Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
April 14, 2005
Evening Public Hearings

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 was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of third party
edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the proceedings
may need to hire a court reporter.

>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: It's my pleasure
To introduce Desiree Valdez who will give the invocation.
I must warn Desiree to bring her A game.
Look who is sitting front and center right behind.
Make it a good one, Desiree.
Let's all stand and remain standing for the pledge.
>> Thank you.
Let us pray.
Dear God, we ask that you guide this Council to focus and
combine energies for the strength that comes when you have the
unity of purpose.
May all who enter this chamber be blessed with integrity,
honesty and patience.
We pray now and forevermore for the courageous men and women
serving and protecting our freedom far and near.

May we say a special prayer for those searching for the missing
child Sarah Lunde.
May you guide them to find her.
May their virtue shield them and their strength go before them.
For this we pray.
Amen.

(Pledge of Allegiance)

>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
At this time, this morning, we had two comprehensive plans we
need to read and then we'll go into our regular agenda.
Ms. Alvarez, would you read number --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: An ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing
and abandoning all that alleyway lying East of fair row avenue,
West of Nebraska avenue, South of Louisiana avenue and North of
Osborne avenue in orange Dale park located in block two, a
subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida,
the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof,
reserving certain easements and conditions, providing an

effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move an ordinance by the City of Tampa,
vacating, closing, discontinuing and abandoning all of that
alley lying in corrected map of Thornton subdivision.
The same being more fully described in section 2 hereof,
reserving certain easements and conditions, providing an
effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I had an opportunity to chat with Steve
Graham, the city's arborist about item 50 which was the Kimmins
settlement.
He wasn't aware of the new plan for Kennedy to plant other trees
other than the Crepe Myrtles.
And we discussed it.
The commitment by Kimmins was to $240,000 worth of new trees.
We thought what would be very fair is to request legal to draw
up a new settlement by next week and I've already spoken to
David Smith about it, where 80,000 would be allocated to the
Bobby Hicks Park, 80,000 to Florida Avenue and 80,000 to Kennedy
Boulevard of new trees of what caliber and designation park
staff would deem the most appropriate.
My motion is that we request that legal redraft the settlement

ordinance for the same amount, $240,000, but that the Parks
Department set up the three accounts.
One for Florida Avenue, Kennedy, and Bobby Hicks Park.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and a second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

>> What was the motion that was just passed?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion -- my motion was that you all had
agreed to the $240,000 for trees, and I had spoken with Steve
Graham about what the caliber of the trees are and what species
would be most appropriate, that the parks -- that we ask legal
to redraft the settlement agreement to come back next Thursday,
that 80,000 would be for Kennedy Boulevard, 80,000 for Florida
Avenue and 80,000 for Bobby Hicks Park and that the parks
department staff would determine the appropriate caliber of the
trees and species.
>> Well, if I can be heard on that for a moment.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, I may.
>> My name is John Grandoff.
Suite 3700, Bank of America plaza.
I represent Kimmins Corporation.
Ms. Saul-Sena, I don't know if those trees will all fit.
As a matter of principle, we've negotiated this settlement for
many, many months in good faith, and we were at the bargaining

table and we would like to have it approved.
Certainly that could have been considered at the time we were
negotiating.
I just find it unfortunate that we're being held up at this
point once we've come to terms.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me.
But City Council -- City Council is the appropriate entity to
agree to this.
>> I don't think that's correct.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, excuse me, Mr. Grandoff.
But it's the same amount of money.
We're talking about the species of the trees and the caliber of
the trees, and I think that -- if it's the same amount of money
to you, it's better for us to get the kind of trees and the
caliber that are best for the redevelopment of these streets.
We're currently working with the Department of Transportation
who is resurfacing a portion of Kennedy and a portion of
Florida.
They are putting in the irrigation sleeves.
They are conduct the holes and we -- cutting the holes and we
want to work closely with the neighborhoods to determine the
appropriate choice of trees.
I don't think it would be so important -- to your client, it's
the same amount of money.
Do you really care about the caliber of the trees and the

species?
>> What I care about, Ms. Saul-Sena, is the process and the
charter.
I think for the City Council to inject itself into the
negotiations of a settlement agreement goes against what the
charter provides.
And I'm concerned about where do you have finality in
negotiating settlements with the administration?
The point is for the resolution to adopt the agreement.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: The administration is tasked with the
responsibility of negotiating various agreements, but those
agreements in order for them to be legally binding upon the City
of Tampa must be approved by City Council.
So the agreement that was proposed today is not in a form that
you all are willing to approve and you're asking us to look at
making some adjustments to that agreement.
I believe that we're willing to do that.
Obviously, an agreement is a consensual sort of thing.
So we can't force something on Kimmins that they are not willing
to agree to.
It sounds like we're talking about details that we need to work
out.
I talked to Ms. Wysong, Ms. Saul-Sena, while you're talking
about dollar amounts, she's looking for trees.
Just rephrasing the agreement as to the types of trees on

certain links and segments of streets.
I don't think the adjustments have to be made in the agreement
are as dramatic as you think they may be.
We need a chance to talk and make sure --
>>GWEN MILLER: I think we need to continue.
>> Ms. Saul-Sena, I agree.
It's an apples and apples comparison.
I'm concerned about the precedent that it creates and the
process being respected as what the charter dictates, what the
City Council should do versus what the administration should be
doing.
And it puts my practice in a lot of up in the air as to, well,
when do you really have a deal?
That's all I'm saying.
We will work on it.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Will two weeks be better?
>> I don't want the whole agreement start to get reopened now.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Frankly, as quickly as you can wrap it up.
I'm not talking about a change in dollar agreement.
I can't imagine that your client would care whether you are
buying Crepe Myrtles or oaks.
So my motion would be that legal would work with Kimmins and
bring this back as quickly as possible.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
Question on the motion, Ms. Ferlita.

>>ROSE FERLITA: I want to see what Mr. Grandoff's comment --
>> We're done and we'll work on it.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll support the motion.
Mr. Grandoff, I think philosophically to answer your question,
there is no deal until you can get through Council and that's
regardless of whether or not you're talking about zoning
contracts or anything else.
So we will always have possibly have some input regardless of
what the issue is.
Don't feel put upon.
That's just why we are here.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the floor.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: This would be in a form of an amendment to the
motion.
It's really an amendment to your previous motion.
Because I believe the previous motion was voted on.
It was voted on.
That it come back next week.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, if it can't come back next week, then
as quickly as possible.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: My understanding is you made an amendment to
the motion.
The motion passed.
You amended the motion to continue it, in effect, put it on the
pending calendar until legal brings it back.

You said as soon as possible.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm sorry.
Then I'll stick with my original motion which passed.
If they can't finish it in a week, then they'll ask for another
week.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Then you're withdrawing your amendment to the
motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: She'll withdraw the two weeks.
We'll leave it as is.
Come back in a week.
If we don't, we'll have to continue it again.
>> Thank you for hearing our concerns.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Cathy Coyle.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, Council.
Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
The first one on the agenda, item number 1 Z 05-38 did
misnotice.
The affidavit was filed late.
I have not heard from the petitioner.
Is he here?
Is anyone in the audience for Z 05-38?
Well, you could make a motion to allow the petition to be
amended.
The typical procedure is that if they don't come back into our
office within ten days to pay the amendment fee, then we ask for

it to be withdrawn.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Item number 3, Z 05-40.
Mr. Michelini is the representative.
He was unable to attend this evening.
His father-in-law is in the hospital.
He did pay the amendment fee.
He is asking for may 26th at 6 p.m. to be rescheduled.
And I can tell you that is Gloria's night.
She said she was willing to take the case.
The report is already written, and we have only nine new cases
and two continued.
So you actually have two open slots that night.
>> So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

>>CATHERINE COYLE: Item number 14, Z 05-25, the petitioner is
asking for a continuance to May 5th, 10:00 in the morning if
Council is so willing.
That is the case in the Channel District.
They did write a detailed letter to Council and to myself and to

Morris Massey.
They will be reducing the scale of the development.
They are going to be removing phase two of the development and
going back and just modifying the original phase, the 86-foot
building.
And I believe it's 18 units they are planning to add.
15 units that they are planning to add.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm just concerned about having it in the day
rather than in the evening.
And I wondered if there's anyone from the public who is here to
speak on it.
I think this is pretty significant.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Andrea Zelman, Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy.
We are representing the applicant.
The conversations that we've had with the community in the
Channel District was their concern about phase two, which was
the tower that we were proposing, which is now off the table.
And when our client spoke today with all of the representatives
in the Channel District and the other developers there, they had
no problem with what we were proposing tonight.
He specifically told them what we were proposing tonight.
I did copy the Chairman or the president, Jeanie White of the
Channel District Council and hand delivered the letter that I
sent to Council today as well.
And again, what we're doing now is again taking all of phase two

off the table and simply trying to ask for a slight increase to
Phase One which is the development that was approved in 2003.
No increase in height.
Just 15 more units.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Couple of things.
Number one --
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Anyone in the audience --
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Anybody who wishes to speak as to the
continuance?
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 14.
Anybody in the audience want to speak on item 14?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I would just ask Council so the Council is
aware that I have requested to not be here that day.
I'll be in Orlando, hopefully.
I'm just sharing with Council that I had tried to avoid being
here for any of the land use things.
It's Council's pleasure.
>>ROSE FERLITA: It will be difficult.
We'll have to ask somebody from the Legal Department to
substitute for you.
They probably won't have a portable mike like you.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue to May the 5th.
10:00.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
We need to open item number 5.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have to swear in witnesses.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public going to speak on item 4
through 13, you need to stand and raise your right hand.
Anyone in the public going to speak on item 4 through 13, stand
and raise your hand and 2.
And item 2.
(Oath administered by the clerk).
>>MARTIN SHELBY: When you state your name, ladies and gentlemen,
if you would please reaffirm for the record that you have in
fact been sworn.
I put a little sign up there to remind you so I don't have to
interrupt.
I'd appreciate it.
Thank you.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
I have been sworn.
This petition to rezone the property is for a 4820 North Gomez
avenue and 4815 North MacDill Avenue to PD zoning district
to develop a senior housing apartment complex.

The apartment complex is comprised of one building which stands
three stories and contains 80 one-bedroom units.
Vehicular access is restricted to MacDill Avenue.
An exit drive is located on Gomez and is listed as exit only for
emergency solid waste and service vehicles.
The petitioner also plans to grant pedestrian access to Gomez
Avenue through a pedestrian gate centrally located along the
easterly property line.
Elevations have been submitted with the request and are attached
to the site plans you have before you.
You'll note that there are no objections to the site plan.
The property lies just North of Louisiana between Gomez and
MacDill.
I'll show you some site photos.
Right now, it is a vacant treed lot.
This is a view of Gomez looking North.
And I took some various pictures of houses that were around it
to the North.
This is across the street.
This is violet, I believe it's called.
Violet Place.
It's a private road.
This is the place directly across the street.
Some more houses on the East side of Gomez to the South.
And immediately to the South along the southern property line.

This is a MacDill view.
You'll notice on the eastern side of the property it's all
single-family.
On the western side along MacDill, it is multifamily and
duplex and triplexes.
This is the MacDill view.
Immediately across the street on MacDill, there are very
large apartment complexes.
Lakeside villas and to the South, the driveway on MacDill,
there are more triplexes.
And there's another apartment complex across the street called
horizon point.
You'll note some policies in my report that I cited as well as
Tony Garcia speaking about housing for the elderly and promoting
living facilities, multiple or grouped for elderly living.
They meet section 202 supportive housing for the elderly program
which is housing for independent affordable housing for income
eligible persons 62 years and older.
That is noted on the site plan and that is very specific for
what this use is.
If they try to convert it to some other kind of apartment
complex, they would not be able to do that without a change of a
new rezoning.
Staff had no objections.
There is an additional comment sheet from solid waste which is

attached to the site plan.
Just four notes that were left off about the enclosure and the
materials and the screening for the dumpster.
Thank you.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, have you been sworn?
>> Yes, sir, I have been sworn.
As Ms. Coyle stated, the request is for senior housing project
at 4820 Gomez avenue and 4815 North MacDill Avenue.
The predominant land use categories in the area consist of
residential 35, residential 20 which is what the site consists
of, residential 35, there are a variety of residential uses that
surround the site.
Single-family to the East.
Multifamily to the West.
Single-family to the South.
Some vacant land to the North and, of course, to the East.
There are quite a few policies in the future land use element
that talk about and support development and housing for the
elderly.
We've got about four policies that are kind of lengthy.
Actually, I've got about eight policies there.
I'm not going to read them all.
What I would like to say, though, since the proposed development
allows 80 multifamily units for independent affordable housing

for income eligible persons 62 years of age or older, it is in
accordance with HUD section 202.
Future developments of this type are encouraged and needed
throughout the city and county, as we all know, to accommodate
our ever-increasing residential population, elderly population
who are mostly on fixed incomes.
The Planning Commission staff finds the proposed request and
does not object to the request.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Members of the Council, my name is Joseph DeVito.
I'm an attorney that represents the diocese and I have been
sworn.
It's my privilege to be here this evening on behalf of the
Bishop who has recognized the need for low-income elderly
housing in our community.
The project will be the 10th facility that the diocese has
sponsored.
And with me this evening are two members of our board, Monsignor
Larry Higgins, Laurence Higgins is our president of the
corporation.
And I'm going to ask him to address you in just a minute because
he has somewhere else to go this evening.
And he needs to leave.
So we'll ask him to say a few words.
And we have Mr. Fernando Noriega who is also a member of our

board who has been giving us some very good guidance on
planning.
Monsignor, I'll ask you to address the Council.
>> I think you have to swear me in because I didn't --
[ LAUGHTER ]
Everybody stood up, but I didn't know what it was for.
(Oath administered by the clerk).
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No fingers crossed?
>> Well, it's a pleasure to be here this evening.
Maintain a good relationship with all of our neighbors for the
past 48 years or more.
And the elderly are experiencing a serious housing problem and
become more serious.
And their ability in the open market to defend themselves is
most difficult if not almost impossible.
Projects like the one we are proposing be a monumental asset to
our community.
And I am sure that many of your relatives and friends have
benefit from these.
For example, Kings Manor and the CTA, Jewish tars, Baptist tars,
et cetera.
We invited by letter the residents and the home association to a
meeting at our parish hall for a presentation of the project.
There were some concerns, which we took very seriously and the
changes have been made accordingly.

St. Laurence wants to make it clear, that we want a project that
will be an asset to the neighborhood, a help to the elderly and
something we can all be very proud of.
Thank you very much and excuse me -- any questions?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Monsignor, I know that you're going to leave in
a few minutes, but I want to extend our congratulations for
being the silver medallion award winner from the national
conference of community and justice.
And I know that's where you're going.
>> Thank you very much.
That's where I am going.
Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> I think Monsignor said it best in recognizing the need for
this housing that he in connection with members of his parish,
all volunteers, formed a nonprofit corporation for the single
purpose of developing this housing.
There's no other purpose.
It is written in the charter that it is for the 202 elderly
program.
We also agreed with staff this be part of the site plan
application to be written into the approval process, and we will
be further recording in the public records a regulatory and use
agreement from HUD that will commit the project to 40 years of

low-income elderly housing in the community. We often get
questions about what is the project and it is not a project for
nursing homes.
It is not a project for assisted living.
This is independent living.
The residents will be living on their own.
They'll have full kitchens.
There will be no central meal service.
We find most of the residents will be elderly women,
approximately 80% or more, who is -- who are no longer able to
live alone because they are widowed or have lost a loved one.
They have inadequate protection in their homes.
They can't afford the cost of maintaining a home.
We all know property values have risen as housing has gone up
and housing needs are so short for the elderly.
So this offers a safe and secure environment that will have
24-hour manned desk at the front and security entryways for the
residents to come.
We have a rendering and we have with us today our architect and
other members.
I'd like to put a brief rendering of what the facility will look
like.
We have done our best to meet a couple of goals.
First is to recognize the needs within the community for this
much-needed housing.

Secondly, is to recognize the code requirements that you all
have put in place.
And we've done that by meeting with staff, making some
adjustments.
We've gotten the approval of all the departments.
We've also met with the community members and had a neighborhood
meeting at the church that Monsignor hosted and presented some
of our ideas, our preliminary plans and then we heard the
concerns of the neighbors and tried to maximize our buffering.
There are significant setbacks which I'll let the architect
explain.
We've tried to create a very residential type dwelling.
The back portion will have a courtyard look to again maintain
that residential type of flavor in the community, which, again,
I think meets part of the code or the policies that you all have
set in providing innovative housing, including the encouragement
of affordable housing units while preserving the character of
the existing neighborhood.
That's our goal is to try to preserve as much of that as we can.
So I'd like to introduce our architect, Mr. Enrique Woodroffe
and ask him if he can address you on more of the more technical
things that I'm not an expert at.
>> Good evening.
Thank you so much for having us.
My name is Enrique Woodroffe.

Woodroffe corporation architects, 505 West Laurel street, suite
205, Tampa, Florida.
And I've been sworn.
If I could, what I would like to do, I think most of you have a
site plan in front of you.
I'd like to help continue addressing some of the points that
were made by DeVito.
The site we're talking about is just under five acres and it
faces, if you recall, from the comments made earlier by staff,
Gomez to the East and MacDill to the West.
One of the efforts made really almost at the outset, there are
very nice trees that border along Gomez.
Very nice tree shade element that occurs around the South side
of the property.
And part of the design process was for us to figure out how do
we best maximize this and how do we provide some relief in terms
of what this project is in terms of buffering.
I would like to share with you that from the South property line
up to the edge of the southerly part of the project, it's almost
75 feet from Gomez to the front door is approximately 85 to
90 feet.
Part of the reason was, if you'll look at this green buffer that
occurs pretty much from the parking to where Gomez is, we
shifted.
Originally we were hoping to do less, what we found, there were

some very nice trees that we're going to maintain.
Part of the process is how do we design the building without
really hurting the site.
So we have tried to do pretty much in terms of that.
Retention areas will occur in the back part of the area and like
DeVito talked about, there's a central -- one of the things
that was made recently was a request by the neighborhood that
the entrance be at MacDill as a major entrance.
So what we have done is, there will be a main entry coming
through here that goes to the site.
And what we have done, the exit to Gomez is the emergency
vehicle access.
And I know that was something that was pretty important to the
community.
Additionally we have about 80 parking spaces, some of them being
grass, some in here and some of the areas that occur here.
I would like to stress that one of the elements we tried to do
when you saw the rendering earlier was try to get the
residential feel in terms of breaking up the massing.
So if you were to look at some of the elements it's not a really
wide and we did the relief of going back and forth.
I think we tried to do everything we could in terms of site
planning.
The other thing I forgot about is the fact we provided a fence
to prevent some of the access talking about.

Card access to the gates.
And at the same time, we think it will be a decorative fence --
some of the design process and try to enhance the neighborhood.
I would tell you that from working with not only the diocese,
but also St. Laurence church and Monsignor that there has been a
huge effort in term of making sure this is a good neighbor.
Hopefully we have done that through the process of the site
plan.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Woodroffe.
So what you're saying is that on Gomez Avenue, they are going to
have a fence all along Gomez and there's only going to be one
little road gate there, which will be the security gate?
>> Emergency vehicle.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Emergency vehicles.
>> And pedestrian.
What happens is, there's a fence all the way around the entire
property that occurs also and there's a gate also along the
MacDill -- for the entry and exit.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Then the entrance on MacDill toward the very
end of -- I guess that's lake Avenue?
>> That's the only parcel -- if you were to look back at the
photograph Cathy showed, there's a little portion that touches.
The property does not touch MacDill except for this little
hundred by hundred area.
That's where the exit and entrance is.

>>MARY ALVAREZ: And there's a security gate there too.
>> That's correct.
And part of that is really for the benefit of both I think the
neighborhood and also the people that reside in the apartments.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to
speak on item number 5?
>> Randy Cohen with Cohen and company.
1509 Swann Avenue and I have been sworn.
I started out to be here tonight in opposition to this project.
I represent Lydia and Julian Garcia and 54 of their neighbors
that have serious concerns about this project.
However, I'm happy to report that the applicant has worked with
the neighborhood and their concerns and has resolved virtually
every one of them.
So I'm not here in opposition to the project tonight.
However, we do have two concerns.
I have talked to one of the representatives of the applicant on
one of the concerns, and that's the entrance to Gomez.
The gated entrance there.
We would request that after the building has been CO'd that one
year after that point we have a review of that accessed driveway
to determine that, in fact, the actual operator of the facility
is operating that driveway in the manner that it's required in
the zoning condition.
That it's an exit only for emergency vehicles, solid waste, and

service vehicles.
So we would like that to come back to City Council one year
after the building is CO'd.
The other item relates to Hartline and the potential of a
proposed bus stop at Habana and Louisiana.
I represent 56 of the neighbors in the area.
Virtually everyone on Louisiana, virtually everyone on Gomez,
virtually every house shown in the photographs that Cathy Coyle
has.
Concern is fair amount of cut-thru traffic here.
Simply is not a pedestrian friendly -- we know the applicant is
working very hard with Hartline to have their bus stop put on
MacDill rather than Habana.
We would simply request that if they do have to have a bus stop
on Habana and if we can go to the elmo, this is their property.
This is Gomez.
This is Habana.
This is actually an open piece of property that's owned by the
Franciscans.
It's currently an off-site parking facility for St. Joseph
hospital.
We would request if they do end up having a Hartline bus stop on
Habana that it be put in this area North of Louisiana so that
there could literally be simply cross-access, a walking path to
actually reach Habana.

