about.
This is on paper a wonderful project.
I don't see any reason to kill this project.
I feel very sorry that the Davis family was not able to come to an agreement with this developer.
But as was stated, with progress, some inconveniences are going to happen.
And I personally feel your pain there.
But I represent the district as a whole.
I can't represent one family.
I, as part of my vote, I can't speak for the other members of council up here, but I have an entire constituency to look out for, and the best thing for East Tampa, in my opinion, is that we move forward with this project, let 216 families come to a brand new, safe, clean, vibrant environment.
And like I said, I hope this will be the catalyst for many more projects east of 40th street.
And to answer one of the things about the schools, I don't know.
But I know all 216 families won't have children.
And even if they do, they won't all be elementary school children.
And some families may have two or three children.
But I don't think that's going to be the entire catalyst for just the school.
And I also think we need to do something, as Mr. Kinsey said, as far as looking at the transportation as far as the lighting issue or some other traffic calming device in that area.
But I just can't see not moving forward with a project of this magnitude, bringing $20 million for a quality project into the East Tampa area, which is so underserved at this point in time.
And I'd like to humbly request this be approved.
I'd like to move the ordinance.
Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 5202 north 43rd street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 of zoning district classification RS-50 residential single-family and CI commercial intensive to PD multifamily affordable housing, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and a second.
Any question on the motion?
(Motion carried)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Just a comment.
Because I am CRA chairman, this is exactly why we put a CRA district in that area, to bring quality development into this area that's sorely needed.
This will bring TIF dollars, which will stay in that community.
So like it was eloquently put by Mr. Kinsey and of course Betty Wiggins and everyone else that talked for the project, this is exactly what we were looking for.
And I'm looking forward to the completion of this project so we can start reaping the fruits of this thing.
So I thank you.
I thank creative housing for bringing this over, for bringing this over to us, and being a part of East Tampa.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
We are now ready to go to item 4.
Need to open item 4.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
The petitioner filed amended site plans after the 30-day requirement.
Council would need to wave section 27-323, number 5, to allow for the public hearing to go forward on the revised site plan.
Staff, according to code, is not allowed to accept those site plans and have not reviewed it.
We have substantial concerns related to this petition.
The petitioner would like to go forward, because I believe there are a number of people here from the neighborhood that would like to give testimony on the new site plan.
I don't have an objection with that testimony being taken.
But staff are asking for the continuance of this public hearing.
Council can hear the petitioner and his request for continuance.
I think he would like to go to a day meeting after tonight.
>>> I'm Mikas, petitioner.
I have been sworn.
Am I permitted to address?
The issue with the submittal of site plans, let me give you a little bit of the history.
The plans were submitted December 12th, on two properties in the carver city area on school street.
I'm going to show you a series of things after this.
But I'll give you the background.
The plan that was submitted for Lois and Spruce contained a four-story, 100,000 square foot office building and a parking structure for 300 cars, as well as approximately 90 town homes.
That was presented.
Angela Hurley was the assigned person to it and we proceeded towards a February 1st -- first week of February DRC meeting.
In the interim -- interim, I met several times with the homeowners association which I have done before then as well.
And the president of the homeowners association, carver city, Lincoln Gardens homeowners association.
In response to them -- and I agree with them -- the concept of a four-story office building and parking structure was just not appropriate for them.
Even though the properties have the highest possible proposed -- or permitted use under the land plan.
What is appropriate for the carver city, Lincoln Gardens community is a residential product of the nature that we are proposing, a 3-story product.
In response to that their concerns, I submitted a second site plan just before the first DRC meeting in February.
We got the comments at the first DRC meeting and then prepared a further revised plan.
Those plans were submitted to the homeowners association.
We continued to work through that time with them to come up with the plan that is appropriate for them.
A second DRC meeting was held on March 14th.
And at that time additional comments were made.
We agreed to make all the changes that we heard staff request at the March 14thth DRC meeting.
The engineering firm Hamilton engineering, Jim Melm, is with me here today as is Randy Cohen, traffic consultant.
We made those changes as requested on March 14th.
Jim went back to the staff with the revised plan on March 17th, reviewed it with them, and at that time they indicated that a series of additional notational items had to be made.
We agreed to do those.
Jim went back to his office, worked on those additional notational items the next morning.
There was a confusion.
And we admit that.
The engineering firm and myself, we agreed that we were submitting the plan the very next day, which was the 13th day before this hearing, on March 18th.
Unfortunately it was not completed until the mid afternoon at about 4:00.
And we brought it over at 4:30.
All the changes, though, from what was presented the day before, we were prepared to hand in that plan the day before, but we did make all the additional changes, but at that time we believe we had been told to make.
Jim is here, if there was any question with regard to that understanding.
We apologize for placing the staff in this position.
But we have a plan for both sites that has been thoroughly reviewed by the homeowners association in response to every single item that was referenced on both March 14th and then again what was told to us on March 17th.
We missed it by a few hours, and we apologize for that.
You do not have staff's comments.
I'm prepared to let staff take this last plan, get back to us, and tell us what additional things we need to change.
We're open to that.
We're not saying no more changes.
And we believe whatever they say in the next few weeks we could take care of that.
I would respectfully request that you allow us to at least present the plan and at least allow the homeowner association and any other person that wants to make any statement regarding it tonight, because they are here.
And then come back hopefully in the daytime and respond exactly to whatever the staff says.
>>GWEN MILLER: A day meeting is okay with you?
>>> Absolutely.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that in respect to the people who are here in the audience that we should do that, what you just suggested.
Listen to the neighborhood, listen to you.
But then -- then wait and listen, continue it and listen to our staff.
So that would be my motion, that we open the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: But the staff has said we can't get testimony --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can't we hear from the public?
They can speak now and then they won't come back again.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: (off microphone)
Therefore as a result of tonight's testimony, they may very welcome back with a substantially altered plan which then may cause the people to have a different opinion based on the testimony, or based on what it produces as a result of staff's recommendations.