Therefore these folks will not have to walk on Gomez that does
not have sidewalks, Louisiana that does not have sidewalks and
both of those streets have a fair amount of cut-thru traffic.
We're not in opposition to the project at all.
We ask your consideration on those two items.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Right now, did they put a -- Hartline, didn't
they put two shelters in there for buses.
>> They put two, I'm not sure they are Hartline.
I believe they are private and for the shuttle service running
back and forth from the hospital to that.
I think those are for employees of St. Joseph's Hospital.
They already have pedestrian activity there.
They already have some facilities there.
It would make a lot of sense that they do have to gain access to
a Hartline bus stop that it be through this property and it
should be something easily worked out.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I don't know whether Hartline has a route that
goes to MacDill by way of Plaza Terrace.
>> I'm not sure either.
Frankly, MacDill makes a lot of sense.
You have two large apartment complexes.
Substantial amount of multifamily along MacDill.
Certainly a lot more potential for ridership along MacDill.
Like I say, we think it can be worked out one way or the other.
We're looking out for the safety of their patrons as well as the

folks in the neighborhood.
Not exacerbating them by having more pedestrians and more
conflicts on the street.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: That makes sense.
About the security gate on Gomez, they've already stated that's
only going to be for security purposes and for -- so I don't see
why we need to put a condition on the plan to come back.
>> The simple thing is, they will hire somebody to operate the
facility for them.
We simply want to make sure that we don't have to go through
code enforcement to come back if that gate is not operated
appropriately.
They've told me that it would be and I'm sure it will be.
We simply would like to have that insurance policy, if you will.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We'll think about that.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let's let the petitioner come up and rebut.
Petitioner, will you come up and answer some of the questions,
please.
Anyone else want to speak on five?
Nobody else wanted to speak.
If you're going to speak on number five, would you please stand
up and come up now and speak.
If anyone else wants to speak on item five, would you please
come up and speak now.
>> My name is Harold Bono.

My concerns were --
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
>> Yes, I was.
My concerns are, there's not enough lights there for the people.
They go 60, 70 miles per hour sometimes.
Building sidewalks down wilder and Louisiana, so people can walk
to the parks?
>>GWEN MILLER: That's not this petition.
That's for transportation would have to look into that later.
>> It's really bad out there.
I don't know if you've been out there at night.
It's really dark too.
There's Publix, no sidewalk to go to Publix.
I'm sure the older people want to walk to Publix, horizon or
Lopez park.
There's no way of walking.
>>GWEN MILLER: They have transportation to look into those
sidewalks for those streets and lights.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I agree with you.
We need to do that as a sidebar after this petition is voted up
or down.
Transportation will have to look at the speeding and the
enforcement of such and the lighting will have to be another
issue.
But certainly this particular project is not, in my estimation,

going to exacerbate some of the existing conditions that are
already prevalent.
So I think that that concern is not warranted.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anybody he will in the audience like to speak on
item number 5?
Petitioner, rebuttal.
>> Thank you, Madam Chairman.
And I appreciate Mr. Cohen being here this evening.
And I very much appreciate that he has changed his opposition to
support.
We have tried very hard to work with the community, and we're
very proud of that.
That's the typical process that the diocese uses because we are
good neighbors.
We are here for the long run.
The issue of the bus line, we are happy to work with Hartline.
We do -- and I do, need to point out that the diocese is not the
same as the Franciscans.
We do not own that site.
The Franciscans are completely independent corporation and an
independent order.
The Bishop does give them permission to be here in the diocese
under the religious aspects of their mission, but the operation
of their hospital and all the things that go with it is
completely independent of the diocese.

We would be willing to sit down with them to address the most
convenient method of preserving the pedestrian traffic.
I believe there was a letter in the packet attached to the
report indicating Hartline's willingness to work with the
community and we would pledge that as well.
I would not have a problem with the one-year review if that was
your pleasure.
We certainly do not have any intention of violating the terms
that are in the site plan and the approval process, the diocese
and all the sites that we have, maintains a high level of
quality in how we operate and manage them.
If there are any other questions, I'm happy to answer them.
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to close the public hearing.
Motion and second to close.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Ms. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: It would be my pleasure to read this ordinance.
I do want to say a couple of things before I do that.
In terms of Monsignor Higgins and his relationship with these
type of projects, I think he's beyond reproach.
In addition to that, in my tenure on City Council, in terms of
housing, apartment complexes -- don't get excited yet, John --
[ LAUGHTER ]
I do want.

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I almost fell off the stage.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I do want to say if there's anybody who has been
sensitive to senior housing apartment projects, et cetera,
Fernando Noriega stands tall above many.
The fact that he's affiliated with this housing apartment
complex, I think some of my older colleagues by experience and
not by age understand that he would not be affiliated with this
if it was not something good for the community.
This being said and my error about county commission.
Move an ordinance for zoning property in the general vicinity of
4820 North Gomez Avenue and 4815 North MacDill Avenue.
Zoning district classifications RM-24 and RS-50 to PD, elderly
multifamily residential, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: There's no question on the motion.
Just a comment that I'm very familiar with this piece of land
back there, and it's always been a dump site.
I think this project will enhance that area.
For one thing for sure, it will keep it clean.
So I'm real in favor of this project.
Like Ms. Ferlita said, Monsignor is above reproach on projects
that he's headed.
And, of course, with the committee that he's had working with
him, I know they have worked very, very hard with the neighbors
and that's one thing that we are very conscious of that the

neighbors are in support of projects.
So I'm very glad that we are all in consensus on this.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Thank you all for coming.
Number 9 is a continued public hearing.
We're going to go to number 9.
Ms. Catherine Coyle, number nine.


>>CATHERINE COYLE: I have been sworn.
This request is a rezoning at 4002 West Leona street to a PD
zoning district to create two single-family lots.
If you look at the plan before you, lot one measures 60 by 120.
It is a conforming lot.
However, lot two only measures 53.5 by 120.
That is by plat.
A 1605-square-foot single-family house currently sits on the
property.
That is this house.
And the house will be removed upon construction of two new
dwellings.
The plan shows two building envelope with minimum setbacks of
25 feet in the front, seven on the sides and 20 in the rear.

That is the requirement of the RS-60 district.
I can show you the houses on the corner across the street.
Just so you can see the style of the houses, this is the corner
across the street.
And this one is to the East.
You also have a map before you.
I looked at the -- I looked at a one-block radius which is nine
blocks.
There are 145 zoning lots that have been developed.
34 have been developed as nonconforming.
Less than 60 feet or 6,000 square feet in area.
That is shown in blue.
111 are conforming lots.
That gives you a 23.4% nonconforming development.
As I noted for the objection in the staff report, that is less
than the standard 50% policy that we have, the 50% criteria.
Noting policy B-3.3, that's what we judge based on the physical
development pattern and character of the surrounding area.
In addition, on page 2, transportation had three points,
technical points, that five-foot sidewalks were required along
the property frontage that would have to be added to the plan if
Council were to approve this.
And the code requires a driveway made of concrete with flares to
be placed in the right-of-way.
Also needs to be stated on the plan that will be made of

concrete and whether or not there will be garages for these
structures.
The code does require two parking spaces for each dwelling, and
we need that stated clearly on the plan.
We did have objections, though, based on the physical
development pattern.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff, yes, I have been
sworn in.
The predominant land use category for the proposed site, as you
can see on the future land use map as well as the entire area is
residential 10.
There are two homes across the street that do fit the request of
what the applicant is proposing.
There has been no significant trend for this type of development
in the last five years in checking most of the special use
applications that have been proposed for this general area.
As you can see and also I'll reiterate the comments that
Ms. Coyle has made, significant lot pattern in the immediate and
adjacent areas is predominantly single-family detached, single
story homes.
It is inconsistent with policy B-3.3.
It is also inconsistent with 2.1.3 which talks about the city
ensuring land development provide for varying and innovative
housing types and locations while preserving the character of
the existing neighborhood.

There was no specific elevation provided for the site.
The agent for the property owner did provide me photographs last
week, which I have looked at of the site across the street to
let me know about the varying lot development directly across
the street which, again, I'll reiterate are the only two story
homes on that entire segment of Leona.
That being said, Planning Commission finds the proposed request
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and objects to the
request.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Todd Scime, 4706 North Thatcher Avenue.
I have been sworn in.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for hearing us.
And the situation with our Mr. Elmer Kocher who is here, 85
years old, had come from the nursing home to be here.
So I thank you for your assistance here.
I wanted to touch base on the first item regarding Cathy Coyle
and the Planning Commission.

If you can see this survey here, Mr. KOCHER who was born and
raised in Tampa, Florida, went to Plant High School, you'll see
this lot split here, 113 feet.
You'll also notice that this plot, this plot was done in 1951
when he's owned this piece.
I want to stress this to you, the reason why we're here today

and the reason why we're coming before City Council on a
situation as we have right now and we have some neighbors who
are for us and some who are -- may be against us, but we have
met with them and knocked on their door and asked for their
support in this situation.
And gone and canvassed with them.
Again, I want to show you also some pictures so you can
understand the situation that we want to create here for
Mr. KOCHER.
You'll see across the street there are two homes.
That's the similar elevation that we're looking to do.
We're looking to split this lot.
We have 7200 square feet on one lot and 6420 square feet on the
other lot.
And basically, this is the view across the street from us.
These neighbors have the lot split.
Our house and Mr. KOCHER's home is, as Cathy Coyle showed you
earlier this home right here.
And so what we are proposing and we are asking Council to do for
us is to allow us, due to the fact that Mr. KOCHER has -- he
didn't just move in here six months ago or five years ago or two
years ago.
He was here since 1951, and he's owned this property and he has
the documentation to prove that he has owned this property and
to allow what is across the street, his neighbors across the

street have signed petitions in favor and support.
Gayle Sierens' mom lives right next door, and Gayle Sierens' mom
lives right next door and she is in favor and in support.
And we have other letters of support to our request.
This is the ideal situation for us to meet front yard and side
setbacks.
You'll see we have the 7200 square feet on one lot and the 6420
square feet on the other lot, house of 2962 square feet would be
allowed.
And we are willing, of course, to meet any transportation
requests, curb and sidewalks and anything else that would be
required in permitting.
At this time, I would like to -- if there are any questions or
if there are any comments, and then we'll save time for those
that are in favor.
>>GWEN MILLER: Question from Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
The houses you showed us across the street, neither of them had
driveways in front of them.
I wondered how they dealt with cars and parking.
The picture of the two White two-story houses.
>> Here is a drive here, the one on the left.
And the one on the right --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The other one is on the corner and has access
from the side street.

>> Yes, ma'am.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
Because in the proposed image that you gave to us, it appears
that there's like 53 feet frontage of which 25 feet is a
proposed driveway, and there's no visible garage.
Is there just not a garage that you drew in or it's just not
part --
>> That's correct.
And we're going to downsize the driveway a little bit.
We don't need the 25 feet.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a garage as part of the proposed
structure?
>> The garage is not a part of the proposed structure at this
time, but we are willing to --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So what we would see if we went down the
street would be two cars parked in the driveway of each of the
houses?
So out of a hundred feet, we would see four cars parked in
front?
>> No, Ma'am.
What I will say, we are willing to create a garage and a
condition that a garage must be centered in there, or a driveway
along the side so that no cars -- that cars cannot be visible.
I personally always like to have my car in the garage,
personally.

So want to provide a garage and keep with the setbacks and all
the other regulations that are there.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Scime, have you seen this staff report?
>> Yes, sir.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I just want to give you the full
opportunity to contest any of the findings of our staff.
As I look on this red-and-blue map, I hope I'm reading it right
it appears to me there's eleven on this one block between Clark
and Grady on Leona.
There's 11 conforming lots and three -- go down just a little
bit.
There's 11 conforming lots including Mr. KOCHER's, and three
that are not that you're showing in green.
Do you contest that at all?
>> No, sir, I do not.
The one with the star is Mr. KOCHER's lot.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: On this one block, if I'm a little kid
playing up and down this one block, there are 11 conforming lots
with the full size consistent with the zoning that's there, and
there are three that are all across the street, two of them
directly across the street and one down at the far end of the
block.
No.
On Leona.
>> Right.

You have three that are nonconforming across the street, and you
have six on --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You're on Corona.
>> You do have 24% within a radius here, as Cathy had mentioned,
of nonconforming lots.
I know it's not the 50% that we would like to see in this zoning
district, okay, but we do have precedent set here of 24% of
non-- existing nonconforming lots.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Your argument is the minute there is one, we
might as well just do the rest.
>> No, sir.
No, sir.
I say that we have an individual case here, and we have a
situation -- I mean, if your dad was here and he was 85 years
old, I would have sympathy on him because he lived here since
1951.
If he had moved in in 1990 or '95, I would have a different
lookout about it.
I would say I'm sorry.
That's not the case here.
This man was born and raised here and he's been an ambassador
for the City of Tampa and he's helped people at this location.
And now he's at a time where he comes before Council when he
needs help to allow for this zoning to be approved, and here we
are.

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: My comments have no relationship to
Mr. KOCHER.
I don't know him.
If you say he's a good man, I take your word for it.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who would like to
speak on item number 9?
If you want to speak on 9, would you please come to the podium.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait a minute.
There are people.
>>GWEN MILLER: If you're going to speak, would you please stand
up and come to the podium and speak.
Let's don't stand on the side line and not come up.
>> Good evening.
My name is Don NARRICK.
I'm at 4020 West Leona.
I'm the fourth house just West of Mr. KOCHER.
And I've known Elmer for -- well, since I moved in in 1997.
He used to ride his bike daily and used to say hello to
everybody in the neighborhood.
And I'm sure he doesn't remember me.
But the one thing that I wanted to say is that the main reason
why I moved here was because the large lots and the nice house
that's on the large lots.

Yeah, that's great.
He's got a nice lot and he can split it, but what is going to
happen is you're going to have the same domino effect all the
way down the street.
And the kids that actually moved in across the street that they
showed -- they showed a house on the corner, they moved from
Texas, their kids play in Elmer's lot right now because they
have no room in their -- on their lot.
I'm just a little upset about this.
And another thing is, you know, look, our schools are land
locked.
There's nowhere to grow.
Nowhere to grow for the schools.
The infrastructure is horrible here in Tampa.
You all know that.
I can go on and on.
But the main thing -- the main point that I want to say is, you
know, my kids are older now, but they played in my backyard
because they had the room.
And that's the reason why I bought this lot.
Even if I sell it, I want to sell it to somebody that wants that
house or to tear that house down and build a house on that
double lot.
There's no reason -- I know at least two couples and an
architect in his family who would buy his lot in a heartbeat.

And there's no reason why they can't do that.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
>> No, I wasn't.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Disregard it all.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Raise your right hand.
>>GWEN MILLER: Those who have not been sworn in and are going to
speak tonight, would you please stand and raise your right hand.
Those who have come in late and are going to speak and have not
been sworn in, please raise your right hand.
Are you going to speak, young lady with the yellow blouse on?
(Oath administered by the clerk).
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir -- just for the record everything you said
up to this point is the truth?
>> Yes, sir.
And let me just add one more point real quick.
Sorry.
Just one more point.
He mentioned about the lady that Gayle Sierens, little name
drop, she's two doors up and not next door and it's Betty self
and very nice couple.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Those people who came in late, there's a sign
that asks you if you were sworn in.
Please, after you state your name, just reaffirm that you have
been sworn.
>>GWEN MILLER: If you're going to speak, let's go.

>> Hi.
I'm Weinstein.
4009 Leona street on the -- I've been in the neighborhood about
ten years.
And I also purchased in that neighborhood because I was
interested in having lots of -- the feel of the neighborhood is
what I really enjoyed.
I wanted my children to grow up somewhere where they could play,
where there would be lots of space and where the density
wouldn't get to the point where there were so many extra cars on
the street and -- I just like the feel of the neighborhood.
My children are small, unlike Mr. NARRIG's and they are in the
schools and the schools have absolutely nowhere to grow.
I'm concerned about that and about the overall infrastructure
just to echo that.
I also have with me a letter that was notarized from another
neighbor that is -- I don't know what to do with it, but that
also has strong feelings about it.
And a petition that was signed by a whole group of people, both
on our street and in several other streets around that also felt
strongly that they would like to maintain the original character
of the neighborhood.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next.
If anyone else wants to speak, come up and speak.
>> Mary beecraft, 3950 Corona street.

I was sworn in.
I've known Mr. KOCHER a long time.
He's been a very good neighbor.
They are exactly right.
He was living there when I moved in and his wife 40 some odd
years ago and he's been a great neighbor to me.
As you can see, he does not live there anymore.
So what has happened to the neighborhood is really not going to
affect Mr. KOCHER because he doesn't live there.
It's going to affect the rest of us who are looking at speed
tables and calming things to slow down the traffic and the
children who play in the street with cones out there to kind of
ward people off, to ride their bicycles and smaller children
because they have no yards to play in.
As he was talking about, the house across the street, those
children play with soccer thing on one side of Grady street and
they are on the other side throwing their soccer balls around
because they don't have any other place to play.
I'm really against it.
I've been there.
And I'm on a corner lot and this might come up with me some day.
But so far, all offers I have had have been for one house on the
lot.
>> Good evening, City Council.
John wise, 3707 Santiago street.

The Neighborhood Association that this is encompassed in
Virginia Park has done a survey on whether or not to go from an
R-10 land use element to an R-6.
We sent out 2,000 surveys and out of the 2,000 surveys that we
sent out, 157 people responded.
It's not a complete picture, but I think it's a snapshot of what
people are looking at in our neighborhood.
Out of the 157 people that responded, 123 were in favor of
reducing the land use from our ten to our six because of the
density issue.
34 were not.
In the affected area where the land use change is being
proposed, 66 were in favor of the land use going down to R-6.
And outside the affected area of 57.
Within the affected area, only 19 were opposed to the land use
reduction.
I think what is important here is where we are right now.
As Cathy Coyle said that it's 23% right now of nonconforming
physical development pattern.
And if we continue to allow these to increase, then the
threshold is reached, and I guess the formula is that they don't
have to -- that it's not as stringent to get the land use change
or the zoning change.
So there are some development patterns I would like to go over
real quick in our neighborhood too.

Here are some examples of how the lots are changing.
This is what I call -- when they split the lot, that's what it
looks like.
And many of the homes in the neighborhood are going to this,
where you have the one lot and a new home is built.
That's actually just down the -- down the block on Leona and
this is across the street on Leona.
Here is one on Corona where it was so big I had to do a
panoramic view where they just kept the one lot and re-did this
house and went to one story.
Didn't even go two stories.
Here is another example where on Tacon they wanted to split the
lot and it was denied and they went ahead and built one house
and the neighbors were very fine with that.
This is where the lot got split.
This is a good example where just down on Leona, this was John
Grandoff's aunt Louise Diaz and Mary Jay Martinez where they
wanted to split.
They wanted to do three homes.
And they are now doing two or at least one right now.
They except the -- they kept the development pattern.
Here's another example where a new home is being built and they
are just doing it on one lot.
The neighborhood, what I think they are saying, they are just
trying to keep the consistency from what we're hearing from our

Neighborhood Association meetings, the return of surveys, they
are just trying to keep the development pattern that's there
right now.
And the worry is as you continue to split lots, that that's what
is going to happen is the domino effect.
And again, people moved into this area we keep hearing for the
larger lots, the room for the kids to play, the lesser density.
And I would appreciate it if this didn't get changed.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Wise.
This lot that you're showing us right now, how wide is that lot?
>> This one right here?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
>> I'm sorry.
I didn't look that up on the county appraiser's web site.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Does it look as big as the one Mr. KOCHER has?
>> I would think it's a hundred feet.
This is approximately a hundred feet just by eyeballing it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So they've got setbacks on the side, maybe --
>> well, in that neighborhood it would be seven foot side yard
setbacks, 25 front yard and 20-foot rear yard setback.
The point that I'm trying to make is, there are homes where
there's one house, and it's an older house.
And they buy the lot and they take the house down and they
replace it with one and that has not been objectionable to the
neighbors, to the majority of the neighbors.

The objection comes when you take down the one house and then
you build two and you have all that increased density.
You have four garages and two families and all that extra stuff
going on in the neighborhood.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience like to speak on item
number 9?
Petitioner?
>> This is the son and they are going to speak in support and
I'll wrap up.
>> Good evening.
My name is Jeff Kocher.
I have been sworn in.
I'd just like to say, like they said before, my father has been
here since -- well, all his life.
But he bought the two lots in 1951 where we were raised, my
brother and myself and my father, like they said, is in assisted
living right now.
What we're trying to do is ensure that the financial resources
to support himself for the rest of his life.
I'd like to ask the Council to help approve my father's request
so that he can sell his home, he receives full value for the
properties.
I feel that my father has earned this for his living needs and
that since he has resided since 1951, we would appreciate your

approval of his request.
Thank you.
>> I'm Kathleen Kocher.
I'm Mr. Kocher's daughter-in-law, and have been for 30 years.
When this property, when we have to sell it, the money that we
receive will be used for his living expenses, which includes all
his medications, and all that is very expensive.
And we just want to receive a full value for his property.
Ever since for 30 years, I mean, it's always been -- it's a
double lot.
I mean, it always has been a double lot.
I realized since then the rules have changed.
But the proceeds from the sale will be used for his living
expenses for hopefully a long time.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn?
>> I said so, didn't I?
I think I did.
I meant to if I didn't.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Kocher, were you planning to build the two
houses or were you selling the house with the lot?
>> We were just going to sell.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So whoever buys these lots are the ones who will
build the two houses on there?
>> Yes.
If they want.