>>GWEN MILLER: So those here to talk on item 4 you may talk only on the continuance.
If you want to speak on the continuance of number 4 you may speak on the continuance.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Before you do that I just have a question.
I'm sorry, Mr. Harrison, were you first?
Go ahead.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, we are going to give our staff time to go over this.
>> Julia Cole, legal department.
What you will hearing at this time is whether or not the waiver is appropriate to allow the petitioner to present the site plan, that staff is unable to review pursuant to the 13-day rule.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to make a motion.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: The question, I guess, on the floor is whether council -- whether council wishes to waive the 13-day rule to allow testimony to be taken on a matter that has yet to be presented for recommendation of staff.
Ms. Cole, I can't see you.
Is that a fair reflection?
>> Julia Cole: Yes.
And I should have said it before.
As a result of the fact there was no site plan to go forward with this evening, there has been no ordinance prepared by legal.
So regardless of what you do, this is going to be needed to be continued for an ordinance to be prepared.
>>GWEN MILLER: Plus it needs to be continued so our staff can go over the site plans.
The staff has not seen these site plans.
So how can we go forward tonight if staff has not seen them?
>>> The opportunity to waive the rules and allow them to move forward with a new site plan, but he would be moving forward, the petitioner would be moving forward with a negative recommendation from staff, and staff unable to really make any comments on the site plan he is presenting to you today.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That seems to me very counterproductive.
And the second question I have of you, Mr. Shelby, and you pose some very good concerns or questions or cautions.
What is the hardship in terms of wherever we end up ultimately going with this whole process?
What is the hardship that justifies taking this to a day meeting and starting the precedent in terms of zoning?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: (off microphone).
>>ROSE FERLITA: Why are we continuing this to a day meeting?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Council has accustom that if there is no present evening opposition, council can consider it.
But what is the hardship?
The hardship is, I believe, a waiver of council's rules to say the zoning meetings are heard at night.
I suppose there's a special particular reason as a public policy behind that, why you do that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And I think that's why I'm posing it, Mr. Shelby.
That kind of concerns me.
>>GWEN MILLER: If our staff has not seen the site plans I don't see why we should go forward tonight.
We need to continue and give our staff a chance to see the site plans.
How can our staff comment on anything that's happened when she doesn't know what's on the site plan?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I agree with the chairman on that.
This is not, as we say in the legal world, ripe, not ready for to us consider.
We don't know what they are going to say.
We don't know what their objections are going to be.
We don't know -- that's record evidence that we have got to consider.
There's nothing for us to consider here tonight.
That may very well color what the neighborhood says in response, too.
>>> If it's possible, there is one person that may not be able to get back here at whatever time is scheduled.
Lorraine Wyley is the president of the carver city lien can garden homeowners association.
She may not be here for an extended period of time.
If she could at least express to you where we stand with respect to the site plans that you see with respect to the materials that have been thoroughly worked through with her.
If you would.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you please take down the boards?
Because it means I can't see half the people in the audience.
Thank you.
I just wanted to request council to let people in the audience speak to whether they were supportive of a continuance, and if they didn't if they could come back again, if they could speak now.
>>GWEN MILLER: We asked if anyone wanted to speak on the continuance.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think they did.
I think you couldn't see hem behind the boards.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone want to speak on this continuance of item 4?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: It's a moot point to have them tell us if they want it continued tonight if we can't hear from staff.
>>GWEN MILLER: Right.
Would you come up and speak now?
>>> Good afternoon, council.
I'm Lorraine Wyley.
I have been sworn in.
4201 Nassau street.
I'm the president of carver city Lincoln Gardens civic and homeowners association.
In reference to the proposed site that Jim MIKAS is planning to build on Hubert and Spruce, I'm sitting there and I'm hearing that staff has not seen as much as they need to see in order to further hear the discussion on what he would like to have done.
The community does not oppose what we have seen so far.
If there is something that we need to see further than what we have already seen, which what we've seen seemed to be agreeable with the association, because Jim has met on various indication was the board, and the association, we've discussed in depth what has been presented to us, and at this time we do not oppose what we've seen thus far.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Okay, council, what is your pleasure, continuance?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't know whether there was an official motion to open.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, we opened it.
Yes.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have opened 4 now?
>>GWEN MILLER: Just 4.
Continue it to a day meeting?
>>> A day meeting.
>>GWEN MILLER: In April?
What do we have in April?
>>> I don't know if there was anybody else -- I didn't want to cut them short.
I just mentioned that Lorraine may not be here at another time.
I don't know to No if there was anybody else that wanted to speak.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: As staff I would recommend at least a three-week continuance, April 21st.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a question on the motion.
Mr. Harrison?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: A day meeting.
This is two very large projects.
And it would seem like -- it would seem like on two very large projects like this, we ought to stick with our initial reading being in the evening.
I don't know if everyone is going to be totally in favor of it.
We have one person that appears to be okay with it but I don't know if that's going to be uniform.
So if we have any chance of controversy, I think that we ought to go with the night meeting.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Procedurally, a motion to waive the rules requires a unanimous vote.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Oh, yes.
Forgot to waive the rules.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Unanimous among the people here?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Among the people here.
>>ROSE FERLITA: In terms of when we are going to do this?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: In terms of whether you choose to go to a day meeting.
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to waive the rules.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: You need to waive the rules and that vote has to be unanimous.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Harrison I think spoke subsequent to the same concern I had earlier.
It's fine that the lady who represents carver city came up here and is supportive of what he has and what staff hasn't seen.
But I'm going to mess up your unanimous requirement.
Because I am not going to support a continuance if it's a day meeting.
I think Mr. Harrison is correct.
I agree with him.
That this is a huge project.
And I think that we need to look at it in an evening scheduled meeting.
I don't mind the continuance.
But I just think that we are setting a precedent that I'm not comfortable for.
Nothing to do with your project or you particularly but I'm not going to support a continuance for a day meeting.
So that messes up the unanimous.