>> Thank you very much.
I understand this is a situation where obviously there's a lot
of emotion, and it is what it is.
It's a tough decision.
And, you know, me personally, my father was just on a side note
was hit by a car after the Bucs game and put in a wheelchair.
And he lived with me and I took care of him and those expenses
were upwards of eight to ten thousand dollars a month.
And he had to stay in a nursing home for a good portion of that.
And so, you know, I'm here today.
We've seen the situation, the 24% of homes that are existing and
nonconforming.
We're willing to make a side entrance or garage so that cars can
be parked and going to meet any conditions that Council will set
forth on a revised plan.
We understand the neighbors.
We have knocked on their doors and we respect their opinions.
And they may not be exactly what we want to hear, but we have
respect for them and whether they are in favor of us or against
us, we respect that.
Again, but Mr. Kocher has been here before.
I haven't seen one person who has been here before him since
1951 get up today and speak against this petition.
I haven't seen anyone who has put the earned time in their
individual rights to claim what is rightfully theirs in their

property rights and have the ability to split that lot and
harvest the rewards of the majority of profits that they can --
especially when we need it.
Especially when this gentleman needs it, as you can see.
I didn't leave him in the nursing home tonight so I could talk
about what -- he's in the nursing home.
We brought him down here for you to see first hand his situation
and his plight.
And it may be -- if it was, again, Mr. Dingfelder had said, if
it was, you know, these are case-by-case basis.
And we can't say tomorrow we're going to do this for someone
else.
I'm saying that the Council has usually said, is the neighbor
across the street directly affected?
Are they in favor?
And the case is yes.
And I have their letters of support.
Is Mrs. Self.
Is that Gayle Sierens mother?
She is the neighbor directly next door to us, and she has signed
a letter of --
>>GWEN MILLER: We're going to listen.
We don't speak out.
>> We have a support letter from Mrs. Self.
So I want to put that into the record and file those here.

Again, in closing, I would like to say this, you know, you do
everything you can in this life.
You work hard.
You try and help people and some day, five minutes or two
minutes or one minute or an hour, you need someone else.
You need the help of another human being.
And this evening, I've come to you before you to ask your help,
to help Mr. Kocher who is going to be 86 years old and allow him
the right to split this lot, approve this rezoning and give him
the ability to harvest what he has earned since 1951, born and
raised here.
Thank you and God bless you.
I would like to submit for the record the letters of support.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
Mr. Scime, at some point in this presentation, I don't know if
it was you or Ms. Coyle, I saw a photograph of Mr. KOCHER's
house.
I don't know if it's still there or not.
>> Yes, sir, it is.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Could you put that back up?
>> Let me get a wider one, if I may.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can see it fine.
Need to straighten it out.
It's kind of ironic.
Is that a rubber band on it?

You can leave the rubber band on because it appears the rubber
band shows the split you're talking about.
That's perfect.
Just stop.
They lived in this house and maybe a younger Mr. Kocher could
probably confirm this although it seems pretty obvious.
They lived in this house and the house straddled both of these
so-called double lots.
And just confirm that, Mr. Scime.
>> Yes, sir.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Coyle, could you answer one question and
then I'll be done?
Because what I'm really trying to get to here -- how long has
this current zoning, what is the zoning -- RS-60 or something?
RS-60, roughly how long has that RS-60 or its equivalent been in
place?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: The previous zoning was R 1-A also 60-foot
lots since 1956 is when zoning came into effect.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So five years after the family bought the
property in 1956, which happened to be the year I was born, the
property took its zoning, which was this same type of zoning,
right?
R-1-A the same --
>>CATHERINE COYLE: 60-foot lot width, yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That point forward, the expectation was

there, already.
We have RS-60, can't build two houses because this lot doesn't
fit it.
Isn't that correct?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Without a special approval, yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I was more interested in the picture Mr. Scime
was putting up there with the original platting.
The question I had, when Mr. KOCHER first bought this property,
was it -- were these two separate lots at that time and platted
as two separate lots?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: They are platted that way, correct.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Two separate lots at the time that he bought it.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.
But there was -- I believe there was a house on it.
It's two platted lots.
They were platted at 61.5 --
>>KEVIN WHITE: I wanted to know if it was platted as two
separate lots when he bought it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Scime, would you tell me how long this house
has been up for sale?
>> It is not been up for sale.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: It's not up for sale?
>> No, Ma'am.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I thought Mrs. KOCHER said that there was an
interested party.

>> No, Ma'am.
What we would like to it, there's been no for sale sign --
there's been no for sale sign.
We've come before you tonight to allow us to split the lots and
then be able to sell it to a developer.
Mr. KOCHER or his son has no interest in being a builder.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, the fact remains, once he puts up that for
sale sign, that house will sell in a week, maybe three days.
In order for us to move forward and make this a planned
development, we have to look at the rest of the area around
there.
And it's just not -- it's just not feasible to do this.
I can't support it.
I know how you feel about Mr. KOCHER.
I have a hundred-year-old mother and I have her in assisted
living.
I had to sell her house.
But guess what?
I'm having to support her too.
So we can't ruin this neighborhood at this point because to put
two lots, two lots in there and have two houses built is just
not the thing to do.
Mr. KOCHER will sell this house in a heartbeat.
And he will get his money more than he probably ever will see in
his lifetime.

>> I agree with that, Mrs. Alvarez, and everything you said is
true and accurate.
What I am saying, though, Mr. Dingfelder pointed out that the
zoning was -- when he purchased it, it was two lots.
You'll see the split in the middle.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: But the house was there.
>> Was the house there?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: You built the house?
>> Had the house built for him.
>> The lot was split.
There was no house on it.
It was vacant land and then you guys in 1956 come in and have
the zoning put in place.
But he was here first and the lot was split and that's what I'm
asking, for his rights be instilled and given back to him.
I agree with what you're saying.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have another question.
Mr. Harrison.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: When was the house built?
>> 1951.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So it was vacant and you built the house
immediately and then you built the house at the same time that
you bought the land essentially.
>> It was a package deal when they set up that subdivision.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move that we close the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close the public
hearing.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, thank you.
I've been obviously quiet because I've been trying to digest
what Mr. Scime has been saying on behalf of his client.
I think that the role of this Council is certainly not to put
the emotional status of a senior citizen or an elderly
petitioner over what we need to do.
Obviously we can certainly be sensitive and emotional about had
a an 80-something-year-old senior citizen has to do in terms of
health care, in terms of costs, et cetera.
Being in the health care profession, I certainly can appreciate
that more than anybody else.
But the reality is, that we have to look at this from the
standpoint of what we are charged to do based on what is there
and based on what is not there.
We look at the Planning Commission and they are saying certainly
that this request is inconsistent with the provisions of the
Tampa comprehensive plan.
We look at the developmental pattern and the character of the
surrounding area.
I think this flies in conflict with that.

I think if the family is interested in selling this, as
Ms. Alvarez said, if they put a for sale sign up there, clearly
somebody is going to sell it right away -- buy it right away.
I don't think that the neighborhood, Mr. Wise and the rest of
them are insensitive to the needs of a geriatric neighbor.
But Mr. Scime, I think you're trying to present this from the
standpoint of emotion, from the standpoint of body language,
from the standpoint of us helping or not helping an elderly
person.
And that certainly is putting us in a very compromising
position.
We want to be sensitive to what he needs and what his family
needs to provide.
Certainly that is the responsibility of every family in terms of
an elderly patient's needs.
But at the same time, it flies in the face of what is
consistent.
It's not compatible with the character of the surrounding area.
And I think although we all want to remain sensitive to the
needs plaintiff KOCHER, if this house were sold as it was,
probably the revenue and the profit that the family would
realize from this would certainly take care of his health care
needs if, in fact, this is primary and utmost in their mind in
term of how they are presenting this to us.
I don't want a response back from you.

The public hearing is closed.
We are certainly sensitive to the needs of Mr. KOCHER.
But based on the factual comments that I've made, I will move to
deny.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to deny.
Any question on the motion?
All in favor, aye.
Opposed, nay.
All right.
We're going to go back to page 1, item number 2.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]


>>GWEN MILLER: Number two.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I can barely hear myself.
I think the audience will stop and listen to you.
This petition is to rezone the property at 2504 North boulevard
to construct a single-family semidetached structure.
It has two units in it.
Each unit has a two-car garage that accesses the alleyway to the
rear.
The PD setbacks are shown at 20 feet in the front, 10 feet to
the porch, seven feet on the sides and 20 feet in the rear.
The 20-foot rear setback allows for two additional parking

spaces in tandem behind the garage opening which can be
considered as guest parking.
The building elevation depicts a traditional style bungalow
designed with a large front porch and a cantilever balcony on
the second floor.
The property lies just South of Columbus Drive on the western
side of North boulevard just North of Amelia.
This is the property here and the neighboring property.
And then to the South of Amelia, there are single-family homes.
The elevation that you have is in black and White, but this is
the elevation that was submitted by the petitioner.
There are no objections to the site plan.
I noted policy D-2.4.
This request meets the intent of this policy, the current RS-60
district permits detached dwellings, however the PD allows
consideration of semidetached and gives city staff the ability
to negotiate design elements.
Which this -- the character of the design that they have
submitted actually fits in with the area nicely.
Page 2, policy D-3.1 creation of complementary uses and
transportation connections.
They will be enhancing the alleyway and using it for rear
access.
There be eliminating the visual effect of cars parking in the
front and the main access off of boulevard.

Which I also noted that boulevard is an arterial roadway in this
segment and having cars backing into that roadway could create a
traffic conflict.
Using the alleyway is actually a good thing.
I did note the design requirements for single-family
semidetached design standards.
This development does meet those as well.
Staff had no objections.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
As Ms. Coyle has stated, petitioner is proposing a planned
development rezoning that will permit the development of two
single-family attached residential units.
You all may remember this one.
The site was approved for a plan amendment to transition from
residential 10 to residential 20, which this Council approved.
This is just South of the intersection of North boulevard and
Columbus Drive.
The request is consistent with policies regarding development
not exceeding the intensities and densities established within
the future land use element.
And is consistent with the transition of uses in the surrounding
area as you do have residential 20 across the street as well as
additional residential uses in close proximity to it that are
very similar in structure.
The request is also consistent with policy A-9.3.

And policy B-3.6.
The policy in the housing element which talks about 2.1.3 is
supportive of the request which talks about the city's desire
for compatible and integrated redevelopment.
The Planning Commission staff find the proposed request
consistent and does not object to the request.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening, Madam Chairman, City Council.
My name is Barry LeClair.
I reside at 714 West Indiana Avenue, Tampa, 33603.
I have been sworn.
I do reside in riverside heights which is the next neighborhood
to the North about three-quarters of a mile North of the site
that I've acquired.
I would like to put a site plan I've kind of colorized on the
Mel mow and go over the context again a little bit and show you
photographs further up and down North boulevard.
And if I can use the easel, I'll put the rendering and
elevations up so you can see them in color as opposed to black
and White.
>> This is the subject property.
This is Columbus, West Columbus Drive.
North boulevard.
This is North, North is to the right as you're looking at it.
The properties outlined in orange are community mixed use 35 in

the land use category.
And what I've outlined in red are general commercial zoning.
This used to be princess market.
It's now -- I believe it's a floor covering or a furniture
store.
This used to be the bay town sound building.
It's currently vacant.
It is on a general commercial zoned property.
I believe this is the LYSY business, commercial general type
business.
I'm not sure exactly what they do in there.
This is a gas station convenience store.
These three lots, plus these two are under common ownership and
I think it's reasonable to expect sometime in the future that
they are either going to come in for special use permit two for
parking and retention to serve commercial or just come in under
a PD and rezone it for something.
I hope it's neighborhood serving commercial that I could walk to
for a newspaper, dry cleaning, pizza, delicatessen, something
like that, florist, plant shop.
Small scale neighborhood serving.
What I'm proposing to do as staff indicated, build one structure
with two units inside.
Without belaboring the point it's for me and my parents.
My parents are in their 80s.

My mom is not quite there yet.
But they have health issues without going into a lot of detail.
And short of putting them in assistive living, the whole purpose
of the zoning is to build a house and have my parents live in
there so I can take care of them as long as possible.
It provides a transition from commercial to single-family.
And go through some pictures briefly.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. LeClair, before you do, I'm a little
confused.
Are all the residents upstairs or some upstairs and downstairs?
>> Going to be split in half.
Most of the living area, sleeping area upstairs.
Downstairs home theater, home office studio and then big garage
on the ground floor --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I think we used to call these duplexes at one
time.
>> Okay.
It's a duplex.
When I think of a duplex I always see two doors and it's obvious
it's a duplex.
I purposely designed it to have basically a common entry inside
one front door so it will read as a single-family housekeeping
with the character of the neighborhood.
>>KEVIN WHITE: This is your parents' house now?
>> It's intended for myself and my parents.

I live just a little bit North in riverside heights.
My intention if Council approves the zoning is to sell my house,
take the equity along with my parents' equity from their double
wide retirement home and build this home together.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess my question, when you describe the
split, this is going to be stairs with the bedrooms upstairs?
>> Elevator.
It will have an elevator shaft built in the middle probably
storage initially and my parents actually go to a workout spa to
walk on a stair master.
They don't mind stairs right now, but I have intentions to put a
vault for an elevator internal.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, one question, this is replacing a house on
the -- the second house from the corner?
>> This is bay town sound, a vacant lot.
There was a house on this lot.
I believe it either burned down or was condemned and knocked
down.
It is currently a vacant lot.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Is there another house?
Are there two houses there?
>> There's one house on the corner.
I'm not sure what is on the corner.
There is an accessory structure in the back.
There's a front door on North boulevard and a door and also

another door on Amelia.
I really don't want to get into whether it's a duplex or
multifamily.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: There's a picture that Ms. Coyle showed us what
was on there.
And I believe -- yeah --
>> That's looking at the front on North boulevard, and this is
the lot basically from the driveway to the tree line.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Isn't there another house on the South of there?
>> No.
This is the end lot.
Amelia is the next --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Just want to make sure.
Okay.
>> This is another view looking at the lot straight on from the
East looking West.
That's the house to the South and the vacant lots to the North.
Going down North boulevard, there are a number of bungalows.
One story and two story.
They are closer to the street.
I'm not sure what the current setbacks will be under RS-60.
I think it's either 20 or 25.
I'm proposing a 20-foot setback for the air conditioned living
space and 10-foot porch and the porch being set back 10 feet.
So I have a 10-foot front yard, 10-foot of porch and then the

structure.
This house is obviously very close to North boulevard.
They do have a carport, porte-cochere on the side and I guess a
garage in the back.
Most of these houses are accessed from the alley which is my
intention as well.
This is kind of similar fencing I intend to put in front.
Here is an example further South where the house is basically
right on the curb or on the sidewalk.
I'm sorry.
Just going on down North boulevard.
This house is now yellow.
It was repainted yellow recently.
Again, I think the house is set back, the front of the living
air conditioned space is set back 20 with a 12-foot porch and
about a 10-foot front yard.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: What is that cross street there, sir?
>> I think it's the second or third block South of Amelia.
This is what used to be the bay town sound building.
It's now yellow.
Recently painted yellow.
That sits right on the corner.
That's two lots North of me.
There are two empty lots and then this lot.
This is the side view of bay town sound from looking across

Columbus.
And this is looking from the back.
This is the alley that I would be accessing from either Columbus
or Amelia.
And the South side of the building that would face the North
side of my building.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let me see if someone in the audience wants to
speak on your petition? Anybody in the public like to speak on
item number 2?
Come up and speak.
>> Good evening.
My name is Matt MALDECKI.
I live on North Boulevard.
Yes, I've been sworn.
I'm actually kind of confused by -- it's a great presentation.
It looks like he's put a lot of work into this.
However, the sign that says that we're going to have a meeting
today states there will be a three-unit town home written on it,
not two.
Therefore, I feel there are some trust issues here from some of
the neighbors as well as myself.
I have letters from two of the neighbors stating that we don't
want this kind of structure in our neighborhood.
We've worked very hard.
I've been there five years.

One of the letters here is from someone been there 13, another
one 10 years.
And one of the main things that we would like to know is why the
sign would say three-unit town home on it when now we're hearing
it's a two-unit town home.
I understand -- I'm sensitive to the senior citizens needing
places to stay and whatnot, but what happens when they pass
away, when they decide not -- you know, to move or whatever,
we're left with multifamily structures which we oppose.
I've been living at this residence for about five or six years,
and I've been paying taxes on it.
I met a lot of Council people that come around, including
Mr. White who wants us to put signs in the neighborhood and
wants us to support you in your political career.
We're asking you to support what we want in our neighborhood.
And we do not want anything else besides multi-- besides a
single-family structure.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you.
Sir, excuse me just a second.
In order to clarify that, I don't know what the sign says, in
reality have not seen that.
Certainly, there's criteria for extended family requests before
this board.
I wonder if, Cathy, if maybe you could define what it is the
petitioner is asking, what this gentleman thinks he's asking

for.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I didn't actually see the sign either.
The clerk can verify what the photo says.
It's two units.
The application requested two units and the site plan shows two
units.
I never understood that there were going to be three.
It's two.
>> Well, the sign says three.
>>GWEN MILLER: Staff says it was two, it is two.
>>ROSE FERLITA: This gentleman is right.
It says three.
Obviously if it's being presented to us as a two, it can't be
three.
>> Therefore, we do have a lot of trust issues with that.
At first I was one of the people that supported Mr. LeClair on
this.
We've never met.
When I saw that sign that said --
>>ROSE FERLITA: Sir, for clarification, in terms of how we
determine how we vote, if, in fact, it is clarified and it is
two instead of three, do you still pose an objection or are you
okay with that based on what the petitioner is saying he intends
to do with the two units?
>> I can't speak for my other two neighbors -- for me, myself, I

would support.
If that's exactly what he's intending on building and whatnot.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Obviously we would hold the petitioner to that.
But newer favor of it given those -- but you are in favor of it
given those conditions.
>> Yes, in those conditions I would be.
Originally, I actually spoke a lot over the phone with the City
Council people, and this is congruent with what my information
was.
Sign saying three units --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. LeClair.
Do you own the property North thereof?
>> No.
I just own this lot only.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: You don't own the one North of it and then there
are two vacant lots next to it.
You don't own those.
>> That's correct.
I am familiar with the property.
At one time A person that was interested in purchasing this and
I were going to join forces.
He was going to develop a mixed use project and I was going to
kind of be the transition between residential commercial and
office and parking and retention.
Unfortunately for him, someone came along and offered

substantially more than what the property appraised for.
So he just realized he couldn't purchase it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Let's get back to the site plan.
You're planning to use the alley to utilize the parking in the
back?
>> That's correct.
And I'd like to address the confusion over the three units
versus two.
When the land use change was approved based upon the size of the
property there could be -- I could have asked for three units.
And as a matter of fact, some of the staff members said, oh,
well, you have enough land, why don't you ask for three.
That's what I put on the sign at the time.
And realized that I didn't need a third unit.
I don't want a third unit, and I'd rather have two bigger units
than three small ones.
Just to clarify that issue.
It's two units and no more.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else in the audience like to speak on item
number two?
We have a motion and second to close.
All in favor of the motion, say aye.
Opposed, nay.
Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you Madam Chair.

I would like to move an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 2504 North boulevard in the City of Tampa,
Florida, more particularly described in section 1 zoning
district classifications RS-60 to PD, single-family
semidetached, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to open number 4.
We have a motion and second to open item number 4.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

>> Thank you, Council members.
>>GWEN MILLER: You're welcome.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Four is district 6, Ms. Coyle.
This is district 6, not four.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Wellswood is the nearby association.
It's not in an association.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: This is my area.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Cathy, this board usually gets along.
Now you started all this fighting.


>>CATHERINE COYLE: This request is to rezone the property at
2716 West Virginia avenue and 2709 St. Isabel street to PD

zoning district to construct a 12,000-square-foot medical
office.
Vehicular access is located on both St. Isabel street and West
Virginia avenue.
And the plan shows 65 parking spaces on site.
The building will stand two stories tall with a maximum height
of 35 feet.
The entire property perimeter will be screened with a six-foot
masonry wall.
Building elevations are attached to the site plan.
The note for objection -- I want to be clear with this.
First of all, the property is kind of a T-shaped.
It runs North and South, Virginia, St. Isabel.
And there's a little piece that juts out to the West.
This is the property looking South, standing on Virginia.
And this is on Virginia to the North.
It's a large office complex.
I'm sure you all have been in this area.
It's medical offices, next to St. Joe's women's hospital.
I'm not opposed to the use of a medical office.
The issue of the objection is strictly the building orientation.
If you look on your site plan, the building is oriented so that
it -- and I'll put this North-South.
This is Virginia.
If you come in off of Virginia into the parking area, and you

circle through underneath the building and then you can exit out
South to St. Isabel street, the building is oriented so that it
is in that western jut right there.
There is actually no orientation to Virginia or St. Isabel in
the South.
What we are asking as well as the Planning Commission is to
simply take the building, reorient it North-South so it has a
face on each of the streets and not be tucked in with the
residential properties.
I discussed it with the petitioner and the engineer, and they
will address that.
I believe they wanted to go forward with the orientation that
was there.
If you measure the box for the building, it's 70 feet wide.
There is the proper dimension to flip the building.
You'll note under findings of fact on page 2 in my report, there
are several reasons why this project should go forward as far as
the use is concerned.
And staff is very supportive of medical office in this district.
However, it is simply the building orientation that we have the
objection to.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
I have a question.
We know that there is an intense parking issue in this area with
medical offices.

And I saw that there's a waiver request to waive seven parking
spaces.
And I wondered if during the city proposal -- I mean, the
presentation, if there's somebody from transportation who could
address that and tell me what percentage that is.
I think it's about 10%, but I'm not so great at math in my head.
But it seems to me that that's pretty significant.
>> Parking is a premium in this area, I would agree.
The reason that we were hoping -- another reason why I was
hoping to reorient the building was to have not such a large
turnaround, that potentially more parking spaces could be put in
and work with the engineer on placement of additional parking.
There is a lot of area being used for circular parking where
more parking could potentially be placed when the building
shifts.
Transportation could address why they had no objection to the
parking waiver.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Is this going to be used for medical offices?
Or is it going to be used for, say, day surgery, same-day
surgery?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: That is still a medical use.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I know.
But is that what it's going to be?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I believe -- it's an obstetrician.
Transportation is here if you have a question.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Transportation, my question was about the
waiver request.
The petitioner was waiving -- was requesting a reduction of
seven parking spaces from 72 to 65.
This is in the St. Joe area where we seem to have major parking
issues.
And I wondered what your concerns were about that.
>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
I have been sworn.
When I looked at this project, I know the area is quite
congested.
What I usually do is when I look at projects, I determine that
usually 20% reduction I think is excessive, but in this case, it
was about 10%.
So I had them put a waiver on the site plan to give you -- you
could grant them that waiver or not.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If we didn't grant the waiver, they would
have to redesign to accommodate the required parking spaces,
correct?
>> Correct.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thanks.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, what happens if we do reduce the parking,
what happens is they are going to park in the street or on the
right-of-ways?
It's happening now.

>> It's a possibility.
Like Cathy said, they could park in the turnaround -- the
drop-off that they have available.
It's a possibility.
Yes.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, if there's a way we can have them
configure that and put in -- I think they need the full 72
spaces.
I really do.
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
>> Thank you.
Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn in.
As Ms. Coyle had stated, the objection that I think both of us
have is basically due to the orientation of the building.
Of course, there are policies, specifically policy A-4.1 which
supports this area as a medical office area in close proximity
to a regional medical center which is St. Joseph's Hospital.
However, the request is inconsistent with about three policies
as they relate to the design of the site.
There is no relationship to either St. Isabel or the other
adjacent street to Virginia.
The back of the building actually would face Habana.
If one were able to see the height of the building going down
Habana, you would see the back of the building if it were

actually constructed.
There's absolutely no orientation the way they have the building
projected right now to any of the local streets, including
Habana itself.
Also, as Ms. Alvarez had stated, there are several, due to the
size of the building being 12,000 square feet, there have been
in addition to the request of this strange orientation they have
requested several additional waivers to accommodate putting the
structure on to this site.
It is inconsistent with quite a few policies in the
comprehensive plan regarding the orientation.
The sidewalks and the side plan have no relationship to the
structure of the building itself.
The sidewalks go along Virginia and the sidewalk does go along
St. Isabel, but there's no connectivity to the structure itself.
It does not show that there's any shade trees provided for the
sidewalks in addition to that.
A variety of things.
So Planning Commission staff finds the proposed request
inconsistent and objects to the rezoning request.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tell us what you like, Tony.
>> It's one of the rare ones where I really don't like a lot
about it.
I do like the office use because it is supported by the comp
plan but it is a very poor site plan for conceptually what they

would like to do.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
Petitioner?
>> Good evening.
I'm Matthew campo.
6402 West Linebaugh Avenue, Tampa, Florida.
I have been sworn in.
I'm the civil engineer for the project.
Not necessarily the representative of the applicant.
They are here, but I am the person who worked on the site plan.
Obviously I can answer some of your questions.
Specifically, though, the orientation was intentionally done in
this manner.
The petitioner can speak to more of what type of medical this is
going to be to serve.
One of the big keys -- one of the main things that we did was
orientate the parking so that it was more centrally located to
the building.
In other words, with the building rotated there will be a
greater distance for individuals to walk to come in to get the
medical service that they are there for.
Also, the intention is that there's an intentional drop-off,
again, to serve as the type of use this is, which, again, I'll
have the petitioner speak a little bit to that, because they are

the ones individually that will be occupying this building.
The other purpose, we can potentially get more parking on the
site.
We did make an attempt to save nice trees on the site which as a
result of that, we potentially could put more spaces in there.
For a sacrifice of saving some trees, we did leave out some
parking.
We felt that was important.
As I said, I'm available obviously to talk about the technical
side.
That's my expertise.
So if you have any questions on that, I'm free, and then I think
the petitioner would also like to address you more on the use
and some of the specifics of what why they are doing what they
are.
>> Good evening, Council.
Bill butler, I was sworn in.
I live at 5206 Bayshore boulevard.
I'm a 50% owner in a company called BLT that is involved in this
project.
This is a medical facility.
OB/GYN group of four OB/GYN, nurse practitioners and medical
staff.
This location I would like to show a few pictures so that you
get a little better idea of the property itself.

This particular picture is running East and West.
This one runs East and West also to show you that is -- this one
I believe you just saw from the staff runs looking South as
well.
We're in the process --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Would you tell us where the streets are, please?
>> This is bordered South on St. Isabel, North on Virginia, West
on Habana, and East would be Tampania, I believe is the road.
It is one block South of Martin Luther King.
When we were designing or looking at the building, we had the
building shaped this way for several reasons.
One, aesthetically, if you look at the buildings that are in the
area, the buildings typically run East to West on Virginia,
which is this particular building which is a medical facility.
This is another adjacent medical facility.
Both these properties, Council, are right across the street from
the property.
This particular one is also on the corner.
You might be familiar with it, Ms. Alvarez.
This is on the corner of Habana and Virginia as well.
This is the other side of it just so you can see.
It's one long building.
We situated the building back like this when aesthetically we
thought it matched the way the buildings in the area are built
length-wise on the property, East to West.

We wanted to have plenty of greenspace because we want to leave
as much for grass, trees and such to set it back off the road so
that it's more appealing in the neighborhood.
It's being built in a Mediterranean style which I'll be happy to
show you.
I have a board of that.
It was built so that you would have a drop-off.
This is an all female OB/GYN group here in familiar at that --
Tampa that delivers about 80 babies a month.
It's important that they have a covered area to walk under for
rain, for security for other reasons.
So we designed the building so that it would run East to West
with an easy opening in and out so that they could make a
turnaround as well as to have secured parking because it is an
all female facility.
Security is of the utmost concern for the physicians and the
staff who typically do in this particular business work long
hours.
The building is in a Mediterranean style as I mentioned and done
for this reason.
We just signed the contract for the property yesterday.
So I wasn't fully aware we were coming in front of full board
for Council.
But I have put a few things together and I would be available to
answer any questions that I can for you based on what we're

trying to do.
If you turn the building North and South, I do have a picture
running North and South.
This is what the building would look like North to South.
You would have to change the drive-in, drive-out.
All the buildings, as I mentioned, run East and West.
To me it would be a very odd look to have a building running
North and South with everything running East and West.
A number of the properties around it are up for sale and are
being in the process rezoned commercial for medical as well.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Are you familiar with yellerton building?
That's a real nice building and it's running East and West and
it has a lot of area in the front.
>> In the front and the back.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: It goes from the front to the back.
Go ahead.
>> That's the same feel.
I mean -- I'm familiar with it.
You drive into it.
You turn around and go back into your parking space and it also
has parking behind it.
And it is built back recessed on to the property where it has a
number of -- it's a very large percentage of the property out
front.
That's similar in this respect.

There will be trees, of course, you know, there would be plenty
of grass.
There would be sidewalks.
Two concerns that the sidewalks and side walls which we have no
problem with, that would be part of the building.
The staff would recommend that.
So we don't have a problem with that at all.
But we would like to keep the building running East and West
much like many of the buildings in the area both aesthetically
and keep it on the property the way it is.
So greenspace is there and it's -- I think it is a much nicer
look for the neighborhood than to run it North and South.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So you're putting one of the sides of the
buildings on Habana?
>> One side -- this particular one right here, make it run East
and West.
In front of it would be running on the North side, which would
be Virginia.
This is this the South side would be facing St. Isabel.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, what about that little piece that's facing
from the -- see on this side here, it's running East and West, I
guess.
>> Yes.
This is the property.
Would run East and West this way with entrance from Virginia and

entrance from St. Isabel.
Running this way much like many of the other buildings in the
area are running.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: St. Frances street --
>> I was not familiar with the -- I guess that's the name prior
to, yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Petitioner S that all of your presentation?
Yes?
Okay.
All right.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on this
item?
I see no one.
Well do we have a motion to close the public hearing?
We have a motion and second.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
What's the pleasure of the Council?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, Mr. Harrison --
>>SHAWN HARRISON: You were quick to point out this is your
district.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And I don't like the idea that we're going to
reduce the parking spaces.
I think they really need the 72 parking spaces.
I know what's going to happen.

I've seen it happen in this area.
Parking all over the place when they don't have enough.
The Planning Commission has said it was inconsistent, and our
staff has objections.
And so I'm going to move to deny it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll second it and I would like to speak to
the motion.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Ferlita --
>>ROSE FERLITA: Discussion as well.
Ms. Alvarez, I will certainly support your motion for many
reasons.
The fact that the Planning Commission finds it inconsistent and
we that have been here this term and last term have found that
there's always been a transition in that neighborhood as you
recall.
I say "neighborhood," it's really not a neighborhood anymore.
But we have to abide by some of the things that are consistent
at least in that transition from the office, from the
neighborhood to the office space.
And I feel that if we grant them the waivers that they require
in terms of parking, et cetera, it's going to cause a hardship.
I don't like the configuration, totally in support of what
Ms. Alvarez' concerns are and I will support the motion to deny.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

I think that one of the things that Catherine Coyle pointed out
is that there is the potential of reciting the building and if
it were recited perhaps gaining enough parking spaces so that
they don't have to request a waiver.
So if the petitioner wanted to request a continuation to allow
them to go back, redesign and meet the concerns of our staff, I
would be in support of that.
>> Mark Scime, 4706 --
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Public hearing is closed.
>> I'm sorry.
I just wanted to respond to that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Saul-Sena expressed my sentiments
exactly.
I think that the project is wrong as it's designed.
However, I think Ms. Alvarez, it's her district and staff
indicated that the use is not necessarily inappropriate as a
medical facility.
So if Mr. Scime and his client have the desire to go back to the
drawing board with specific direction from this Council, that
they are going to reorient it, address staff's concerns,
Planning Commission staff and our staff and figure out ways to
build in more parking, while they are at it, then they might
have to shrink their building down a little bit to put in more
parking or whatever it takes or buy another lot and then they

can do what they need to do.
I'm okay with the continuance as well if they want to do it on a
serious note.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: There is no motion for a continuance right
now.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's a pending motion for that which maybe
somebody would reconsider.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: If they want to reconsider and have a
continuation, I would remove my motion.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Do we have to reopen the public hearing?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, you do.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to reopen the public hearing.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Public hearing reopened.
>> Mark Scime on behalf of Mr. Butler and Mr. Trujillo.
We would like the opportunity to go back to the drawing board
and see if we can come up with something that staff can work
with.
We just got the staff report Tuesday.
So we were a little surprised.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: How long do you think you need?
>> Two weeks.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: It will be a month at least.

>>CATHERINE COYLE: It depends -- Catherine Coyle, Land
Development.
Hear this at night or day?
You had no opposition.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No opposition, we can hear it in the day.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: What's the pleasure?
If we move it to a night meeting, what is the --
>>CATHERINE COYLE: May 12th.
28 days.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue till the 28th.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: 28 days, which is May 12th.
It would be 6 p.m.

>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Any discussion on the motion to do it at night on the 12th?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Seven new and three continued.
Ten cases.
Seven new and three continued.
>>GWEN MILLER: Go to the morning since we don't have opposition.
I'd like to make a motion to waive the rule and do it in the
morning.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second to waive the rules
and do it on May the 12th at 10 a.m.
Any further discussion on that motion?
All in favor, simplify -- signify by saying aye.

[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: With the directions that we spoke about.
>>GWEN MILLER: We're going to go to item 7, one of our employees
needs to get to a meeting.
He's running late.
Cathy Coyle will do seven.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Item number 7, you said.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to open.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
I have been sworn.
This petition is to rezone the property at 5112 North 22nd
Street to a CI zoning district to introduce a manufacturing and
retail use.
The business will be relocated to the site.
The property lies within the East Tampa overlay district and
will be required to meet those regulations through the
permitting process.
The property contains 1.48 acres, maintains frontage on 22nd
street and shadow lawn Avenue.
The City of Tampa is the current owner of the property and the

Mayor has signed an affidavit to allow this rezoning petition.
This request is for Euclidean zoning district, therefore no site
plan is required.
I cited under the commercial zoning district standards under
2777 for the CI commercial intensive zoning district does allow
manufacturing and retail uses.
And I also noted on page 2 the proposed rezoning is consistent
with objective A-9, policy A-9.3 and A-9.4 which speaks to the
enterprise community and business development in East Tampa.
Under findings of fact, there are no waivers that can be granted
for Euclidean zoning requests.
22nd street is an arterial roadway according to the roadway
classification map.
And the parcels that lie to the North, if you refer to the map,
are CG.
One sliver of RS-60, 22nd is a commercial -- general
commercial intensive corridor and across the street on the
eastern side it is all commercial intensive.
This is the property to the North.
It's called the meatland warehouse.
This is the property to the South.
It looks like it used to be an old farm store and it's been
converted into an auto sales.
And this is the property in question.
It is vacant currently.

Mr. Ed Johnson is here with the city economic development for
East Tampa.
Staff had no objections.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn in.
On the future land use map, to basically confirm what Mr. Coyle
has told you, predominant land use category to the East along
22nd, heavy commercial 24.
There is some residential ten directly to the West.
The site is presently vacant land.
There is the meat packing facility right here.
There is -- there's the auto glass here and abandoned commercial
use, funeral home and East gate shopping center to the North.
The site is consistent with several policies in the
comprehensive plan as Ms. Coyle had stated.
In addition, the site is located within the East Tampa community
redevelopment area.
The proposed request is consistent with the vision statements
contained within the East Tampa CRA plan as it relates to
supporting economic development opportunities along designated
corridors.
The Planning Commission staff finds the proposed rezoning
request consistent and does not object to the request.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening, Council members.

I'm Juan Davis.
8637 twin lakes boulevard.
As far as the city Real Estate Department can tell us, there's
never been anything built on this site.
It is vacant now.
If you walk along the site now, it's littered with debris and
beer bottles.
Our intent in moving our business there is to help improve the
area, which is in dire need of such.
We are currently in the business of manufacturing apparel and
screen printing T-shirts and manufacturing now is done in -- by
way of cottage industry.
We plan to bring that in house and provide jobs for the
community.
We have met with community development and they are very much in
favor of us going forward with this project.
So we ask that you do the same.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to
speak on item number 7?
>> Thank you, Council members.
>> Good evening, Council.
Ed Johnson, manager for East Tampa CRA.
And I have been sworn.
I'd just like to just add a few comments on this particular
project.

This site located off of 22nd street in shadowlawn has been in
the city's inventory for a number of years.
It's been vacant property.
We have an opportunity here to bring the Davis' business to East
Tampa.
And they are willing to relocate from Drew Park, bring their
whole business there where they will continue in the
manufacturing apparel business.
And the thing that was interesting to us was that they have
committed upon the rezoning of this property to be able to bring
additional jobs to East Tampa and actually use the Erwin Vo-tech
training center across the Street on Hillsborough Avenue.
as mechanism to train individuals who reside in East Tampa to
be able to be employed in their plant.
The other piece of it was that really caught my attention was
that they are willing to pay above the minimum wage scale for
this type of work and to provide benefits also for the residents
of East Tampa that would be employed in this facility.
So I wholeheartedly concur with this rezoning and upon that
approval will give us the opportunity to sell this property to
the Davises and get it back on the tax rolls and -- rolls and
make it productive for residents of our community.
So I thank you very much for the opportunity.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else who would like to speak on item 7?
We have a motion and second to close.

All in favor of the motion, aye.
Ms. Saul-Sena, would you read that, please.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm happy to, but I think this is such a good
one, you should let Mr. White do it.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Ms. Saul-Sena.
Mr. Johnson, I would just like to say -- you don't have to get
back up -- I would like to say to the Davises as well as the
City of Tampa, the administration for working so hard to bring
this to fruition over in East Tampa where this type of economic
development is so needed and thank you for all your efforts in
your department.
Like to move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
vicinity of 5112 North 22nd street in the City of Tampa,
Florida, more particularly described in section one from zoning
district classifications from CG to CI providing an effective
date.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Item number 8 is going to be continued.
Item 8 wants to be continued.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, Mr. Bentley did ask.
He has indicated he would like to go two weeks.
That would be the night of the 28th.
You have 16 cases that night.
There is a different planner that night and if the plan changes,

there could be some discrepancies in the review.
The next available night is May 12th, and you have ten cases
that night.
May 12 you have seven new cases and three continued.
You're probably seeing nine new cases.
There are two that have been misnoticed.
They cannot go forward that night so there are actually only 7
new cases that night.
>> Good evening, Madam Chairman.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
Ms. Saul-Sena and I both have the same recusal.
If I could.
In regard to file number Z 05-11, rezoning request from -- on
this petition, I have an interest in real property located
approximately two blocks -- I live and own property
approximately two blocks from the subject property.
I was in the circled noticed area.
I've talked to Council.
He said I should recuse myself and I will.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ditto.
>> Good evening, Madam Chairman, members of Council.
My name is Mark Bentley, 201 North Franklin street.
I represent the petitioner, The Palm Bank.
The request for continuance is based on some feedback we
received from some of the adjacent property owners who had some

concerns that we weren't aware of and we would like the
opportunity to see if we can reach some common ground and make
some modifications to the plan.
Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who wants to speak
on item number 8 on the -- only on the continuance?
No one wants to speak on the continuance?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Shelby reminded me that I needed to state
on the record that I have real property in proximity to this.
>> Motion to continue to May 12th.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Should we see if there's anyone in the
audience who wants to speak on the continuance?
>>GWEN MILLER: I did that already.
We have a motion and second.
All in favor, aye.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Please specify 6 p.m.
>>GWEN MILLER: It's granted.
May 12th at 6 p.m.
>> Thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 6.
Have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

Two abstentions.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
Land Development.
This rezoning is for the property at 5224 South MacDill
Avenue to construct 16 single-family attached units all with
two-car garages that access an internal circular drive.
Each unit in the front is shown with sidewalk connection to
MacDill Avenue.
Two compact parking -- two compact visitor parking spaces are
shown on site as well.
The structure stands three stories with maximum height of
35 feet.
Elevations have been submitted as part of the site plan before
you.
Transportation notes objections.
They are objecting to the location of the garages for units one
through four and 13 through 16.
The garages need to be placed ten feet back from the sidewalk
that you see on the site plan.
To meet visibility concerns.
And the stop bar located in front of units three and 14 need to
be removed.
That is not necessary stop bar.
I did advise the petitioner -- the engineer which I believe is
Mr. Campo again, he acknowledged those particular changes could

be made fairly easily.
Under findings of fact on page 2, the single-family attached
design standards for these units, they have met all three points
with no rear walls facing a public street.
They do have the front doors and the connections, pedestrian
connections to MacDill.
The auto storage, when it is provided in a parking -- or in a
garage, should have two spaces, which they do.
And no fewer than three or no more than eight units shall be
constructed in a row.
They are all in -- each row contains four units.
And I did note the purposes and intent of the PD zoning district
for you to consider.
I also noted on page 3, number 3 under findings of fact, the
property contains .69 acres.
The current zoning is CG.
This would allow up to a 45,000 square foot commercial
structure.
If you would like a comparison for what else could go on this
property.
With a parking garage.
The CG zoning district allows up to a maximum of a 45-foot
height.
The proposal before you is asking for 35.
The use -- the proper use to the North, South and West are zoned