>>GWEN MILLER: So we go for a night meeting.
The first one we have is June 23rd.
>>THE CLERK: June 23rd.
>>> That creates a very major problem, and at the contract closing we would be in default by that time.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, I think that today is March 31st.
We have had the experience tonight of several -- not the continued rezonings but the regular rezonings continued.
This petitioner was several hours late in turning this in.
But I think making him wait four months is just not right.
And, therefore, I would like to make a motion that we continue this to April 28th at six in the evening.
That's a month from now.
>>> I really would appreciate that.
That would allow me to perform under the contract on the larger piece of property.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I am saying is based on our experience some will be continued.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let me caution you that doing this because it creates a self imposed hardship, he was late and it wasn't intentional, I'm sure.
But we are going to consider your alternate suggestion based on the assumption that there is going to be a continuance.
And we are getting right back in the same -- we are going to do this and then we don't.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Looking at the April 21st, we have only got presentation of the police officer of the month -- you wanted a day meeting, right?
>>> I'll go with either one.
>>ROSE FERLITA: He's not part of this council, Mrs. Alvarez, you are not going to get unanimous from me for a day meeting.
Make your comment.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I was just going to say from what the schedule shows, there's one continued land rezoning, one DRI, two wet zonings, and one extension of time wet zoning, and then the list of businesses that failed.
That to me, that's enough to consider a day meeting.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll second the motion.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Police correct me because I apologize.
I was out for just a moment.
But when I walked back in, just listened to the motion here real quick, is this not what we were just discussing last week, about our rules of procedures?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Which rule of procedure?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Our 10 and 3.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: And exceptions to the rules.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct. The 10 plus 3 have not yet been codified formally.
They are now a council custom.
And desire, and procedurally council can do what it wishes.
It hasn't been codified yet.
That's forthcoming.
That's in the rules that have been proposed.
>> That's what we agreed to do.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Right.
What has been proposed is the evening meetings, and if you were to move them to a day meeting, that is in the rules and that does require unanimous vote under the present rules.
Does that answer the question, sir?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Yes and no.
And basically, I was just trying to find out -- remember when I asked you specifically that my concern was the 10 and 3 which was having one or maybe two council members that were sympathetic to the cause, and we continue to continue, and we would end up like we have tonight with 17 items on the agenda?
Or like we were two weeks ago, until 1:00 or 1:30 in the morning, with all of the other ones.
And basically, I was just trying to clarify, isn't this the procedure that got us to that conversation?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
The answer is it was the intent of council to formalize a rule that said 10 new petitions and no more than 3 continuances and the only way that would be waived would be by unanimous vote of council, and that's what council has proposed.
Actually let me just leave it there.
>>KEVIN WHITE: By common practice of this council, sticking to its rules.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: That would put petitioners on notice --.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: From henceforth and forever more if you can't meet your deadline, this is what the outcome is going to be?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe council's intention when it crafted these rules was two fold.
Number one, as an aside, internally, Land Development Coordination will make sure that these are not scheduled for hearing until after the design review committee.
I believe that's the process now.
That in and of itself will probably reduce the number of continuances.
The goal ultimately will be that when something as council member Harrison says is on the agenda, it is ripe to be heard, and council will either make an up or down decision.
If goal ultimately is to be able to foster an orderly brother pro impression of hearings.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I was just wondering about that.
The unfortunate part is I was not here to find out why Mr. MIKAS is requesting one.
Don't want to go back through it.
I think I will defer to my colleagues who did hear.
>>> It's an issue of a couple of hours, for want -- the kingdom toppled.
>>> My concern is we are now looking at mid July, as I understand, for any continued hearing.
This means from April 1st on, anybody who has anything that they want to bring up, we are talking mid July.
Perhaps council should consider additional evening meetings.
The end of June.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would be happy to go to zoning meetings every Thursday night if it would make the salary commensurate to the hours of being here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So we go to June 23rd.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion on the floor.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: A motion for April 21st.
>>GWEN MILLER: A day meeting.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Which then requires additionally a motion to waive the rules.
>>GWEN MILLER: We are going to see where it's going.
We have a motion and second to waive the rules on April 212 1stst at a day meeting.
All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
Now we need to come up with a night meeting.
Mr. Harrison.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Can I ask a question?
Who in the audience here tonight is here to speak on this item?
>>GWEN MILLER: One?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: There is just one person here.
And --
>>> the homeowner president.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So we may not be dealing with quite the controversial issue we think we are dealing with.
Now I'm still not willing to go to a day meeting but since we have not yet codified the 10-plus-3 rule into an ordinance format, I'm not sure that we're going to take up more than about 10 or 15 minutes of agenda time by hearing this matter if we went ahead and just picked a date that was closer than the end of June.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I misspoke and I apologize to council.
I don't want to confuse the issue.
But let me just read the rule.
And I apologize if I caused confusion.
For those evening zoning meetings that are required to be rescheduled, continued for consideration, council shall schedule these items on the evening agenda for the fourth Thursday of the month at the end of the agenda.
That's what it says now.
By council's discretion, these cases may be placed on the day agenda, if deemed appropriate.
Now that is within the rules.
Therefore, it doesn't require that particular provision does not require it to be unanimous.
And I apologize to council for misspeaking.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: That's okay.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's the rule as written and that's why the rules need to be --.
>>GWEN MILLER: April 28th is the fourth Thursday.
Can we do April 28th?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm saying I don't think it's going to be controversial.
I don't think it's going to take -- Mr. MIKAS, if you don't take 30 minutes for your presentation, then we may not be --
>>> my major problem is to make sure I satisfy staff.
And this gives them time.
We have -- the reason this created a problem, we made the changes from the DRC meeting of March 14th.
We made the mistake of coming in and saying, any more changes you want to make on the 17th, the afternoon of the 17th?
And they said, well, put these additional notations.
And they were right.
No question, the staff made right comments.
It just took us past 12:00 noon the following day.
It was understood, improperly understood, that we could get it in anytime the next day and we got it in at four, okay?
And they are all notational items.
Now, whatever they have additional items were prepared -- we are prepared to do that.
We're not fighting anything.
There hasn't been one item that we said, no, we won't do it.
It's just merely been tell us, and it's been incorporated, I think.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I don't have a question.
I want to make a motion that we make it on the 28th at 5:30.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
Question on the motion?
Mrs. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Discussion on the motion.
And this is my issue.
This is my issue.
And I think we can each understand each other's position.
I can certainly understand where Mr. White is coming from.
And I understand this is causing you a hardship.
And I'm very sorry about that.
And this may go anywhere regardless of my vote but I want to put this on record.
We have gone strong in saying these are our rules.
I think there's one, perhaps two petitioners representatives out there that had to suffer the consequences, and in a little different situation a couple of weeks ago because we said these are the rules, you're ready, you are not ready, here we go.
Now, based on that type of stand, not that that was the same thing as you're coming up and requesting, as sympathetic as I am to the hardship, if you didn't let this go through, I am at least equally upset that a petitioner puts me in a position where we have a rule, and now we are debating about breaking that rule.
I mean, it's like almost as council makes rules, with the intent to break them.
We are saying, well, maybe we'll have some continuances and maybe we won't.
I'm not going to support it unless it's appropriate.
And for us to add it to that, I'm just not going to do it.
And I hope you understand, Mr. Mikas.
It's nothing to do with you.
I can't support it.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue to April 28th at 5:30 p.m.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Passes.
>>> Thank you.
I really apologize for putting knew this position.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I just have to have one last word.
Again, nothing to do with you, sir.
But it's an issue of fairness.
Because we have put other petitioners representatives in a predicament because we were going to hold strong to policy.
Policy or lack of following policy is what many times has put this council in an embarrassing predicament.
We have just done it again.
>>GWEN MILLER: I need to open number 5.
I have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
And ditto for this.
(Laughter)
So this one -- it's the same thing.
They are requesting waiver from the 13th day.
And then rescheduling of the hearing.
>>> The projects are almost identical.
Same product.
They are only a block away.
They would have been -- if they were one piece they would have been one project.
>>ROSE FERLITA: 10 or 15 minutes?
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone here on item number 5?
Would you like to speak against a continuance?
Or for the continuance?
>>> Loretta Wyley again, president of Lincoln City Carver Gardens.
In reference to the project at Spruce and Lois Avenue, we have again met with Jim Mikas on several occasions and we discussed this, the board and the association, based on what has been presented to us at this time.
We have no objection to this project.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Mr. Mikas put us in another strain.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to continue this to April 28th at 5:30.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
Questions on the motion?
All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
>>> I appreciate it.
>>GWEN MILLER: The two will be together.
We need to open number 6.
We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay?
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development. The petition before you is the special use petition to allow for the 80% rule.
Petitioner is requesting the property at 10015 north 10th street.
The property is 45 by 100.
I have the indication, study of the area.
Staff is concerned about this.
I forgot to give this to council.
I'll pass it out.
But it does make an argument to recommend against this petition.
There is only approximately 7% of the lots in the area that are nonconforming.
The vast majority of the areas have the conforming lot sizes for the underlying zoning which is RS 50.
If there is a point to speak in support of this petition, I did want to advise council that the area is an R-20 land use classification.
This is the area where we went through the process of doing a down-zoning.
It was RM-16 zoning here just about a year or two ago.
Mr. Harrison, you're aware of this area.
I think the down-zoning was to prevent development of multifamily duplexes in the area.
This petitioner is proposing to develop single family at a density of 9.6 units per acre.
But the area around it conforming lot size is just the character.
I'll give you a copy of this.
Staff is objecting.
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
Ms. Moreda had alluded to the future land.
I am going to put a future land use map on the Elmo to look at.
This is the subject property she's talking about.
Indeed as you can see the predominant land use classification in the area is residential 20.
The existing uses in the area are mix of older single-family attached and detached homes.
There is integration of uses.
Most of the housing stock in the area is aged and utilized.
Residences constructed in the area in the last few years similar to the ones being proposed here this evening.
It will be from what I understand, from the economic aspect, something that would fit into the character, into economic background of the people that live in the area.
The request would not adversely impact the residential character of the area and would contribute to the aged housing stock in the area.
Planning Commission staff finds the proposal consistent with the comprehensive plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>>> Good evening.
My name is Yvonne Jomarron, and I'm representing the owner.
They want to build two houses according to the 80% rule.
And I think it would be very nice in the community.
This is going to give taxes, and besides that, single-detached residences and be taking very good care of the neighborhood, besides that.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn?
Were you sworn in?
Were you sworn in?
Did you swear to tell the truth?
>>> I'm sorry.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>> I do.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And everything you said to this point is the truth?
>>> It is.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 6?
>>> Thank you.
>> I'm sorry, I have not been sworn.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else in the audience that needs to be sworn in?
Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>> My name is Jeff Berg who have the president was not able to make it tonight.
He basically says 5,000 square feet is not the amount for the single family home.
It's the minimal.
He put -- you put a 1250 square foot house on that land, there's no lawn.
And
Building row houses -- and that's pretty much what we are going to get here if you take the houses and squish them in, really -- we don't want that to show character of the neighborhood.
By all means, anybody building houses, new houses in the area, they should have a financial gain.
But our association, we believe it shouldn't be at the expense of the neighborhood that they are going to leave behind when they leave the neighborhood.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask him a question?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: From this aerial, it looks like a lot of vacant parcels in the neighborhood, there are?
>>> There are some vacant parcels.
But I wouldn't call it many.
And just one other thing on there.
Wouldn't it be nice to have one house on that property rather than squishing two?
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else that would like to speak?
Need to close the public hearing.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Opportunity for rebuttal.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, anything else you want to say?
No.
Motion and second to close.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, this is an area unlike what Mr. White said earlier that I think is in need of redevelopment.