CG if you look at the zoning maps before you.
And that's the property.
It's a fairly underutilized underdeveloped segment of
MacDill.
The transportation objections still stands unless the graphical
elements of the plan are changed.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I saw a note from solid waste, individual
garbage receptacles to be stored within individual units when
not in use that sort of thing.
And I just want to be abundantly clear that I guess, is it the
intent of solid waste to pull in and drive through this complex
and all the pickup would be internal?
>> Yes.
That's correct.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Wouldn't be 17 cans out on MacDill.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
They prefer garage pickup on these type of town house
developments.
When we can get the internal circular drive they pick up at each
garage door just as they would for a single-family house.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn in.
Relative to the future land use map, this site is located South
of Gandy Boulevard.
The predominant land use category along MacDill on this

segment is CMU-35.
Which immediately goes down to -- transitions down to
residential 10.
Here is a proposed site -- as Ms. Coyle has stated this is
almost .7 acres.
The applicant is requesting 16 town homes.
They have the potential to build 24.
They also are currently zoned CG as she told you.
They do have the potential to be quite a significant structure
of a commercial use.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You said potential, you mean potential under
the current zoning category?
>> Well, the CG.
That's what she said.
Regarding the commercial potential.
The proposed request is consistent with not exceeding the
densities as I had stated before since build potentially eight
more town homes.
Access to the project, according to the site plan will be solely
through MacDill avenue will will not impact any adjacent
single-family homes which lie to the East along puritan.
According to the site plan, the applicant proposes to also
provide a six-foot decorative PVC fence to the East as a buffer
to the adjacent residential units.
The request is consistent with the policies as it relates to the

integration of residential qualities in the area.
The Planning Commission staff does find the proposed rezoning
request consistent with the comprehensive plan and does not
object to the request.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening, members of the board.
Jeff sheer, Ruden McKlusky law firm.
401 East Jackson.
Tampa.
I have been sworn.
I'm here representing the petitioner, Samter construction.
Requesting the rezoning from a CG district to a PD for a town
home development.
Peter Bennett, who is sitting right here, the developer and
Mr. Campo is also here, the engineer.
They are available to answer any questions you might have.
I believe you saw -- Cathy showed some photographs of the site
right now.
It is an underutilized site.
It's actually not very attractive at all.
And I can, again, show you quickly what we proposed to put
there.
This is a fairly preliminary elevation, but it gives you an idea
of what my client has in mind for the site.
As staff mentioned to you, with the zoning they have now, they

could do a much more intense development either in town homes or
in a commercial building.
So we're definitely not maxing out the site here.
We do have no objections from staff other than transportation.
My understanding, and Melanie could perhaps address that, the
issue that she did have with the backup from the garage has been
satisfied.
Perhaps she could speak to that.
My understanding is she and Matt campo have worked together and
we now meet their requirement and they no longer have an
objection.
We have spoken with Melanie Higgins of the Ballast point
Neighborhood Association.
I spoke with her several times about the project.
They had a board meeting I believe this past Monday on it.
Unfortunately, they will be objecting to the project.
Melanie did share with me that the two main issues that they had
were the transportation issue that we've now satisfied as well
as the solid waste issue that Mr. Dingfelder brought up.
And that issue has been satisfied as well.
I'm not sure if it's to their satisfaction, but, again, we will
not have garbage cans on MacDill.
We will have pickup right outside the garages.
In fact, there is also a note on the site plan that says that
the residents are required to keep their cans in their garage on

all day except for days where there will be pickups.
And we will put that in our association documents as well.
Other than those two issues, they didn't have -- the
neighborhood did not have really anything else.
They said they specifically had issue with other than they just
didn't like the project.
They felt, I believe it was too intense, although, again, as
you've heard, the alternative could be much more intense.
We feel like we've done a pretty good job of balancing the
project.
Again, we could have had 24 units on there, but we wanted to
have a bit more open space and greenspace on the site.
Again, understanding you have a lot more to go tonight.
Unless you have any questions, I have no other -- nothing else
to add.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let me hear from transportation.
Melanie?
>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
I did talk to Matt, and there was a graphical change that could
be done to provide the 10-foot before the sidewalk for all the
garages that were in conflict before and the stop signs could be
removed.
But it's a graphical change.
And it's too late to submit a new site plan.
But I did see -- he did e-mail me what he would submit, and I

was okay with it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So you're saying that the objections that you
have for the units one and four -- one through four and 13 and
16, is that what you're talking about?
>> Right, the driveway between the garage door and the sidewalk
has to have 10 feet.
And they were only showing five.
But we were able to adjust the two sides.
I removed a sidewalk on one portion, and it wasn't really needed
because it was on the other side of the driveway.
So it worked so that they could have the backout and provide the
ten feet, what they needed.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And what about the two guest parking spaces?
Is that enough for 16 units?
>> Well, when they did redo their site plan, they weren't able
to show any guest parking.
He had to take it out.
Toad remove the guest parking spaces.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So there's no guest parking?
>> Doesn't look that way.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Nobody is allowed to visit then.
Okay.
That sounds good.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Can I clarify something for council?
Land Development.

The plan Melanie is speaking about is eight and a half by 11
which Matt campo submitted to show the correction to Melanie's
comments.
However, that is not the plan you have before you.
Those are graphical changes that are needed so we will need to
continue the case depending on which way Council wants to go.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Will it kill the guest parking?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, it depends on how you look at it.
If you go -- technically by code -- don't touch it.
Technically, by code a car is not supposed to cross over a
sidewalk.
It is an internal sidewalk, and if you look at it this way, you
have ten feet from the back of the garage and you have five feet
for the sidewalk and a 20-foot driveway.
So you have 15 feet from the garage to the drive aisle even
though you are technically over an internal sidewalk.
It's not technically a space; however, the spaces that they had
were right in here.
And here.
But now there is no area because it was shifted to make a longer
distance from the garage.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It said that the two existing trees were
removed and I just -- there are some trees indicated but there's
no notation about what is being proposed to take their place.
And I want to know how large the trees were that were removed.

Usually there's a table on the plan, but -- oh, there is.
Okay.

>>MARY ALVAREZ: She's the tree police.
>> My understanding from the engineers, there were two trees on
the site, but they were not large trees.
They were right on the perimeter of the site.
And also to address the issue on the guest parking --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me.
Back to the trees.
So what are you going to do?
>> We're going to meet code to put in new trees and replace
whatever is required.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: According to that site plan, those look like
palms, and I know that you know that palms don't really count
unless you have a bunch of them.
It has to be shade trees, has to provide shade.
>> We're committing to whatever is required, shade trees
replacement and so forth.
>>GWEN MILLER: Catherine Coyle was suggesting need to continue
to see the plan.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before we continue I have one other question.
The neighborhood you're building in is not Channelside and I'm
looking at a building that looks kind of urban and stark, and
that sort of thing.

I don't understand, because I've seen their projects over on
Gandy, which is a nice Mediterranean.
I'm not saying everything needs to be Mediterranean.
But it has a little softer edges, little softer feel to it.
Why are we having an industrial look here?
>> Well, perhaps the applicant can explain too.
I think he got this today, and it was not, as he had hoped.
That's not a good representation of what he planned there.
There are a lot more ins and outs here so forth.
If we do continue, we can bring to you a better view and a
better idea of what --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's a real opportunity to improve this
part of MacDill which needs help.
It's a pretty rough area along MacDill.
And you can really make a nice statement there.
And like I said, this developer has made a nice statement over
on Gandy.
>> And just quickly on the guest parking, we do have the 15 feet
between the garage door and the actual drive aisle, which does
allow two cars to pull in there.
If you do have guests.
I understand that it does encroach on the internal sidewalk, but
there are places for guests to park when they come to visit.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, I was just going to ask you whether you
were going to give your buyers a sign you can't have guests.

You have no parking.
No parking for guests.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public like to speak on
item number 6 on the continuance?
If you're not in favor of the continuance.
If you speak tonight, you won't be able to speak within we come
back?
Do you object to the continuance?
You can speak on that.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, can I just suggest something?
I understand that people can't speak to the substance of it, but
I think that if they are going to have to go back to redesign
this, it would be helpful if they spent some time listening to
the neighbors before they redesign so they would incorporate
some of their considerations into it so it wouldn't be another
continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: I believe we'll probably meet with the
association with the neighbors and let them tell them what they
need.
Do you plan on meeting with them?
>> We offered to meet with the neighbors, and they didn't seem
all that interested.
They were just in opposition, and didn't really seem to have a
whole lot of interest in meeting with us.
>>GWEN MILLER: Melanie, would you come up and speak and let us

know if you are willing to meet with the petitioners.
>> Melanie Higgins, West pearl avenue, president of the Ballast
point Neighborhood Association.
Unfortunately, the notices for this rezoning went to the former
president at his house.
They were not forwarded to me.
I guess Jean wells gave Mr. Sheer my e-mail address.
I didn't get the e-mails.
And Sally Flynn heard about it through the flier that comes from
Land Development coordination.
She called me and she said, do you know about this?
What is it?
And I said, no, I don't know about it.
And then I guess a couple of weeks ago, the sign went up on
MacDill.
And I noticed it.
And just Friday went to Land Development coordination to get the
plans and look at it.
And Mr. Sheer had given me a call that day because he called
Cathy Coyle and heard that I had picked them up.
And we had a board meeting on Monday.
He could have come to the board meeting.
I think I invited him.
Maybe I didn't.
But he would certainly be welcome to come and present at our

May 9th association meeting.
No objection to the continuance.
Thank you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Sheer, in the future, we hope you would
be more aggressive in hunting down the Neighborhood
Associations.
Don't wait for them to call because then we have to waste our
time doing this.
>> Well, yeah, I sent the letter to where Cathy Coyle told me
to.
I did call.
I was the one that called her.
I did make the first contact.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need a motion to continue till when,
Ms. Coyle?
What date is available?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: That's at your pleasure.
You still have one slot available on May 12th.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: How about May 26.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: May 26th is a different planner.
Not a different review necessarily, but she isn't verse on this
particular plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: May 12th at 6 p.m.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: May 12th or June 9th.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May 12th is very short.
Do you think they'll have a chance to listen and redesign?
>>GWEN MILLER: Is May 12th too short a period of time?
>> As far as we're concerned May 12th is fine.
I think they said they are meeting the 9th.
We can attend that if need be.
>>GWEN MILLER: And have the plans to show to them.
Okay.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: May 12th.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second the motion and I just wanted to
disclose that one of the owners of this project called me and
said he wanted to talk to me about the project.
We talked about it for about three seconds and then that was it.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue to
May 12th at 6 p.m.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Number 10 is a continued public hearing.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, council.
Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
This petition is a special use for the property at 1313 South
Dale Mabry Avenue.
I apologize.
The report is incorrect.

It's not to a PD zoning district.
This is a special use request to construct a 4,515-square-foot
bank with drive-in windows.
In the Publix shopping center.
The proposed drive-in windows are located on the southern
portion of the building adjacent to the parking area.
For Publix supermarket.
Two other additions to the shopping center shown in reference
and are not subject to the special use review or approval just
to be clear.
The reason for the recommendation, we had no --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Say that again.
The last thing you said.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: The two other additions, I think it's a
crispers restaurant and another facility on the backside, that
is not part of the special use review.
They are showing it as reference, the improvements within the
development.
The special use request is specifically for the drive-in window
on the bank facility.
The drive-in window criteria are on page 1.
They did meet the road criteria, the queueing for the bank is
adequate.
Uses adjacent are commercial.
I showed on page 2 and page 3 the general standards and issues

for Council's consideration for special use requests, ingress,
egress, offstreet parking, refuse, lighting utilities, control
of potentially adverse effects generally and number six on page
three is drainage.
If you notice on page four, the traffic analysis comment from
transportation has been removed.
They have approved the traffic analysis.
That was the reason for the previous continuances.
That's why we are here tonight delayed from a couple of months
ago.
And the solid waste notes have been addressed as well on the
plan before you.
Mr. Awad from stormwater consulted with me today and said he
would like to address you, acknowledge you some stormwater
concerns.
>> Alex Awad, stormwater department.
I have been sworn in.
Our concern is that with the massive amount of impervious area,
we know that the site is still impervious, but since there's a
new development going on, we would like to see some effort made
to provide stormwater pond, retention specifically because that
area is on an area that has flooding problems.
I would like to request that Council recommend or require the
developer to provide at least a standard 525 five-year --
development standards on this development.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm sure you've looked at this site plan.
Do you think it's humanly possible to find a place to put that
on this site?
>> Well, there's always opportunity to provide a vault
underground retention.
They can put perforated pipe.
There are opportunities and not lose parking.
I think the opportunity is there.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
I thank you for bringing this to our attention.
I think it's absolutely critical.
And can you just give me a ballpark of what the city has spent
on addressing our stormwater problems in this area in the last
couple of years?
>> Well, we've spent a lot of money and we're going to be
spending a lot more trying to solve the Henderson Dale Mabry,
Neptune Dale Mabry, palma Ceia and the area behind Himes and
Parkland Estates, that whole area we are working on solving and
that is in the millions.
So anything that we get from a developer would be a great help.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
Regarding the site, the proposed use -- I'm going to use this
aerial for illustrative purposes.
The proposed use of the site -- here is the Publix and here is

the vitamin shop.
Here is the parking lot, the proposed use will be in the
northeast corner right over here.
Henderson boulevard, church, Neptune, Dale Mabry.
The land use plan designation along Dale Mabry and along this
particular intersection of Henderson and Dale Mabry is CMU 35
which permits consideration of the request.
It does meet long-range planning issues as relate to the
integration of neighborhood supporting uses and the proper
mitigation of impacts due to expansion and redevelopment.
It is consistent with policies that talk about redevelopment
opportunities and incentives which should be maximized by
encouraging appropriate mix of land uses in the mixed use
categories where appropriate as this is community mixed use 35
that does meet that criteria.
The proper land use is located in highly commercialized section
of the city South of Henderson boulevard and adjacent to Dale
Mabry Highway, a major arterial road.
It is part -- it is within the boundaries of the palma Ceia West
Neighborhood Association.
The Planning Commission staff finds the proposed request
consistent with the provisions of the plan and does not object
to the proposed use.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Madam Chairman, members of the Council, my name is bob

sprinkle and I have been sworn.
I'm president of sprinkle consulting.
18115 U.S. highway 41 North, suite 600 in the booming
metropolitan area of Lutz, Florida.
And I am going to give expert testimony tonight.
I'm a civil engineer and a member of the American institute of
certified planners.
And I am giving expert testimony because issues for Council
consideration say that we should be providing evidence in the
form of expert testimony.
I also have Bruce landIS with me tonight and he will be
providing expert testimony.
In light of that, I'll provide both of our CVs.
I have been sworn.
I have been sworn.
Also tonight with me are representatives from RMC, the Bank of
America, and also Publix.
If you need to talk to them.
The matter before you here is simply a special use request to
authorize or seeking permission to use a drive-through for the
Bank of America site on the shopping center site which is
located in the northeast corner, which is really nearest Dale
Mabry and the Watrous intersection.
And we have met with your staff and are pleased to note that
they offer no objections to the request.

I'm a little surprised this evening to find out about the
drainage issues; however, Mr. Landis we have been working with
this site for sometime.
We are responsible for the relocation of the Publix as it is.
And we no know a lot about the drainage and the history of the
drainage and so that we will present that to you later on.
We have also met with the homeowners association, which is the
palma Ceia Neighborhood Association, and we're pleased to note
that they offer no objection.
They published a newsletter in the winter of 2005 just so you
could know what kind of interaction we had with them.
And in that newsletter, they said Publix to add services, retail
to property, and it says F all goes as expected, the
neighborhood will soon see additional commercial services on the
property now occupied by Publix at Neptune and Dale Mabry.
The grocery store chain is currently working with developers to
add retail space and dining adjacent to the current Publix
supermarket as well as a new Bank of America at the corner of
Watrous and Dale Mabry.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of clarification.
Are you saying Palma Ceia Neighborhood Association or palma Ceia
West.
>> Palma Ceia West Neighborhood Association.
The new bank location will replace the current branches on
Neptune and Henderson.

Final plans pending approval by the Neighborhood Association and
City Council for a drive-thru facility adjacent to the bank.
The developers along with representatives of Publix have been
working closely with the PCWNA board which has expressed
concerns regarding additional traffic flow along Watrous Avenue.
So far it appears everybody has worked together on a site plan
that will be beneficial to all.
Additional detail will be available on a neighborhood meeting
February 8th.
We did provide those details.
I'm pleased to note they offer no objections.
They have taken a position of no objection to our proposal.
Allow me to address the issues here for Council consideration
under section 27-269, which are required -- requires us to
address those issues.
And the first one requires the plan to promote the public
health, safety and general welfare.
And that I think we did this in three ways.
One, that we provide needed services on an already commercial
property.
Two, that we are -- as part of this proposal, providing funds to
improve traffic conditions at the adjacent -- at an adjacent
intersection.
Three, by carefully managing traffic circulation and pedestrian
safety on the site itself.

The second thing is the proposed use requested complies with all
required regulations and standards including provisions of
article 6 and 8.
And the plan has been reviewed by your staff.
It has been reviewed by the Hillsborough County Planning
Commission and it has been found satisfactory in all of these
areas.
We submit to you that it is satisfactory.
Number three, the use itself is compatible with contiguous and
surrounding properties.
It is on a commercial corridor on Dale Mabry just South of
Henderson.
This aerial photograph will show that.
And I think anybody who has been there knows and understands
that we're not proposing something here that's not compatible
with what is already going on.
This proposed use is in conformity with the Tampa comprehensive
plan.
The current land use is community mixed use 35.
The land use allows the uses proposed as does the CG zoning or
the Planning Commission has confirmed that for you this evening.
The use certainly does not establish a precedent.
It is perfectly consistent with uses approved all up and down
Dale Mabry in this area.
The drive throughs are typical of banks.

I cannot think of a branch bank that does not have one.
And the shopping center is long-standing center and is really
seeking these modifications as a modernization effort to bring
up modern standards.
>>GWEN MILLER: Can I interrupt you for a minute.
Ms. Saul-Sena has a question.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The issue that concerns all of us, I wonder
if you could address very succinctly is the issue raised by
Mr. Awad, how will you address the stormwater?
>> Mr. Landis who is an engineer in our firm, right after I
finish, he'll come up here and address that specific issue.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's the issue of greatest interest to me.
>> We're on our way there.
We're there in about two more sentences.
Anyhow, the proposed bank drive through is going to be designed
using recent technology and it provides better service, and
meeting current needs.
And our firm has done a comprehensive traffic study of the needs
and the intersections surrounding the site.
One intersection at Henderson and church operates at a level of
service F.
We have proposed improvements to the intersection and have
agreed to pay for those improvements as part of this
development.
Consequently, that's why the city traffic concerns were removed

from this petition.
The improvements will raise the level of service at this
intersection from level of service F which it currently is -- to
a level of service D even after the development is put in place.
Bruce landis can also speak to traffic issues if you have any
questions about that.
And your staff has reviewed these analyses and has agreed with
them.
But right now, I would like Mr. Landis to come up and explain to
you the drainage issue and then secondly be available to answer
questions about that.
>> Good evening, Madam Chairman, Council members.
For the record, my name is Bruce landis, I'm with sprinkle
consulting.
I'm a registered civil engineer and a certified land use
planner.
I have been sworn.
My address is 18115 U.S. highway 41 North, suite 600, Lutz,
Florida.
This issue or concern on stormwater drainage comes as a
surprise.
We saw no issue --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How are you just addressing it?
How are you going to address it?
>> How are we going to address that?

I did the original design in the late 1990s when the store
that was there, the Publix store and the complex was there.
We demoed that.
That property was completely paved over at the time.
When we were meeting with your stormwater professionals at that
time, we demonstrated that we were reducing pervious area
significantly.
The petition that's before you is going to show some additional
impervious added.
So we are not adding to any runoff volume.
You know --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, sir.
If you're familiar with this, you know this has been a
historically flooded area with the problem you're taking
greenspace and making it pervious, even if you weren't, you're
spending money here and it's a problem and you're going to
generate more traffic.
There's going to be more oil.
We need you to catch it and deal with it on-site.
>> Well, I've just heard of this issue tonight.
And so I can't at this point outline what kind of designs we
would do.
But I can tell you that we spent probably seven years ago
considerable work in providing pervious areas, reducing the
stormwater runoff from our site.

>>GWEN MILLER: To me T seems like you need to go back to the
drawing board and come back again and address this stormwater
problem.
Mr. Awad, our stormwater has told us that you need to do
something about the stormwater.
This cannot go without you doing that.
We cannot support it if you don't control the stormwater.
Like Ms. Saul-Sena said, that's an area that floods a lot and
something will have to be done there.
To me, you have to go back and we'll have to continue if you
would like for us to continue, we can vote it up or down.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We should hear from the neighbors.
>>GWEN MILLER: I'm letting him --
>> What we can represent is that the variance before you is not
adding to any of the stormwater problems.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask a question?
There are people that do want to speak on this.
Mr. Landis, as I look at the overhead and I'm well familiar with
this as are many people.
This Publix is one of the oldest Publix in town, even though it
moved three times over the last 40 years, but I think it started
where it is and moved over and then it moved back.
Something like that.
Anyway, the stormwater right now that's -- when the rain hits
that parking lot, that massive parking lot, where does it go?

>> It will sheet flow into the inlet, stormwater inlets in the
periphery into the street.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So -- so there's no on-site retention for
that entire huge parking lot because it's been there forever.
>> That's right.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, anyway, we can does that another day.
But that's the bottom line here.
Publix, you're talking about Publix and Bank of America.
Those are two of the best corporate friendly people in this
community.
Publix does wonderful things in this community.
Bank of America does wonderful things in this community.
But this city is about to spend $20 million -- that's what
Mr. Awad was alluding to, we're about to spend $20 million to
fix, hopefully, knock on wood, to fix Dale Mabry -- this Dale
Mabry corridor and to help palma Ceia with the flooding.
I think what we're asking, okay, even though we might not be on
the greatest legal grounds to do it, I think we need you guys to
go back to the drawing board and we're asking to be good
corporate neighbors and figure out a way to retain the water
that will hit this roof.
We're not saying to retain the water for the entire parking lot
but retain the water that will be on this new project.
I would say when you come in with the crispers to figure out a
way to do it there.