This is not quite Beach Park yet.
And so I have no problem with 80% development in this part of my district.
So I move an ordinance approving an S-2 special use permit approving 80% lot development in as RS 50 residential single zoning district in the original vicinity of 10015 north 10th street Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section 1 hereof providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
All in favor say Aye.
>> Nay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I am usually opposed to 80% lot development request but I think Mr. Harrison is correct in the sense that I think these particular type areas, the reasons 80% rules were created in the first place.
So I think it will contribute to the development that's appropriate.
So I certainly support it.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, again.
The clerk has requested us to recall item 7 just for purposes of clarification.
>>THE CLERK: I believe that number 7, it should be -- petitioner should be allowed to amend and schedule a public hearing for May 12th.
>>GWEN MILLER: We did make that motion.
>>THE CLERK: There was no motion made.
It was to remove it from the agenda.
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to make a motion to continue to May 12th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Not to continue it.
I don't believe it's been opened.
>>THE CLERK: It needs to be scheduled because they need to do their notices again.
They misnoticed.
>> We did not do that?
>>THE CLERK: No.
>>THE CLERK: You said to remove it from the agenda.
>>GWEN MILLER: Allow them to pay their fee.
>> CLERK: (Off microphone)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I wish we had known that five minutes ago.
We could have scheduled those other two that we just scheduled that for May 12th.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Those petitions have already been scheduled.
For May 12th.
They paid the amendment fee already and it has already been --.
>>GWEN MILLER: Continued to May 12th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: You made a motion to remove it from the agenda because there was a motion made previously.
Do you know when that was?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: A week or two when they discovered they had done the wrong notice.
It has already been scheduled for May --.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: By motion?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: By motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do we need to make it again?
Just for the record?
The clerk said we didn't.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Make it again.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue number 7 to May 12th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Continue top allow to be set.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Set the public hearing for May 12th.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
(Motion carried)
Okay.
Now number 12.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to open number 8.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: This is the petition for Packwood Avenue. The proposed rezoning is to a planned development district. The petitioner has made a number of changes to the site plan in the sense of the narrative on the site plan, which the code does allow for.
Where I can indicate the number of staff concerns in our staff report have been satisfied.
But let me give a summary first of the project.
The property involved is at 109 south Packwood.
It's for a development of 20 residential townhouse units.
It's five groupings of townhouses, two units, towards Packwood Avenue with two units oriented towards the alley.
Each unit will have one garage parking spaces which with one tandem space.
Setbacks proposed, 13 feet from Packwood Avenue, five feet from Cleveland, 20 feet from the rear, and five feet from the north side property line.
The first comment that I have made in terms of my objection was concerned about the density.
But last week City Council did approve the plan amendment to this area to the R-35 land use.
Staff is concerned.
There are a number of waivers that this petition is requesting.
One is for the removal of more than 50% of the trees.
They are asking for waiver of the green space requirement.
It is a total of 4300 square feet of feet space that they are asking to waive.
They do indicate on their site plan that they will be mitigating by increasing the tree replacements to do four-inch minimum trees.
They are also -- the site plan is corrected to indicate that the alley maneuvering will be reduced from the required 24 feet to 20 feet.
They are asking for a waiver, the driver waive -- driveway distance from Cleveland, section 27, 137.5, allowing for the tandem parking arrangement rather than a two-car garage.
For units that are oriented towards the street.
And they are also asking for a waiver of the separation between units based on the height of the buildings and the wall lengths.
They are asking for a 10-foot separation.
And I calculate there's more of a 15-foot separation required.
The objections by the fire department have been satisfied.
The site plans now indicate that they will be sprinkling the buildings.
The site plan indicates three guest parking spaces on the property.
It has been revised now to indicate that those guest parking spaces are actually in the right-of-way.
And staff, as an editorial comment, you know, guest parking, I think that council has been asking petitioners to provide.
I think you have wanted that to be on the property that's being rezoned, not in the public right-of-way.
Those spaces cannot be earmarked for any particular use.
Council, through their review of the presentation, I think, need to look at the chapter 13 hardship conditions.
They are asking for substantial waiver of green space here, 4300 square feet.
I think normally you will see the site plan laid out.
You see a lot of these.
Usually it's a one-lot development where they are asking to build the four townhouse units in this similar arrangement.
The fact that they are doing five sets of these in a row is causing for the waiver of the green space.
Council increases the density on this property to allow for a higher density development, and at the same time the developer is asking for a substantial number of waivers to do this density that he's proposing.
Staff has continued objection to this petition.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a question?
>>GWEN MILLER: Sure, Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the allowable density?
What are they asking for?
What is the difference?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: They are asking for a density of 25.6 units per acre.
And they are an R-35 land use.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How many would they be allowed if they were --
>>> 35 units per acre.
>> And this is 35 units per ache er?
>>> No.
They are asking for 25.6 units.
Their previous land use was I think an R-20 land use.
Is that what you were asking?
I'm sorry.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
I have got the future land use map.
On second reading last week changing the plan amendment.
This is the subject site.
It's gone to CMU 35 which is this over here.
So it's got a 357 dwelling unit density that's .92 acres so they have the potential of going up to 31 units.
I don't think -- 20 units.
So the potential is, since they are doing a PD, it can go up to potentially 31 units.
We did have some concern, also, in the talks about meeting to exceed or meet the requirements of land development regulations, as it relates to the green space.
They are asking for reduction of almost 30% of green space.
The area itself is consistent with pattern of development in the area, as I'm sure most of you have recalled for most of the developments that you have approved, south of the periphery of Kennedy Boulevard.
There has been a consistent pattern of town home development west of MacDill Avenue, significant pattern of development, more along the southern periphery of Kennedy Boulevard.
So it is consistent with the town home development as it leads eastward to the downtown corridor.
Planning Commission staff finds the proposal consistent with the comprehensive --.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And Mr. Garcia, you have been sworn?
>>> Yes, I have.
I haven't said that one time, Mr. Shelby.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Good evening.
I have already been sworn.
Let me briefly show you where this project is located.
What you see here is an indication of the high density corridor.
This is also the high transit pattern corridor.
This is also the location of where you are proposing light rail.
And a variety of other high intensive uses right here.
This red dot represents the project location.
Without speaking for the Planning Commission, I'll read from the report in a second.
But they were encouraging higher density between Kennedy Boulevard and Cleveland to support the new commercial and new office space.
It's trying to get developed and get a foothold on the redeveloping the Kennedy Boulevard corridor.
And to support that, there were several different recommendations that encourage a project of this nature.
What we did was, we took a bungalow style, typical Hyde Park style of development.
And I'll show you that elevation in a second, with higher peaks, normal side yard setbacks of three feet on the apartment buildings, and they became single-family residences later on.
But this corridor has to have residential support.
And immediately adjacent to this site are all offices.
There are no residential properties.
There's one townhouse project across the street from this.
I don't think I need to go through this urban pioneers and what it takes to develop a site.
This thing is falling down now.
I guess I can hold it up with one hand.
They did that on purpose, I think.
(Laughter)
>>GWEN MILLER: We have to buy some new ones.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: There we go.
Basically, what you have is an area at any redevelopment for some time, you are just now beginning to see redevelopment occur.
So the water lines that have not been upgraded, the sewer lines have not been upgraded, the sewer lines and alleys that have not been repaved will become repaved, restored anew.
So all the people complaining about water pressure and things like that, and sewage does not work, will not be complaining about this area.
This article basically talks about this.
This is a copy of the old City of Tampa zoning map, and again it's showing even back in the 40s and 50s that the plan was for higher density to occur between Kennedy and Cleveland.
We said, look, what design We use?
The Mediterranean revival design is getting a little tired.
So we went back and came up with a design concept that basically emulates a bungalow style.
This five-unit pattern, with two on each end, are lower scale, one in the middle is a higher scale.
And this occurs in the front to break the streetscape so when you are driving along you have a different appearance for each of those units.
Let me show you the photographs in the area about what we are looking at.
That building is directly across the street to the east of this property.
This is a picture of the street as it is now, with the patches, the potholes, and right behind this is a commercial project that hasn't been built yet.
You may remember that we came to you earlier with a commercial mixed use project on that site.
Directly across the street to the south is a two-story law office.
This is the subject parcel.
It used to be several homes there.
Now they are all vacant properties.
Immediately across the street, diagonally across the street is another large office building.
So sort of in keeping with the development style and scale of the offices that are there, in order to support the Kennedy Boulevard, we thought this was inappropriate density to be developing that.
As Tony pointed out, potentially you have 31 units, and we are proposing 20.
The side yard setbacks are generally in the near five to seven feet.
We also had requested that we were placing the on-street parking as guest parking.
We were going to cut the curbs out.
And place parallel spaces on the street in front of each of these homes which were then typical for a development around the turn of the century.
There are a couple of different policies.
The planning commission pointed out promote the higher densities and land use categories adjacent to employment centers through the plan amendment and rezoning process to ensure efficient use of land and public facilities.
This complies with that.
This is exactly what we are trying to do.
If we are going to have commercial development that's viable on Kennedy Boulevard it has to be supported.
And this is a very attractive project, which will do exactly that.
Facilitate the development of residents which support commercial office uses located nearby, reduce the need for lengthy automobile trips, plan amendment sites should access a transit system as you know, Kennedy Boulevard is a major transportation link between Westshore and the downtown.
This will provide easy access in either direction.
Also north and south going up to St. Joseph's hospital or going south into South Tampa.
We have done just about everything we can do to mitigate this, any impacts we might have.
We have increased the size of the trees to four inches, from two inches.
It is a 215 square foot reduction of green space per unit.
When you multiply that times 20 units, it becomes a larger number but it's only 215 square feet.
Previously City Council had a policy where if we had increased the size of trees from 2 to 4 inches to help mitigate for that reduction of green space, it was agreeable.
Being so close to Kennedy Boulevard, we believe first of all that that is an acceptable -- should be an acceptable proposal, and it's a reasonable one considering location.
We have tried to work out everything we could based on the staff concerns.
Most of them relate to policy decisions that have been made by City Council.
But we have designed this project specifically for this location.
It is a good location for this type of in-fill.
And again it will be introducing residential development on the 100 block just south of Kennedy.
So I respectfully request your approval and retain any time I need to for rebuttal.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 8?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 107, 109, 115 and 117 south Packwood Avenue and 1807 Cleveland street in the City of Tampa more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications RM-16 residential and multi-family, PD office to PD residential townhouse, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
(Motion carried)
Need to open item 12.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
Item 12, and 14 involve the same property.
>>GWEN MILLER: Open 14, please.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GLORIA MOREDA: What I'll do is give the staff report for the special use.
That item needs to be acted -- acted on first prior to the wet zoning.
The proposal is to allow for drive-in window for convenience store/restaurant.
They are asking -- when the staff report was prepared, there was a question of whether or not the site plan showed compliance with chapter 13.
So I added a variance, request to the variance review board to consider waiver of chapter 13.
I think the petitioner has been working with the Construction Services Center to revise the site plan to show compliance with the chapter 13 requirements, so the ordinance will have to be referred back so that council -- so that the new site plan can be attached to that ordinance.
But with that modification of the site plan, staff would remove their objections to the petition.
They are complying with all the requirements related to the specific use for drive-through window.
This is not near a residential area.
They have access to two collector streets, Morris Bridge Road, and Cross Creek Boulevard, and transportation requirements.
I will read for the record the wet zoning report.
The location is 10009-60 Cross Creek Boulevard, requesting a wet zoning of two APS.
Currently the property is zoned PDA.
This request is for the convenience store's restaurant, going to be a fast food.
Currently the property, the nearby wet zoning is Publix, which has a 2(APS).
Beef O'Grady's is in the shopping center next door, with a 2(COP-R).