You know you can vault because everybody is vaulting around
town.
And it takes a little bit of money, but I say just go back, tell
your corporate people, be good corporate neighbors like they
always are and figure out a way to help this problem, not
continue to throw water on to the street.
>> Okay.
We engineers can figure out just about anything.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak, please come
up and speak now.
>> Hello.
Gail cork rin.
President of palma Ceia West Neighborhood Association.
Yes, I have been sworn.
They have met with us several times, the Publix developers.
We were concerned about the drainage.
We were concerned about traffic.
We've asked them several questions.
They had answers for everything, but this evening when Mr. Awad
spoke, then I'm like, okay, where did this come from?
So if this is a problem, we do want it fixed.
We live there.
We shop there, we know what it's like.
We drive cars and not boats there.
So if that is an issue, we do want it addressed.

>>GWEN MILLER: Do anyone else in the audience like to speak?
You heard our concerns --
>> Yes, ma'am, I have.
Let me offer a solution.
To that.
I've been submarine before.
This has been batting around now for sometime with staff.
This has been going on and on and on.
We met with drainage and we said we want to know what the issues
are because we want to come before this Council fully satisfying
all the demands of the staff.
And this is the first time, this minute, that I've heard that
this exists.
And I can see this.
But let me say this.
I just talked to the owner, and we will -- well, it's very
important to us, timing is very important, as long as this has
been.
We will provide retention for the buildings that we are adding.
For this site.
In other words, we're building a bank.
We will provide a satisfactory retention for the runoff that
bank produces.
We're going to build a crispers we will add satisfactory
retention for what it is.

Now this bank, understand is going on top of already impervious
surface.
There is not -- if you look at this, the bank, all hundred
percent paved where the bank is.
We're not taking away greenspace to build this bank so that will
improve the drainage.
It would be like us going out and putting in retention ponds
right now with building nothing.
The building doesn't add anything to retention.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I help?
In other words, you'll add a note tonight that says we will
address the stormwater for 4515 square foot of this.
>> Yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because that's the building.
>>GWEN MILLER: Cathy Coyle, did you hear the petitioner?
He'll write that on the plans.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think after we deal with this issue, we
need to address the larger issue, which is how they -- which is
how we can begin to address this consistently.
I'm not even saying anything about their trees.
>>ROSE FERLITA: But Ms. Alvarez is.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You go, Ms. Alvarez.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
I did consult with Mr. Awad and did clarify with Mr. Sprinkle.
Alex's comments are specifically for the bank site only because

that is the purview of this particular petition.
He is asking that a note be added to the plan for the bank that
it meets the five 25-year storm which is the standard typical
requirement.
I advised Mr. Sprinkle of that.
Are you willing to do that?
>> There 4515 square feet.
>> I can simply add a note to the plan that goes to permitting
that they meet that standard.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do that.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: No continuance needed.
>> Alex Awad, stormwater department.
I have been sworn.
I would like to direct your attention to the other portion that
is not part of this petition, but it's all in the greenspace
that will be gone.
That 10,000 plus square feet.
And what concerns me is I've mentioned in the past that at least
to the construction services center because it's not part of
this petition.
I cannot comment on it as a rezoning, but that would have to
meet our 50-year storm because there is really no positive
outfall to the site.
So I'd like at least to clarify for everyone that when this
development comes in, it will meet or will have to meet our

50-year storm because there is no true positive outfall for the
site.
And it's over 10,000 plus square feet.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that an issue for us tonight?
>> No, it's not part of the zoning.
I'm just trying to make it clear that that portion of the
development will have to meet that certain stormwater criteria.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's nice of you to remind us of that.
Appreciate the head's up.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else want to speak in the audience?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion to close.
All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]

>>ROSE FERLITA: Move an ordinance approving a special use
permit, S-2, approving a bank drive-in window in a CG zoning
district in the general vicinity of 1313 South Dale Mabry Avenue
in the City of Tampa, Florida, and is more particularly
described in section one hereof providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
We need to open number 11.
We have a motion and second.

All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you for your good citizenry.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm very -- as our city redevelops, we
currently don't require anything in terms of stormwater
improvements if an area is -- has been previously paved with
impervious surface.
And I think this is something that we really need to seriously
reconsider.
When redevelopment of a certain scale occurs on property, even
if it's been previously paved, I think we should make the
property owner begin to address some of the stormwater issues.
We did this with the Westshore DRI, and because Mr. Dingfelder
is Chairman of the Public Works Committee, I think that we
should ask him as our Council representative to begin this
dialogue, I believe a new stormwater plan is coming to Council,
and I think it needs to look at this.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll take it one step further.
Let's ask staff to get back with us in 30 days to address that
issue.
And I'll work with them.
I'll give them all my engineering brilliance.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor, aye.
Opposed, nay.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]



>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land Development.
I have been sworn.
This petition is to rezone the property at 2508 West Ivy street
to construct 19 single-family attached units and a 12,000 square
foot commercial building.
It's a mixed commercial building.
The site lies within the boundaries of the West Tampa overlay
district.
The commercial structure fronts Armenia and an orientation
similar to the historic cigar factories in this area.
The use is proposed within the structure are cater shop, dance
studio, restaurant, pharmacy, private recreational facility,
specialty convenience, retail, shopper good retail, furniture
sales, professional office, no medical, church, day care and
bake facilities.
It's a mixed use building.
No medical because of the parking issues.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I know exactly where it is.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Okay.
Good.
The residential uses lie to the West of the commercial building.
And front both Cordelia and Ivy street.
Garage access is shown on the proposed alleyway which is mid

block and runs East-West.
Each residential unit has one guest parking space as well.
The front setbacks for the residential units are set at 10 feet.
Elevations are attached to the site plans.
You'll notice the style, the buildings is very complementary to
the area.
The plan commitments to comply with all West Tampa overlay
design guidelines for elements such as finished floor height,
roof pitch, garage access, fencing, landscaping and lighting.
There are no waivers requested for those criteria.
The plan notes compliance with all City of Tampa technical
standards for transportation and stormwater as well.
You'll note that the site on the map that you have before you,
the majority of the property is currently zoned commercial
intensive with two lots on the rear zoned RS-50.
The original plan that the developer brought to us was for all
town houses all the way up to Armenia.
We encouraged him not to give up a portion of the property
because it is an intense commercial district and because this
area is revitalizing with residential to keep a portion of that
commercial property for commercial uses.
To create that neighborhood center where people could walk to to
encourage less vehicular traffic.
The site currently is being demolished, probably is cleared by
now.

This was a couple of weeks ago when I went out there.
It is as of today.
There you go.
These house -- these houses are across the street to the North
and the houses to the rear.
I believe the ladies that live in a couple of these houses are
here tonight.
And some of the houses to the South on Cordelia and this is
another view of the house to the rear.
The reasons for recommendation on page 2, single-family attached
dwelling units, rear walls are not to face public streets, and
the front doors do connect immediately to Cordelia and Ivy.
The garages are in the rear accessing the alley.
Each town house unit contains a one-car garage in the rear with
two parking spaces.
One in tandem and one next to it.
So there is a visitor parking space for each unit.
And no fewer than three or no more than eight units in a row.
Each row contains four to five.
I did note under findings of fact the purpose and intent of the
PD zoning district for your consideration.
I would like to add, the plan came in on March 31st, which was
the 13-day deadline.
He made that deadline.
I sent it out for comments, and approximately five days later I

got comments back from staff.
The comments back from transportation are that the parking
spaces proposed in the right-of-way need to be removed.
Transportation is the only authority allowed to Grant Parking in
the right-of-way.
Council has given the authority to Grant Parking on street
downtown in the Channelside in some of the higher intensity
areas.
However, in the smaller areas in the city and within residential
areas, transportation apparently retains that authority.
There is no ability for us to meter these spaces.
It is in a residential area.
They are asking that they simply be removed and curbed and
grassed per the technical standards.
I spoke with the developer and he's not adverse to that.
The second is that clarification from transportation was needed
on if the single-family attached units fee simple or condos.
I believe they will be fee simple.
We can simply add that note to the plan that they will be fee
simple.
Two car driveway needs to be a minimum of 18 feet in width.
I'll have to discuss that with them.
I can note that on the plan as well.
The final comment came from solid waste.
There was a slight error in the angle of the dumpster.

There was an encroachment of the truck.
She offered an additional attachment that showed the correct
orientation of the dumpsters.
I can simply attach this to the site plan and reference that
this will be done at permitting.
I don't believe that there are any changes to the plan
graphically that will need to be made if Council is willing to
approve this that I could just correct it for the hearing
tonight.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn in.
On your future land use map, here is Armenia Avenue, Tampania.
Predominant land use categories in the area along Armenia
Avenue, heavy commercial 24, residential 10.
Park adjacent about a block away from the proposed site.
Proposed site has been underutilized commercial facility for
quite a few years now.
What is significant about I think the approach that the
applicant is taking is that we are looking at reducing the
intensity by allowing residential uses to the rear.
He's been very cooperative in some of the meetings we have had
in reducing his units from 30 units to 19 units.
Detaching the units, also bringing the homes closer to the
streets and internalizing the parking.
Originally that was not the case which would have resulted in

quite a few curb cuts along the streets in a really difficult
interface with the adjacent residentials uses to the North and
to the South.
He has also provided a commercial interface, logical commercial
interface towards Armenia with the establishment of the
commercial that he will be placing along the face of Armenia.
Let me go ahead and put this aerial up here to illustrate.
There is also an adjacent piece of property that is not a part
of this rezoning that is -- that will serve as a parking lot for
the structure that was presently here that has currently been
demolished.
This is going to be developed as I understand just for your
edification, a single-family detached homes.
So there will be a logical transition of intensity from
commercial to the town home slash condo use to the single-family
finally to the single-family homes that are located here along
Tampania.
There will be a proper interface with the single-family homes to
this side, and then the more historic looking homes, bungalow
looking homes along this side.
There are a few bungalow homes along the corner along Tampania.
We feel the request is consistent with the location of
single-family attached units along the periphery of established
residential units.
The applicant has stated the site will comply with the West

Tampa overlay district standards.
And from what he has told us, we feel that this will be more of
a destination point and will help to create a stimulus to the
economic development corridors, particularly along Armenia,
Howard Avenue of course is pretty much residential in character
as it goes a little farther to the East.
We really see no significant commercial development on this
particular segment of Howard which is the next major corridor
that runs parallel to Armenia about a block over to the East.
Planning Commission finds the proposed rezoning request
consistent with the provisions of the Tampa comprehensive plan
and does not object to the proposed requests.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening.
Dick la Rosa, Hamilton engineering and surveying, 311 North new
port Avenue.
I have been sworn in here tonight representing the petitioner.
We worked with site as they mentioned or with Ms. Coyle to
develop this plan.
The site itself as I'm sure you are familiar with was currently
a vacant warehouse, totally impervious.
Our original plan that we came with was totally town home
development, and staff and the Planning Commission both
recommended that we maintain the commercial aspect.
So we went back and totally revised the plan, we reduced the

number of town homes.
We incorporated the commercial component up front.
We're actually here to add the town home development to the
property, if you will.
The property is currently zoned CI.
It could go straight to construction services for commercial
development.
The developer also as Mr. Garcia mentioned owns the properties
immediately to the West, which he plans to develop.
They are RS-50.
Plans to develop as they are currently platted as single-family
detached housing.
What we're proposing is adding the town home development in
there as a buffer in between the single-family detached to
single-family attached, and then put the commercial component up
towards Armenia.
We've also broken up the buildings to give a better feel for the
single-family detached on both sides of the street.
The amount of units that could feasibly go in based on the
future land use and the single-family residential are the
single-family portion could be up to 24.
We're only proposing 19.
We're limiting the uses of the commercial to what I feel may be
less intense uses.
There's a number in the CI district that could be a lot more

intense with the area.
I think this plan here proposes a less intense.
We provided elevations of the building.
The commercial will also -- I'll have Mr. Castillo come up to
discuss that a bit.
But it's going to reflect basically a lot like what the
single-family -- the single-family attached will look like.
As for -- Ms. Coyle brought up the driveways, I believe about
the width of the single-family residential driveways being
16 feet.
I think Mr. Castillo could come up and attest he's done a lot of
single-family detached housing with 16-foot wide driveways.
Compact spaces are eight feet wide.
If I believe you can fit two cars in a driveway if they ding a
door, it's basically their vehicle that they are hitting.
So I think they'll be careful and park in a 16-foot wide
driveway.
As for the dumpster issue, we prefer to have that handled at
construction services like it's typically done during commercial
site review.
We have no problem with reorient -- reorientating the dumpster
and screening and meeting all the code requirements.
I'd like to go ahead and bring Mr. Castillo up.
He can talk a little bit more about the building elevations.
>> Andrew Castillo, Castillo housing.

1201 North Claire view Avenue.
I have been sworn in.
The project that we are proposing is 19 town houses, 12,000
square feet of commercial space.
We're looking to build a very high quality project.
It's going to be something that I think definitely will be an
asset to this community.
I happen to live in this community.
And we have built many homes in this area already.
We definitely want to be a contributor, if you will, to this
community.
I've got an elevation I'd like to show that to you.
That's one of the buildings that we're proposing.
This is just a rendering at this point.
But you can see that the flavor of the design, if you will.
The commercial building is also going to have similar features
to that, and, again, we think it will be a tremendous asset to
this area.
Be happy to answer any questions you have.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by Council members?
Ms. Alvarez.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: How many -- are they wanting two bedrooms?
>> Three bedrooms.
Two and a half baths.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who would like to

speak on item number 11?
You may come up and speak now.
Anyone who wants to speak, please come up now, come up front and
start speaking.
>> I have been sworn.
I'm Hilda Menendez.
2525 Cordelia street.
And I live right down to that project where they are going to
start.
I want to know how they are going to fix my side of the property
and their side.
We had a wall dividing my property and their property, and I
want to know what they are going to do there.
>>GWEN MILLER: He'll come back later and answer.
Just give all the questions you want him to answer now.
>> Well, that's what I want to know.
How is it going to look?
>>GWEN MILLER: After everyone speaks --
>> What did they have there, six-foot masonry wall separating
the old factory from your property.
>> Yeah.
All the way around to Armenia.
>>GWEN MILLER: He'll answer in a few minutes.
>> Now Ivy.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next.

>> My name is John SMIDE.
I am sworn in.
We live at 2512 West Cordelia.
We are the third house behind -- right across the street from
the project.
I would first like to thank Mr. Castillo for destroying, getting
rid of that eyesore to begin with.
It's much nicer even looking at dirt than looking at that
building.
The couple of concerns that we have and I know there's a large
commercial district running down Armenia Avenue.
The demolition of this piece of property is a huge opportunity
for this area as it's trying to revitalize itself.
Bought into this area, lifelong Tampa, born and grew up here.
I agree Monsignor higgens is infallible.
Jesuit high school, everything else.
But the reinvestment in that community, May 17th, actually
hearings in this same room in regards to making a historical
district out of part of this area.
Ironically and I have the map.
I wouldn't know how to show it too well.
Actually, I do.
Ironically, if I can -- this X here is the piece of property
that was destroyed -- or taken down.
These lines mark part of the area where the historical district

is trying to do along with this area here.
Our house sits right inside this line.
This piece of property sits outside that line.
One of the concerns that we have is as this area is trying to be
revitalized and as things are going on, we're not in objection
to what is trying to happen there.
I don't know that more commercial property along Armenia Avenue
is the answer to anything.
We've got LaCasa, there's something on every sickle -- single
corner.
I don't know if somebody wants their house on Armenia Avenue.
What I'm trying to bring up, maybe should be -- we are -- not
really in favor of the town home aspect.
Very leery of the renter type idea that might exist with
something along those lines.
I don't have if that's subjective or not.
I respect Mr. Castillo as a developer and what he may be trying
to do.
I like what he showed from the elevation standpoint.
I'm not here to speak as an objector to the rezoning, but I
think maybe some more consideration needs to be given to exactly
what we do with this piece.
This is an entire city block almost that we're talking about
here and it's a huge opportunity for this area.
And I hate to see something done the wrong way in that area.

It's a great area.
Lou Piniella has ignored Lou Piniella park.
I'm ready to write him a letter -- I would like to make sure
that we take care of that.
Another question would be about parking for the commercial site.
I didn't see that addressed.
Whether or not parking on Armenia side, front of the commercial
site.
We have a large problem with parking on Cordelia.
People parking in the street because we don't have 16-foot
driveways.
We have one car wide driveways and most are long.
But there are a number of residents already park on the street.
Parking is a huge issue coming up and down that street.
Depending on what kind of commercial activity goes on, parking
could be a major issue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, sir.
Next.
>> Hi.
Deck nickUS.
I'm not sworn in.
I didn't know I was going to speak so I haven't been sworn in.
(Oath administered by the clerk).
>> I have a bungalow on Ivy street directly across from this
project, and I have a 15-year commitment to that house.

I bought it as a run-down, worn out old bungalow.
It was just about to be demolished because it was being ignored.
It is of historical value.
In these 15 years I have worked and sweated and labored to bring
that house up.
I now have the joy of paying increased taxes because I've
improved the property.
And now with this project, my concern is 19 town houses directly
across the street from me, two single-family dwellings.
Like the previous gentleman spoke, parking is already an issue.
Traffic is already an issue.
There is no room on the streets to park.
There is no room already.
Where are we going to put 19 properties, 19 dwellings here?
Where are we going to put commercial parking here?
And is this plan that they have in keeping with the tone of the
neighborhood?
I don't see that it really reflects what is already there with
single story bungalows.
We have a lot of redevelopment already going in this
neighborhood in little tiny plots.
Houses I call yucko stucco.
They are on the street.
They are very small.
They do not look like bungalows in the least.

And if we're getting more of that, I think we are losing the
opportunity to bring a real value back to this neighborhood.
What it was before was an ugly night -- nasty warehouse and it
was very ugly and I'm glad to have it gone.
Today they were bulldozing the final so it is flat land now.
I think with the flat slate that we have, we have an opportunity
to bring something of value in keeping with the historical
nature of the district and not ruin it with a bunch of more
yucko stucco.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
Petitioner, would you come back?
Answer some questions about -- young lady wants to know what to
put up behind -- separate her house from --
>> Andrew Castillo.
The lady that spoke with regards to the wall, we have three lots
to the West of the project that we're looking to develop, and we
were retaining those as RS-50 single-family homesites.
So those will be three homes similar required setbacks to your
RS-50 seven foot sides, 20-foot on the front.
To address the issue, let me go back to the fence, we would be
happy if we can put up a wood fence on the single-family side, I
don't know how attractive a block fence will be there.
There was a block fence that was about -- actually wasn't six
feet B five feet tall.
And it was in disrepair.

It's been there for a long, long time, many years.
And that was to buffer the parking that was adjoining that
property.
Now we're going to have a single-family residence adjoining her
home.
So it's going to be a lot more attractive than what was there
before.
Also to address the issue with the parking for the residential,
we looked at that intensely and the reason we went with an
internal driveway is to get the parking off the front of the
street so that it wouldn't be adding any parking to the
adjoining neighborhood and there will be plenty of spaces
available for guests and whatnot.
The other option I want to add is, the internal driveway
connects with the commercial parking spaces.
And that actually is going to add parking for guests visiting
the town houses and perhaps even adjoining neighbors that have a
party or something and would like to use the parking in the
evening.
It's going to be evening.
It's not going to be -- I think if anything, this is going to
alleviate some of the parking issues that may -- might have been
brought up here.
As far as the issue with the yucko stucco, I find that a little
resentful.

I think the designs that we're going to be coming forth, this is
just a rendering.
It's a very simple rendering.
We're going to be putting in a very nice product is what is
planned here.
Potentially wood flooring, high-grade ceramic tile.
Very nice landscaping.
This is not going to be your run-of-the-mill town house project.
This is nothing like that.
This is going to be a very complementary enhancing neighborhood
product.
And, you know, if anything, property values on the adjoining
homes are going to increase significantly because of this
project.
I see no negative impact whatsoever with regards to the
surrounding properties on this project.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Castillo, what are you doing about the
landscaping around?
Tell me about where you are planning to put some trees and some
shrubbery.
>> Sure.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yeah, trees.
>> I would be happy to address that.
First of all, on the commercial side, on the commercial side
along the front, there's currently some cedar trees that are

facing Armenia that are not very attractive.
We would like to remove those trees and plant some really nice
oak trees, live oaks.
Ligustrums, really enhance the appearance of that whole block.
Along the town houses going down the road on either side, we
would like to add a significant amount of live oaks as well.
Some palm trees to enhance the architecture and bring out, you
know, all of that.
So there's definitely going to be a lot of landscaping to
contribute to this.
I mean, this is not -- it's not just going to be the buildings.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: One of the concerns was the renter type.
Didn't you say that somebody said something about fee simple on
these things?
>> Correct.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So they are not going to be rental types.
>> No, Ma'am.
We are planning to offer them fee simple.
They are going to be -- they are not going to be -- we're not
preventing someone from buying one and renting it.
I don't think that would be the typical buyer here.
We've had significant amount of people express interest, and
they are looking to buy for themselves.
You know, young families moving to the area that like to move to
the area.