There's a liquor store with a 3.
They are asking for a waiver of the residential distance separation.
There is residential property 70 feet across Morris Bridge Road.
It is zoned single family agricultural facility.
They are also asking for a waiver for the 100 foot separation from institutional uses.
The property is 950 feet from heritage elementary school at 18201 East Meadows Road, as well as 240 feet from Branchton Park at 15712 Morris Bridge Road.
Staff had no objection.
The police department had no objection with this petition.
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
Planning Commission had no objection.
I just want to make one comment from the design aspect.
The city may consider wanting to ensure that the project is designed in a way that is respectful that unincorporated county residents that this piece you see faces unincorporated Hillsborough County, in this direction.
It's close to an area that is significantly rural in character.
We would like for the applicant to take into consideration, and I have spoken to their legal counsel, about looking at something that would be more in keeping with the overall character of Morris Bridge Road as it is a two lane road so we would like the council to take that into consideration of the design characteristics.
I do have a photograph that can't be presented to -- I'll let you see it as an example of a rural character for a gas station in the area.
As it does interface into the character of Morris Bridge Road, we felt that this would be an appropriate alternative to at least present to the developer.
As it is basically a gateway going in from unincorporated Hillsborough County into what would be, I guess, a significant commercial.
It is a T-intersection but still a significant commercial presence going into the city from unincorporated Hillsborough County.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Where is that picture from?
>>> I don't know, Mr. Harrison.
I actually -- my associate picked this picture up from another case we had that was done in unincorporated Hillsborough County providing by one of our county planners Mr. Steve Griffin to us, and I thought it was very good, and would be very reflective of something that could potentially be done for this area as a nice interface.
Nice transition from going from rural into the more urbanized area of the cross creek area.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America plaza.
I'm representing Guyton Energy Corporation and also Michael Giovenco.
He's asked me to cover the base for him this evening.
I will certainly bring the photograph back to Michael and ask him to consider that in the architecture.
I have no idea where they are on architecture from the site, will certainly be well taken.
The site is on Morris Bridge Road.
And Cross Creek Boulevard.
It's an outparcel of a Publix anchor shopping center, was an AmSouth Bank immediately next door.
It will be a filling station, service station, drive-through, restaurant.
The alcoholic beverage request is to approve package sales of beer and wine, for not for consumption on the premises, and that's it in a nutshell.
We have access on Morris Bridge Road and Cross Creek Boulevard.
We respectfully request that you entertain the waivers on the beverage zoning and also approve a special use 2, which is for drive-through portion of the filling station.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 14?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
>>> Let me add one other point.
We also noted compliance with the new Tampa overlay district and that's on the site plan.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Grandoff, will you be able to go through the drive-through window and get beer and wine?
Is that even allowed under our code, a drive-through window?
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: I don't know.
I can check that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't know if I'm comfortable with that.
And also I typically don't like to get involved in architectural design.
But I think Mr. Garcia raises an excellent point about that.
This is -- it is a huge night and day transition between old Tampa and new Tampa.
>>> From Branchton, and then --
>> it's a big difference.
So how can we, other than just to recommend it to your client, which probably won't do a whole lot for us, how can we codify that a little bit more so that we, now.
>>> I think the way to do it would be through the New Tampa overlay district and the overlay standard you already have adopted, maybe amend that to include some amount of architectural suggestion.
But today --.
>> I know.
For second reading, can you find out what -- get us an elevation of some sort?
>>> Certainly will.
>> And then we will try to take it out at that point?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Council, you can't have the vote tonight because they were going to make the changes to the site plan related to the chapter 13 question, and maybe possibly we can attach a photograph such as this that he would try to design it to the standards.
He can talk to his client, come back with an elevation, and to make it part of the ordinance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone want to speak on item 12?
>>KEVIN WHITE: I was going to make a comment.
I don't know whether Ms. Moreda answered the other question or not.
But there's a drive-through package store on Nebraska north of Osborne, and that does allow drive-through package sales.
>>GWEN MILLER: On lake, too, at Nebraska.
>>> It wouldn't be unique to this particular area.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And Mr. Grandoff, I know you have been sworn.
>>> Yes, I have, Mr. Shelby.
Thank you.
Let me look at the wet zoning survey for a second.
Give me one second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It seems to me we could allow the wet zoning but preclude it being available at the drive-through.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Right.
I can't tell if it's for the restaurant or if it's for the entire gas station.
I just need to check it.
I'll come back with an answer on that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
>>> That's on the elevation.
Also the drive through.
No sales of liquor issued.
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to close the public hearing.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Moreda, what do we need to do?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: To continue this and I would suggest to a day meeting.
A week or two.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Oh, we have to waive the rules.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: You could close the public hearing.
And as soon as he gets the site plans to us, we would place it on your day meeting for the vote.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to pick a date now?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: I would suspect at the earliest would be two weeks.
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: April 14th, 21st, 28th.
Whatever you prefer.
I'm hear on those evenings anyway.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: It's a matter of the hearing closed and it's going to be just read on first reading.
>>GWEN MILLER: So in the morning.
Which council closed it?
14th or 21st?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: 21st.
>>GWEN MILLER: 10 a.m.
All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
(Motion carried)
We need to open number 13.
>>THE CLERK: It's to put it on the agenda.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Closed the public hearing.
>>THE CLERK: Who made the motion to put it for first reading on April 21st?
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison.
And Mr. White seconded.
>>THE CLERK: Okay.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the record that was also for 14.
>>GWEN MILLER: And 14.
Yes.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
The proposal is for special use for an 80% rule.
The property is located at 2209 Davis street to construct two single-family homes.
The lots are platted 50 feet wide.
There is a platted alley at the rear of these lots.
When I looked at the surrounding pattern for determination as to whether I felt this was appropriate, it showed that the nonconforming lots in the area were 49%.
But I think what council needs to look at in terms of why my recommendation is no objection is that there is a platted alley in the back.
If that alley was not there, these would be conforming lot sizes.
It's not customary that staff recommends vacating of an alley.
We think it would be more appropriate to keep the alley in place in case there is a future need for someone to be able to access garages from that alley, or some other designs that might be appropriate to the area.
And we feel from the street this property is going to appear in every sense a conforming lot under the RS 50 district.
We have no objections.
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
Yes, I have been sworn.
Just a couple of things.
The predominant land use category is number 10.
The existing uses in the immediate area consist primarily of other single family detached homes of various sizes on a variety of lots.
It's a pretty collective mix.
Actually very similar to the one that we have actually looked at earlier in Mr. Heroin's district.
And of course it's Palmetto Beach.
It's an area that's got tremendous redevelopment potential.
We feel the request is consistent with the plan of a residential development.
And offers again great potential and contributes to the housing stock and it's a very unique area.
There are some new housing things that have gone on in the area, not significant but something that has been very, very nice as far as from an architectural standpoint especially along Bermuda Avenue or further down, that this is a very nice Palmetto Beach area.
We are very pleased to see this project.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street.
I represent the petitioner.
I think both staffs have done a very thorough job in terms of their presentation, staff reports, the detailed analysis, and without waiving my opportunity or ability to put on a presentation, I would simply request that you move staff recommendation with the caveat that the commencement of development be six months of approval and we would request a year in order to get financing, design, go through the permitting process.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have you been sworn in?
>> Yes, ma'am.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
Even though it's not technically a historic area it has many of the characteristics of Ybor City and Tampa Heights.
My concern is that you are not going to build snap houses here on grade, flat roof or low-roof houses but rather build houses that reflect the traditional housing in the area which is raised with a porch, with a peaked roof.
I need reassurance, Mr. Bentley.
Bomb.
>>MARK BENTLEY: Like Mr. Grandoff it's hard to tell what the client has in mind in terms of architecture.
But let me show you, for example, on the Elmo.
That's the property directly to the east.
That's our neighbor.
Here's a property directly across the street to the north.
Here's the property directly to the west.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's the kind of house where it's raised up where the roof is peaked where it isn't dominated by the garage.
>>> So year looking for a peaked roof?
>> Peaked roof lifted off the ground, not slab on grade and not dominated by the garage in back.
>>> With all due respect, Mrs. Saul-Sena, that will be actually out of character with this street.
>> Not with the thing across the street.
Plus you have got alley access so could you put the car in back.
>>> Actually, the alley is grass and I don't think it's functional.
But that's a whole different story.
But --
>> you are not closing the alley?
>>> No, we are not closing the alley.
>>GWEN MILLER:
>>MARK BENTLEY: Can you bear with me about ten seconds?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Grandoff, I thought you were copping -- coming up to rescue him.
(Laughter)
>>MARK BENTLEY: That's like falling off the Titanic and someone throwing you an anchor.
(Laughter)
>>MARK BENTLEY: This is Fran Havia.
>>> The comment about the houses being traditional looking, the houses in that area, that are traditional, and raised, they are approximately two feet above the ground, or less.
And everything south of Stewart street is considered a flood zone.
It has to be eleven feet above main sea level.
Davis street is like six foot above sea level at this point.
So anything that would be built would have to be around floor level.
First floor would have to be at a minimum of five feet above sea level, or above the grade.
And some people put houses on high so the five foot area is where they can park the car under the house, use the first floor garage.
There's a three-story house at the corner of Davis and Bermuda Boulevard.
It's two blocks east.
That house has done a tremendous -- has had a tremendous impact on the community.
There would be a catalyst to get people started.
And building and developing Palmetto Beach.
It's a Mediterranean style home.
It doesn't look like anything else in Palmetto Beach.
It's like something you would see in Hyde Park or South Tampa.
It's right on the water.
And I just feel like your recommendation about building traditional stock homes is something that would be great but most of them, the old houses in Palmetto Beach were made out of wood.
So I don't know.
At this point we don't have a design.
I wasn't prepared to come here and argue this point.
But I just feel like the style of the home should be relevant.
Palmetto Beach, there's a mixture of homes.
My moth lives on a -- in a home on Gordon street one block north, built in 1950 5th 3.
And it doesn't look like anything in Palmetto Beach.
It's not a frame house.
If you go to Clark street, Korean street, the northern part of Pinellas beach the houses are wood frame homes like we used to see in Ybor, probably five foot setbacks on the side or less.
And I don't know what you mean by tradition.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I just have a question.
I'm not trying to give you guys a hard time, be smart-alacky.
Did you say you need a year to get the financing?
Do you think that's reasonable?
>>MARK BENTLEY: Let me respond. The code says you must commence development within six months.
So just go figure, you know, short of financing just getting through the permitting process, design, and then permitting, you're cutting it very close just with the six months.
Just in abundance of caution, we don't want to come here again.
So we just thought a year sounded more reasonable.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Point well taken.
Fine.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 13?
>> Move to close.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have a question for Ms. Moreda.
How come we keep having 80% requests?
>> They were in the pipeline before.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Oh.
Clerk.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Mr. Bentley apparently is asking for the waiver, six months rule. The ordinance has not been prepared.
He hadn't requested it.
If he's wanting it now, if council is inclined to approve it the ordinance would have to be redrafted.
>>MARK BENTLEY: Obviously I don't.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That gives you a week.
>>MARK BENTLEY: The issue just came up tonight.
So thank you.
>> Send to legal to be drafted.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Particular day, in a couple of weeks?
I don't know what's appropriate.
I can't answer for legal.
Julie Cole: A week would be fine.
Two weeks would be better.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let's make 2002 weeks.
>> We have a whole year.
See, you really did not need Mr. Grandoff.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: You may need a year and two weeks.
(Motion carried)
>> Is there anything else to come before council?
Mr. Shelby.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I wish to note to council that although it feels like 1:00 in the morning, it is actually before 9:00.
I just want to --
>> receive and file.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Anything else?
We stand adjourned.
(Meeting adjourned.)