>>MARY ALVAREZ: Colleagues, this is exactly what I've been
looking for in the West Tampa area.
This is the first big project that's going on as far as housing
is concerned.
And I think they've captured the commercial on Armenia Avenue
perfectly and right behind there, you've got the housing units
and then, of course, they are going to go with the single-family
homes.
And this is exactly what we've been looking for in West Tampa.
And I'm just delighted that this is happening.
That was a sore spot for a long time because that building that
was there was a tropical garment at one time and it turned out
to be a florist warehouse.
And it was always an eyesore.
And I think the West Tampa community has to be thankful that
some developer has tried to come in and a good builder like
Mr. Castillo is coming in and doing something really, really
nice for this community.
And I'm very supportive of this.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Mr. Castillo, first of all, I, too, would like to
echo Ms. Alvarez' sentiment.
More so than that, I was a resident on Cordelia street for more
than 12 years.
I'm very familiar with this neighborhood.
Very familiar with this corridor.

I couldn't wholeheartedly agree more than the aesthetics that
you've done and to address the gentleman's concern that came up
about the commercial corridor, from Tampa Bay all the way down,
it's really nothing but commercial there anyway.
Like he said, he initially brought this project forth as
residential all over the entire project.
But the Planning Commission as well as the city staff said that
was inappropriate with what -- and inconsistent with what the
compatibility was still now and everything that's contiguous up
and down that street and that corridor is basically commercial.
And he would be basically changing the fabric and corridor and
making something that would be incompatible with what is there
already.
Mr. Castillo, I'm very familiar with your building as well and
from that area from Armenia back over to Himes, you all have
revitalized quite a bit of the West Tampa area.
Right behind channel 28, almost a two square block area.
I don't know the actual amount, but I would venture to say and
please correct me if I'm wrong, 15 to 20 homes up in that area
alone.
One behind the school, two city blocks right behind the channel
28 and a lot of pockets all up in there behind the southern
Exchange Bank.
And what you've done to the neighbors over there have grossly
enjoyed the market and property value increase that your

particular development has done for the West Tampa area as well
as I for what it did for mine.
But that's neither here nor there.
But this is a wonderful project.
I think the first lady that came up to speak, I believe you
addressed her concerns as far as whether there's going to be a
fence.
Instead of a fence, if I'm not mistaken, there's going to be
another single-family residence directly next to her, correct?
>> Correct.
>>KEVIN WHITE: So then there's no need to address a fencing
issue unless that particular property owner wishes to put up a
privacy fence at that point in time because she will not be
directly abutting the commercial or the condo type association.
Like Ms. Alvarez, I'm in wholehearted support, and this appears
to be a wonderful project at this point.
>> I would like to add on the commercial side, we're going to be
very selective with the tenants that we rent to.
I plan on keeping this building for myself.
And we're going to be very selective hoping to attract tenants
that will really enhance and be a significant asset to the
community.
So to the rounding -- surrounding, immediate surrounding
neighborhood, including the town houses and the neighbors
adjoining.

So we're going to be very selective in that.
>>KEVIN WHITE: One other thing, Madam Chair, just on the
architectural design -- I'm sorry, that was just mentioned, the
Mediterranean type design, I would also like to mention that
right around the park that's just a block or two away, they
built three beautiful homes that are almost this exact design.
So this is not something that's new to the neighborhood this
type design.
Condos are, but not this design.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I see the drawing that you have for the
rendering of the town homes.
Do you have a similar rendering for the Armenia side of the
commercial?
>> Unfortunately, we have a side view of that.
It has a similar flavor, if you will, of the architecture.
We could put that up for you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because, I mean, the main exposure to the
vast majority of the city is going to be up and down Armenia,
that everybody drives by and sees.
I'm wondering a couple things about that.
Is it going to have a large working entry feature that I think
that's one of the things West Tampa overlay wants are actual
working entry features for the commercial.
>> Actually, the West Tampa overlay committee is going to take a
look at these plans once they start.

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's another question I had.
In previous petitions, when it's in the West Tampa overlay, I
thought we see -- we see the plan or it's already been to the
overlay committee and this one it's not.
How is that working?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: It did go.
I sent it out.
Land Development.
I did send it to the West Tampa CDC.
As I said before when the plans come in, I automatically route
them as part of the DRC, and I have not received any comments
from mike Grandoff.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe by second reading, you can follow up
with them.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I'll call them just to see what he has to
say.
Just so you know for research, if you look at the site plan
itself, there is a main entrance off of Armenia into the
structure.
And from the parking lot as well.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Will that be a working entrance off of
Armenia?
>>CATHERINE COYLE:
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Not just a facade?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.

>>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
We have a motion and second to close the public hearing.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>> Move an ordinance rezoning property in general vicinity of
2508 West Ivy street.
From zoning district classification CI & RS 50 to PD mixed use.
Residential slash commercial, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Motion to open.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]


>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, Council.
Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
I have been sworn.
This request is to rezone the property at 4813 Flamingo Road to
an RM-24 zoning district to allow multifamily development.
The property contains 9,240 square feet which will allow up to
five dwelling units.
The standards for RM-24 setbacks are as follows.
They have a 25-foot front yard, seven foot side yard and 15-foot
rear yard.
The maximum height permitted within the RM-24 zoning district is

60 feet.
The request before you is for Euclidean zoning district.
There is no side plan required.
You'll note on the map that I presented you with, a portion of
the -- the map is drawn a little skewed.
But a portion of the property is actually touching the RM-24 and
went in and a portion of the property is zoned RS-60.
You'll notice there are many PDs along the northern end of
flamingo and large commercial general section as well.
I drove the street.
This is the subject property, 4813.
It's a single-family house.
At least it appears to be.
The same side of the street, one of the PDs is a large town
house development.
One of the other PDs is a town house development.
And one of the other PDs is a town house development all in a
row.
There is one other single-family house on the northern side of
the street.
Next door.
And then immediately to the East, this is the driveway for the
current subject property.
Immediately to the East is a very large older not highly
attractive apartment complex with parking that backs straight

out into the street.
The southern side of the street is RS-60.
We did find it consistent with the surrounding area looking at
the zoning map, given that many PDs have been requested on the
northern side.
Probably reducing setbacks.
This particular request is for RM-24.
Just as I had addressed earlier case this morning, they are
going to have to live with the standards of the RM-24 district.
No variances are requested through this.
We had no objections.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn in.
Pretty brief on this one because Ms. Coyle really hit on a lot
of the same things I was going to talk about.
I, too, drove the site.
Basically it's really kind of interesting.
All along this site on the North side, CMU 35, R-20.
The cove apartments right over here directly to the North.
RM-35.
Single-family over here, but basically all town home development
to the North.
So it's very consistent with the pattern of development on the
North side of Flamingo Road.
It's consistent with the policies as far as the location of

single-family attached housing units along the periphery.
Compatibility of adjacent uses.
The proposed request must meet the RM-24 standards as Ms. Coyle
had stated.
Planning Commission staff has no objection.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
>> Good evening, Madam Chairman, members of the City Council, my
name is John Grandoff.
My address is suite 3700 Bank of America plaza.
And I represent LGL properties, LLC.
This evening.
This property has a split zoning, RM-24 and RM 60 on it.
We're just asking to harmonize the zoning to RM-24.
I sent notices out, posted the property, received no objections
no inquiries.
I believe I have no objection this evening.
I respectfully request your approval in accordance with
Ms. Coyle's report and with Mr. Garcia's report.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who would like to
speak on item number 12?
>> Madam Chairwoman, Council, I have been sworn in.
Sean Donnelly.
I'm the president of South Westshore neighborhood Civic
Association and this property falls within that area.
I also happen to be the neighbor that lives directly across the

street from this proposed project.
What hasn't been pointed out on this is the exact same thing
you've seen before this evening and in prior hearings is that
you're seeking to take down a single-family residence and cram
in two town homes.
Just like with Mr. KOCHER earlier tonight on Leona.
He had what was previously two lots, put a single-family house
up there and now he's asking to tear down a single-family house
and put up two single-family residences.
You denied that even though it was only seven feet short of
being two buildable lots.
What we are asking here is this density not be increased any
more.
This is a dead-end street as you can see from the overhead.
We have no sidewalks on either side.
The other PDs that have been approved here were on vacant
lots.
They didn't change the nature of the neighborhood.
When people moved in, they knew that something was going across
there and they could see the potential for what it is.
When we purchased this lot, there wasn't anything but a
single-family residence.
A nice big front yard.
A single driveway, a pool in the back, ranch style home directly
across from us.

We don't want to see multifamily crammed down our throat there.
There are a lot of it already at which point does this slippery
slope stop?
If this one approves you already saw the house next to it.
It can be sold.
This isn't Mr. KOCHER's case where it's a family that has lived
there for 50 years and attempting to go back to two original
lots.
This is an LLC had a has owned the property less than a year and
is attempting to put two units up they can sell for 225 each
instead of one house they might sell for 300.
Mode here is nothing but profit and it does harm our
neighborhood.
Maybe not to the greatest extent you've seen in other areas
where its mass development.
Maybe it changes the fact I'm fifth in line trying to turn left
on to Westshore in the morning and maybe I'm seventh.
Maybe ten minutes waiting instead of eight minutes.
These are substantial things we are looking for when we are
purchasing something in the neighborhood.
Everything on the other side of the street is single-family
residence.
Again, you don't even talk about children.
I can't walk my dog up and down the street because it's a narrow
street without cars coming around the corner from Green Iguana.

There's an apartment complex there.
We'll take a beautiful yard in a residential single-family
residence and put in two driveways, two garages and cram this in
there?
As far as no objections from the neighborhood, I've never been
contacted other than the mailing notice by the petitioners.
The sign that went up was up when I went to work in the morning
and I went out to grab the paper.
By the time I came home that evening to get the mail, it was up
there just long enough in order for the picture to be taken to
meet the notice requirement.
This hasn't been a neighborhood friendly type of development.
This is done for nothing other than to try and make more money
for the petitioners.
We strongly oppose it much like you've heard from Ballast point
where this is also occurring.
They are trying to infill two residences into what is already a
single-family residence.
We don't oppose projects where it's a downzoning from commercial
to multifamily like what is being done along Westshore on the
Westinghouse site.
We don't oppose development of condominiums and town houses in
general where it's a vacant lot.
And there's appropriate zoning.
We do not want single-family residences removed so that you can

put multifamily residents in there.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anybody else want to speak?
>>KEVIN WHITE: I know you gave your title but are you speaking
for the association?
>> No.
Let me clarify that.
The notice came out to us after we had our last meeting so we
haven't had a meeting in the interim.
The only thing that we have voted on and approved in general is
our opposition to the 80% rule, which has fortunately already
been voted down.
So on this specific petition we have not discussed it.
I was talking as the neighbor there and our general procedures
that we have talked about in the past.
But not as to this specific project.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Also, if I could, I'm looking at the -- I
don't know if anybody has this one to put on the overhead.
And I'm curious where your property is located.
Where do you reside?
>> Directly across the street.
I can back my car from my driveway into their driveway.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What are all those -- are all those
single-family.
Are there 17 single-families along your side of the street?
>> Yes.

At present, there is one lot three doors down from me -- no, two
doors down from me which is a vacant lot.
Everything else there is a single-family residence.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And how long have you been there?
>> We've been there for six years now.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Other than these PDs -- I'm seeing three or
four PDs on there, other than that, is the rest of the -- are
the rest of the properties across the street from you just
single-family homes?
>> In between where you see the PDs, there are single-family
homes and down at the bottom of the street where it gets near
the bay, you have the town home projects which were shown and
then at the very point there's a rather large single-family
residence.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
Petitioner?
>> Thank you, Ms. Miller.
Let me explain a couple of things.
My client purchased this property.
Checked on the property appraiser's web site at the time of the
purchase and the property appraiser was carrying the property as
RM-24.
Measuring 70 feet wide.
Closes on the property.
Discovers that it's split down the middle as you'll see on the

map.
It's got an RS-60 portion, and then RM-24, and then remember
this is CMU-35 property.
So North of flamingo, North of flamingo is multifamily PDs.
RM-24, these are the cove apartments and then this CG parcel
right here.
And then for some reason, I don't know why, probably a
scrivener's error.
I researched it at the zoning department.
This little notch of RM-24 gets put here and it picks up on our
client's property.
There's a single-family home there right now.
We had no plans at all -- didn't bring PD this evening.
What we're doing is fixing the scrivener's error of why that
zoning line went down the middle.
If it had been done correctly, the owner at the time should have
come during zoning conformance and say, what am I?
RM-24, RM-60?
I am here to cure the line and make the line entirely RM-24.
The notice was sent out.
Sign was posted.
I notified the neighborhood.
Has my phone number on it.
I received those calls.
I would like to have talked to Mr. Donnelly before this hearing

but I have not had that opportunity.
This is basically correcting an error that I believe -- my
opinion was done during zoning conformance.
My client will comply with the RM-24 standards.
Here is the current use.
It is currently a property that they have rented, and will
continue to rent it for the time being.
If you go down flamingo, I have several photographs I can show
you.
That side of the street is predominantly multifamily.
It dead-ends.
It turns around and you go back towards Westshore on your right
side is single-family.
Flamingo Road is the dividing line.
We're on the North side of that dividing line that's
predominantly multifamily.
I respectfully request that you approve the application.
And there are no trees involved here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for transportation.
And it's about Flamingo Road.
It's about the width of that other sidewalks, just what the
character is.
>> Ms. Saul-Sena, here is the survey.
It has 20 feet of asphalt pavement.
Now, what it would be on each side --

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Does it have a sidewalk?
>> No, it doesn't.
But new construction would require sidewalk.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I'm just thinking about the Planning
Commission's comment about the underlying land use which is
community mixed use 35.
I just can't figure out why they would make this 20-foot
pavement is a narrow road.
No walks, little spit of land with all the single-family on the
bottom, why they would make that a community mixed use 35, which
is a pretty intense land use.
That isn't a question for you, Mr. Grandoff.
It's a question for Mr. Garcia.
Do you have a clue?
>> Honestly, Ms. Saul-Sena, no, I don't.
It goes back -- it encompasses -- it is pretty solid.
If I may get that map for you again very quickly.
As you can see, it's pretty consistent as far as the depth all
the way back.
Now, as to why it went that way, I cannot tell you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You see, even to the South, it's CMU-35 and
yet it's all single-family.
And it's a little tiny bit of a road with only one access point.
>> There's an -- there are apartments right here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's closer to Westshore.

>> Right.
I understand.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It just strikes me that if we actually went
through -- if we were to go through some massive zoning
conformance and made the underlying land use actually refer to
how things are developed and what the existing infrastructure is
that they wouldn't give it CMU-35.
>> No, you're right.
We have seen stranger things than that.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
We have a motion and second to close.
>> I found my photograph.
Show you what I was explaining.
Give me a moment, please.
Here is sign I posted on the property.
This is looking towards Westshore and the property.
You'll see commercial buildings and multifamily buildings.
Now looking the other way towards the West, again, this is on my
client's side of the treat.
And then continuing down the street, some more multifamily.
Here is the pavement.
Right next door to the one I just showed you, brand-new
multifamily, Mediterranean revival.
Here is the property -- the van is in the driveway of the
property and then you can see multifamily and commercial heading

towards Westshore.
That's what it looks like on the North side.
That's all I have.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, I will move the ordinance because
it clearly appears that on the North side of flamingo, it is
multifamily up and down, and to not give it the multifamily
designation, I think would probably hinder the ability to do
anything with that property.
I move an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of
4813 Flamingo Road in the City of Tampa, Florida, more
particularly described in section one from zoning district
classifications RS-60 and RM-24 to RM-24, providing an effective
date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
Opposed, nay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Two nays.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ferlita no.
>>CLERK: Saul-Sena and Ferlita no.
>> Thank you for your time this evening.
>>GWEN MILLER: You're welcome.

We need to open 13.
We have a motion and second to open 13.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]


>>CATHERINE COYLE: If I could, when we're done with this one,
depending on which way it goes, if I could at least have one
copy of the plan back from you to give to the clerk.
I can have all of them back?


>>CATHERINE COYLE: They are all here for the last case.
I don't know if many of these people have been sworn.
You may want to ask because a lot of them were outside.
>>GWEN MILLER: I don't think all want to speak either.
So they don't need to be sworn.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: You don't want to give them each three
minutes.
>>GWEN MILLER: All of them are not going to speak.
>> It will be like Tarpon Springs, we'll be here until 6:30.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have a spokesperson for those who are for and
those who are against.
They would agree to that, I know.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Doesn't look like it, Ms. Miller.
>>GWEN MILLER: Such a good neighborhood.

I know they love that.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's swear them all.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: This petition before you is the rezoning at
502 East Hillsborough Avenue to PD zoning district to construct
a Starbucks drive through, coffee shop and restaurant.
The structure contains 1800 square feet and has one drive-in
window, 16 parking spaces are provided on site as required by
code.
The site maintains vehicular access to both Central Avenue and
Hillsborough.
Outdoor seating area with bike racks and water spigot for dogs
are located on the southern portion of the building facing
Hillsborough Avenue.
A large interstate scale sign which stands 73 feet tall is shown
on the rear of the property.
Just for clarification, and I do note in the report, the poles
for that sign do exist.
Those the old sign for the Mobil station that is there.
If you go to the site, there are very large poles sitting there.
They are asking to put the new extension back on and
re-establish the sign at the stop for the Starbucks.
The reasons for objection noted in the staff report on page one
regarding the transportation analysis, that has been fixed.
I'll say the word fixed.
Negotiated while we went through all the other cases.

We added a note to the plan.
Before you it says petitioner will conduct a traffic study
methodology as approved and required by transportation to study
three similar sites with trip counts and agree to provide
mitigation for traffic impacts as found in said study to dollar
amount agreed upon with transportation division.
Is that okay?
Okay.
That objection has been removed for the traffic analysis.
The note about the queueing length, the waiver for that needs to
be removed from the site plan.
I believe I did strike that.
Note number four needs to be removed from the site plan parking
and building location cannot be moved when the PD is approved.
I'm not sure if we changed that.
I have to review the plan for that.
The code requires the driveway to measure 20 to 30 feet with
10-foot flare.
The driveway on Central Avenue does not meet this standard and
needs to be corrected.
I'll have the petitioner address those issues.
They do have a traffic engineer.
Note number two from transportation for the traffic analysis has
been removed.
You can strike that from your report.

Finally, number three, the proposed PD is inconsistent with the
following chapter 27 zoning criteria for parcels that lie within
historic districts.
Division one generally, section 27211 intent and declaration of
public policy.
The purpose of this article is to preserve, promote and improve
the historic landmarks and districts of the city for the
educational, cultural, economic and general welfare of the
public.
I went through and bolded very specific items within the next
four criteria for historic districts.
They protect and review changes to these districts which have a
distinctive character, special historic architectural and
aesthetic value.
Safeguard the heritage of the city by preserving and regulating
its historic buildings, sites, neighborhoods and areas which
reflect elements of the city's cultural, social, economic,
political and architectural history and so on and so forth.
Also to foster economic development and to manage growth.
I noted that it is abundantly clear that the site has been
underutilized and blighted for at least a decade.
At least.
The last permit that was pulled was approximately 89 to
revitalize the gas station that was there to put in four new
underground tanks.

And approximately two to three years after that it closed.
I've personally driven by the site since 1995, and it has not
been open.
It was demolished last year, so now it is a vacant site.
The proposed PD will provide an economic stimulus that is
greatly needed in this neighborhood; however, the proposed
design and layout does not meet the intent or express
requirements of the historic district guidelines for the
Seminole Heights historic district.
This is the deciding factor that Council has to make this
evening is whether or not the layout you have before you even
though it does not meet the intent of the guidelines is
something that Council is willing to approve given the economic
stimulus and the blight of the site in this particular area.
You'll note on page three of the report, subparagraph B, the
City Council finds that the city has played an important role in
the development of state -- of the state and that this history
is shown today through protection of these buildings and areas.
The Council finds the distinctive and significant character of
the city can only be maintained by protecting and enhancing its
historic architectural, aesthetic and cultural heritage by
preventing unnecessary injury or destruction to these areas.
I stated above, Council has found and adopted regulations that
call for protection of these historic neighborhoods.
I'm speaking to these specifically because they are within the

zoning code, and that's my purview.
The ARC recommendations are also in the report and I'm going to
go through them as well.
Subparagraph C on page 3 states specifically in the zoning code,
the City Council finds that this article benefits all the
residents of the city and all the owners of the property and
declares as a matter of public policy that the protection,
preservation and protection of use of landmarks and historic
districts are a public necessity because their character and
their value as visible reminders of the heritage and history of
the city, state and nation.
And I underlined a couple of things that were very important.
The Council declares as a matter of public policy that this
article is required in the interest of health, prosperity,
safety, welfare and economic well-being of the people.
The control of the erection, alteration, addition, repair,
removal and demolition of new or existing buildings or
structures, signs and any such facilities or appurtenances
thereto ensure perpetuation of historic character is hereby
designated as a public purpose.
This is your decision you need to make tonight of whether or not
this layout meets that public purpose as stated in chapter 27.
I noted underneath that subparagraph as stated above, Council
has found the protection of these districts as -- and required
in the interest of the health, prosperity, safety, welfare and

economic well-being of the people.
The historic guidelines call for a clear relation between
building entrances and pedestrian areas generally smaller front
setbacks and the de-emphasis and design for vehicles generally
locating parking in the rear of buildings.
Page four of the report, as a regulatory tool, this article will
protect the character and architectural style of these districts
from alterations that are incompatible with their preservation
and from repairs and construction of inferior quality and
appearance.
These elements will be further enhanced by maintaining the high
quality of design and infill construction which this is.
It is a vacant site.
And other new developments in historic districts.
I noted here that LDC acknowledges that the petitioner is
working diligently to design a structure that holds many of the
architectural elements of this district.
And you will see it before you tonight.
The proposed site layout is similar -- however, the building
design is not the only consideration for historic district for
Council to consider.
The proposed site layout is similar to those built in any other
part of the city or county or nationwide.
It is suburban designed specifically to move vehicular traffic
through a drive-thru facility and not reflective of the

requirements in the historic guidelines.
I did note -- to create a friendly and inviting area.
Water spigots for animals and bicycle racks that encourage
nonvehicular traffic.
Table and benches located adjacent to Central Avenue in the
northwest corner of the parcel for public use as well.
The petitioner has also committed to install a four-foot brick
wall feature at the intersection of central and Hillsborough
which is the gateway to the center of the district.
This will incorporate verbiage, recognizing the entrance to the
Seminole Heights historic district.
The dumpster enclosure will maintain a brick facade as well to
mimic the brick wall installed by D.O.T. during the Hillsborough
Avenue widening.
If you flip to the end of my report after page 7, you'll see the
memorandum from del Acosta.
They did appear before the A.R.C. on April 4th.
The A.R.C. did recommend approval as presented at the public
hearing with the following considerations: It's a little
misleading when they say approval when you read the
recommendations.
As many of these people were witness to it.
City Council, they recommend approval based on considerations
that City Council to either deny the site plan if presented in
the form that it was presented to the A.R.C., which is what you

see before you or to approve it subject to the qualifications
and considerations as follows.
The very first one is allow the A.R.C. provision during the C.A.
process for comments and corrections to the site plan that do
not impact transportation department requirements.
Two, allow A.R.C. to address signage issues as they relate to
the guidelines.
Three, request City Council to direct appropriate departments to
let the A.R.C. know what the maximum flexibility they will have
in positioning the building on that site.
Four, orient the structure parallel to the street and closer to
Central Avenue.
Five, place the primary entrance facade on Central Avenue.
And six, place major parking at the rear of the property.
So they are saying approve the plan, however, they are saying we
don't like the orientation, we want to change it at the
certificate of appropriateness.
The bottom line is, I'm not adverse to this at all in concept.
It is a redevelopment of the site and a much-needed area.
As you know, Seminole Heights is littered with car lots and
vehicle repair.
And we have very small commercial districts in that area.
This site is smack in the middle of the historic district.
It is a gateway site.
The decision that Council needs to make tonight is whether or

not they want historic layout that meets the intent of the
guidelines or if they approve the one that's before them.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a process question.
Did the A.R.C. submit its comments prior to you making yours or
did you develop yours and then it went to the A.R.C.?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I wrote my report on the 5th of April and
they gave me their comments on the 6th of April.
I went solely out of the zoning code.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So the petitioner has not had an opportunity
since getting there, now it's only April 12th or 14th.
To take their comments, your comments, redo something and come
back to us now with the different site plan.
Because the timing has been much tighter.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: They did appear before the A.R.C. twice.
This was the second appearance.
They did appear in March as well.
The bottom line from the petitioner is that the plan is the plan
that they have before you.
And that's it.
I'll let them make that presentation.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And our ability is to choose whatever plan we
want.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Your decision is whether or not this meets
the intent of the guidelines of the historic district and
whether or not it's an appropriate use of this site within this

area.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Coyle, is it safe to say that everyone
wants a Starbucks there at that location.
It's just a matter of whether --
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm in a tough position here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm trying to maybe cut an hour off of this.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I can feel the daggers in my back.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: It just seems like it would be, rather than
everyone come up and sort of talk about the history of how we
got here and everybody just sort of give their bottom line
tonight and we see where we may be able to go with this --
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I would be interested if there's anyone
opposed to it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Let's hear from the Planning Commission staff.
>> Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
Yes, I have been sworn in.
Looking at the future land use map, just to point out a couple
of things very quickly, the proposed use is CMU 35 as are the
adjacent uses to the East and to the South.
And, of course, we have the predominant residential land use
category of residential 10.
Looking at the aerial, the site is adjacent to the interstate,
interchange, and is along a major arterial, Hillsborough Avenue.

Regarding consistency with and furthering the intent of the
comprehensive plan, Seminole Heights is recognized in the
comprehensive plan as an urban village.
In the future land use element, it states, an urban village is a
recognized historic district in the city that functions or has
the potential to function as a smaller distinctly recognizable
community within the city.
It is characterized by an urban fabric that is unique to the
city and which can support complementary mixed use development.
The long-term goal for urban villages is to provide a living and
possibly a working environment for those people who are looking
for something that has a definite urban flavor which uniquely
belongs to Tampa.
Policy A-7.1 underneath this section states, redevelopment
opportunities and incentives shall be maximized by encouraging
an appropriate mix of land uses in the mixed use categories
where appropriate.
Policy A-7.6, development will adhere to any city adopted
historic district guidelines where applicable.
New commercial development and major renovations shall provide
sidewalks in areas where it is practical and feasible for
pedestrian oriented activities.
Intent is to encourage pedestrian activity and reduce overall
dependence on the automobile.
In this situation, when we look at traffic, we're talking about

three different types of traffic.
The automobile, the pedestrian and the bicyclist which are all
prevalent in this area and all significant in this area.
And I think something that has been tried to be addressed by all
entities involved, all interested entities.
Finally, additional staff comments regarding this report.
This location is at the core of three Neighborhood Associations
that represent the area.
Old Seminole Heights, southeast Seminole Heights, and South
Seminole Heights.
Each proposed development in an urban village offers different
opportunities to the area and must be viewed on a case-by-case
basis, based on location, transportation connections and
potential impacts to residential uses.
This site has been underutilized as Ms. Coyle has said for many
years and fronts a major arterial road and is immediately
adjacent to the interstate.
To complement this gateway, the site must accommodate as many
historic design principles as possible and be constructed in a
manner that properly reflects the character of the area and has
a site that is functional and also provides safety to
pedestrians.
The site must also be developed in a manner to ensure pedestrian
safety which includes proper orientation of the structure.
It would be nice to see the structure in a less suburban type of

design, but if we're looking at functionality and safety also
that also -- are also important things to take into
consideration.
Planning Commission in weighing all the objectives in addition,
not even talking about the potential stimulus for economic
development in the area along this corridor, we find the
proposed request consistent with the comprehensive plan and do
not object to the proposed rezoning request.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>MARY ALVAREZ: Failed to read that this area along Hillsborough
Avenue is developed with commercial uses.
The proposed request is compatible with and is internally
integrated with the adjacent commercial uses.
>> Thank you, Ms. Alvarez.
>>GWEN MILLER: No problem.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I had a question for you, Mr. Garcia.
When you wrote that this was relevant to policy A-76,
development will adhere to any city adopted historic district
guidelines where applicable.
Huh gotten the response from the A.R.C. yet?
>> No.
I saw A.R.C. the first time and yes, I took that into
consideration.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Given the things you cited, I swear you could

have written that you approved or didn't approve.
Because you cited arguments on both sides.
This is the most gray -- I mean, you could be playing this
either way.
It really -- it really doesn't feel to me like you were taking a
stand.
>> But now this is the rub.
Because I'm going to add an additional comment.
All right.
And the additional comment is this.
I have labored for the last three years in the Seminole Heights
community with both residents and commercial property owners.
In developing a potential to bring a rift that's occurred in the
last three years in this area, three to five years.
There were several of you that were on Council when we went
through the Walgreen's debacle.
We had a great rift created between the residents and the
commercial interests in the area.
We also had the save-a-lot a very contentious rezoning along
Hillsborough Avenue.
What happened as a result of that was a terrible divide between
the commercial interests and the residential interest in the
area.
And I would say a perception had been created and a huge
mistrust among all these people in this area which is sad

because when you look at Seminole Heights you have three
Neighborhood Associations but it is Seminole Heights in its
entirety.
The greater Seminole Heights community.
In making the comments and coming -- the policies as it pertains
to the historic guidelines in how you should apply them, the
bottom line will be to you, but in stating policy A-7.1, what
I'm trying to say is you have those last phrases in A-7.1 where
it says "where appropriate."
So that's a judgment call there.
A-7.6, "Where applicable."
It's very difficult when you've got "where applicable."
So it's basically a call that has to be determined based on a
case by case in these situations where you have things along
this line.
On that separate note I had to add what I've gone through in the
last three to four years with both commercial interests in the
area and residential interests in the area and what I find
fascinating is you have at my count by looking through the
lobby, you have two Neighborhood Association presidents here
that I think are going to be supporting a commercial use, which
is unprecedented in the Seminole Heights area.
So I think --
[ LAUGHTER ]
I'm serious when I say that.

Because what you're seeing here, you may also see a much greater
thing.
You may be seeing the potential for some ties here between the
residential component and the commercial component that have had
some genuine mistrust of what could potentially benefit their
area overall and this could be something significant for them in
that respect.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>GWEN MILLER: After hearing that, I would like to take a poll.
How many members in here are against it?
How many neighbors oppose it?
Just one.
Two.
So that way we don't have to listen to 200 people.
All the rest of you want it.
If you are opposing it, you need to stand and raise your right
hand.
Those two opposing it --
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I really object to this.
It's not supposed to be a popularity poll.
It's supposed to be looking at the --
>>GWEN MILLER: It's not popularity.
Do you want to listen to everyone in the audience?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Give each side ten minutes.

>>MARTIN SHELBY: May I recommend that petitioner be given his
allotted time to the extent that the petitioner wants to make
the presentation and then Council can go from there.
But to have the petitioner to have the opportunity to be heard.
Has he been sworn?
>>GWEN MILLER: Those who are going to speak that are in
opposition and those please raise your right hand.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: For the sake of clarity, Madam Chair, anybody
at this point in time who wishes or intends to want to speak,
this would be the appropriate time to be sworn.
>>GWEN MILLER: Raise your right hand.
(Oath administered by the clerk)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Again, for those who weren't here, when you get
up to speak, please reaffirm the fact that you have been sworn
for the record.
Thank you.
>> Good evening, Council members.
Jim Shimberg junior with the law firm of Holland and Knight, 100
North Tampa Street.
I have been sworn.
I have members of our project team here and we had a long
presentation.
But in the interest of time, I will try to cut to the chase.
Lay out the issues for Council, and then you guys can do as you
wish.

We would love to come up here and say that everybody including
A.R.C. and the city staff and all these residents are in
agreement and there would be no reason for anybody to speak.
We wish we could say that.
A lot of these people have sat through I think five hours total
of A.R.C. hearings.
We have a client representative who is the developer and the
Starbucks representative who have really tried to go the extra
mile to accommodate everybody to take a site that has been
underutilized for a number of years, that's owned by a
multibillion dollar corporation that really doesn't care if it
sits vacant forever, but they are happy to sell it right now.
If the deal falls through, then they'll hold it for however
long.
But unfortunately, because of some of the Starbucks
requirements, everything didn't work out to be perfect.
Now, they've tried to accommodate the historic district to the
extent they can.
A.R.C. will have a lot of input on what the building actually
ultimately looks like.
The real issue here is the placement of it.
Unfortunately, we're not able to move it in the location that
A.R.C. wants us to.
Closer to Central Avenue because the drive through will not work
in that situation.

Unfortunately, there are some timing constraints on the
contract, the multibillion dollar corporation has said they are
not interested in extending.
Unfortunately, I never like to come to Council in sort of here's
the deal, we need your support situation because I know you guys
don't like that and I never like to do that.
Unfortunately, this situation is one that's probably close to
that as we ever like to come to.
And like I said, the real estate representative from Starbucks
is here.
We can walk through the five or six different iterations of the
site plan where we've tried to accommodate everybody and we are
where we are.
We asked for your support.
We believe that we're going to revitalize a small area that's
been dormant for a long time.
We have the support of the community.
It will be something that's positive.
It won't totally adhere to every one of your historic guidelines
in that area.
But we could wait for that to happen and it might not happen for
a while and it will not happen with this deal, unfortunately.
We can answer any specific questions on that.
I don't know how you want to handle the people.
But that's the position.

And Ms. Pearson is happy to go through the site plans.
Mr. Diaz is happy to go through any of the specific conditions
or concerns about the layout if you would like to ask questions
about that.
That's basically all I have at this point.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a basic question.
I have to admit I'm a huge fan of star buck.
I think I've been to every location in town.
But the two that stand out in my mind, one is a real urban
Starbucks, it meets the design guidelines on Howard Avenue.
It doesn't have a drive-thru and it is always, always, always
packed.
Another one is on Westshore.
It does have a drive-thru.
It's a very suburban model and it doesn't frankly appear to be
as busy as the Howard one.
My question is, you obviously have suburban models and urban
models that meet design guidelines.
They all appear to be successful although, frankly, the urban
one appears more successful.
Is this like one you have marked suburban and not urban and
that's why you won't consider doing it without a drive-thru.
Is that the deal?
>> Linda Pearson.
1200 West Platt.

I have been sworn.
We began just to give you a brief history and I'll summarize
five pages into one maybe.
We began -- bill, if you could hand me that site plan --
initially with the neighborhood last November.
We met with staff last June initially on this project.
Starbucks has been interested in the site and particularly with
the Seminole Heights neighborhood and wanting to become a part
of that neighborhood for a long time.
Initially, the site plan included the one that Mr. Charles Moses
is holding up which is urban in design and typical what
Starbucks builds everywhere else.
We met in November with the Board of Directors.
We met in January with the general membership, and we were quite
frankly told no, that is not what we like.
We do not want you to look urban.
We want you to go back to the drawing board.
And come back with something more historic.
So we have come back with something more historic.
What is driving this site plan is the floor plan.
This is the 1800-square-foot stand-alone prototype which is a
new design for Starbucks.
They have typically been located in strip centers as well as
shopping centers.
And this is a design that provides much more seating indoors as

well as in the outdoor area here as well as if could I get that
site plan there.
At the northwest corner of the site along Central Avenue.
They said we want you to incorporate some of the historic design
as well.
We are using the brick wall with the White mortar caps along
Hillsborough Avenue to incorporate that red brick into the
building's design.
We're also using the piering lighting that is along Hillsborough
Avenue for the outdoor lighting at the request of the
Neighborhood Association.
They have asked that the store be lighted 24/7 to eliminate the
potential for loitering after hours when the store closes at
10:00 during the week, midnight on weekends.
We have been trying to be very responsive and particularly some
of the comments made to me after our general membership meeting
was we don't like those awnings.
Those are not period.
We would like you to lower them.
We would like to have them anchored into the frontage.
We would like the Mediterranean revival, the tile roof.
Some might call it a mission style roof here.
But we took a lot of their input and changed the site plan.
Originally, the dumpster location was going to be at the
northwest corner of the site.

So we relocated it to the northeast corner of this site which
means that we moved it farther away from the neighbors, but it
requires another waiver for landscaping along this area and
adjacent to the unimproved alley.
We agreed to put a neighborhood identification sign at the
intersection.
This is a gateway for Seminole Heights, and it will be designed
in the red brick of the wall along Hillsborough Avenue.
They would like something that would identify not Starbucks, but
Seminole Heights as an entrance to that community, like you are
here, you have arrived.
This community has been tremendous to work with.
They have been a tremendous joy.
Had we been able to agree on every single thing?
No.
But I think the majority of the residents in that area realize
that Starbucks wants to become a part of their community.
They want Starbucks, but when Starbucks made an agreement to
come here at this location, there were two things that they
required.
One was a drive-thru operation, which we have been able to
accommodate them with twice as much queueing area as required by
City Code with additional potential there with the bypass lane
that is required by Starbucks.
And number two, they required interstate signage which we plan

to put.
Not a billboard.
Not a changing revolving sign face.
It will be a lighted Starbucks logo that merely has two words.
Drive through.
And Starbucks.
But residents and motorists will recognize that logo.
And we have through Mr. Chommers and discussion and review of
the Seminole Heights guidelines, the signage along the ground
sign that we propose along Hillsborough Avenue as well as the
logo on the front of the store and the end of the store will be
within guidelines.
As a matter of fact, we're proposing less area than is even
permitted.
Signed letters in the code, under the Seminole Heights
guidelines require 10-inch letters max.
Ours will be less than that.
They require 18 or 25-foot sign height.
We've agreed to an 18 for the signage there.
We will require some drive through signage which is not listed
in the guidelines because in the historic period, there were no
drive throughs.
This is an interstate interchange.
There were no interstate highways until president Eisenhower
created the act in 1955.

It was post-period.
This whole interstate interchange is nothing -- there's nothing
contributing from a historic period anywhere at the commercial
portion.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You're on page 3.
>> I'm sorry.
I'm southern, I talk a lot.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ask you a couple of questions at that --
questions that cut to the chase and follow on to Ms. Saul-Sena's
question.
The orientation issue I think is -- seemed to be extremely
important to the A.R.C.
And I know this Council always wants to try and respect as I'm
sure you do, the A.R.C.'s position.
So speaking of position, tell me very quickly, either --
whichever one of you want to do it in less than 30 seconds, why
the building couldn't be turned side ways and face central or be
slid down and be closer to Hillsborough.
>> The drive through and the queue area is dysfunctional.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I heard you say it.
I don't understand why.
>> We can show you.
We have five renditions that we went through which evolved into
this.
And we've taken those renditions and put the points on there of

what the A.R.C. wanted and why it won't work.
And we can very quickly just share them with you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other question while they are doing that,
Jim Shimberg, you mentioned a contract deadline.
What is your contract deadline?
>> It's got to close by April 29th.
>> I'm Bill CHOMERS.
I'm been sworn. Owner of Pursuit Company, DBA of Landmark
Investments.
We are a contract purchaser of the property.
We redevelop stations, former Mobil Oil stations into Starbucks
and other retailers.
And this specific circumstance, it's a contingent contract that,
of course, we weren't going to go ahead and invest that money in
the community if we didn't have the community support, not only
staff but of course Council's.
And that's the agreement under which mobile was willing to sell
the property to us.
>> Good evening, Council members.
Richard Diaz.
I have been sworn in.
We indeed studied six different concepts in various shapes and
sizes and forms.
Basically in response to the A.R.C.'s suggestions for orienting
the site differently on the property.

On the elmo, I have the very first analysis.
This concept orients the building indeed facing Central Avenue.
Outdoor seating is within close proximity of Hillsborough.
The drive through length is difficult.
We do meet the length requirement, but we have far less queueing
capacity on this site.
We have no bypass lane, for example, to get out of the queue.
And particularly the customers, the parked customers have to
walk all the way around the building, across the drive through
to get to the front door.
This is a prototype building so we're sticking with this
essential shape and size of the building.
But we rejected this because we didn't think it would be
attractive for outdoor seating to be in such close proximity of
Hillsborough Avenue.
That doesn't make for a pleasant environment.
Ms. Saul-Sena, you suggested the Howard Avenue store.
That is -- that's a great location.
Does not have a drive-thru.
It's on a two lane highway and it's situated in an elevated
fashion above the roadway.
That's appropriate for that context.
To incorporate a drive-thru here we need to be able to concern
ourselves with circulation, traffic management on site and
off-site and this particular case simply did not work.

There are five others.
Do you want us to go through all five?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Whichever ones are pertinent.
>> Well, this is another option for seating within close
proximity of the roadway.
Hillsborough Avenue is seven lanes.
It's divided.
It's not Howard Avenue.
It's not historic, quiet roadway.
It's a busy major arterial roadway.
Parking is totally in the rear in this concept.
As you can see, the queueing is awkward.
The order window is awkward.
The parking is on the North side.
Parking as well as handicap patrons would have to stroll all the
way across the drive through to get to the front door.
The front door is fixed.
There's a side door for deliveries.
But for security purposes, the interior of this building is
fixed so we can't -- we don't have the liberty to change the
front door for convenience of access.
Again, the outdoor seating is within close proximity to
Hillsborough Avenue.
We don't think because of the fumes, the noise and the volume of
traffic that that is any kind of a desirable element that we

would like to have here.
This was rejected likewise by Starbucks.
The other concepts are very similar.
We've tried to accomplish parking in the rear.
Some of these concepts work.
Some do indeed work.
Either you have to order at the order window from the passenger
side or you receive your coffee from the passenger side.
And we think that's very dysfunctional.
That's not going to work for a coffee retail.
This final site plan is the one that you have before you.
We have situated the building in line with the housing on
Central Avenue.
We have parking in front of the store where it's conveniently
located and access to the front door.
The drive through queue circulates around the building for added
queue capacity.
We have a bypass lane so that customers who change their mind
can get out of the line and leave.
Or delivery vehicles can come to the site during working hours
and they can accommodate their deliveries without disrupting
either the drive through traffic or the parked traffic.
So we believe this is the optimal layout.
It accomplishes safety concerns for eliminating the traffic
congestion.

The driveways are separated from the intersection and this,
indeed, was approved by Starbucks as an operating concept that
they are comfortable with at this location.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thanks.
And just for the record, unlike Ms. Saul-Sena, I don't go to
Starbucks.
[ LAUGHTER ]

>>GWEN MILLER: We're going to go to the audience portion.
Those who are opposed, we'll listen to you first.
Anyone opposing this petition may come and speak now.
>>KEVIN WHITE: After this is over, we have free samples of
Starbucks downstairs.
[ LAUGHTER ]

>> Good evening, Bruce Gibson, 1227 East Henry Avenue, Tampa.
I have been sworn in.
Thank you for this opportunity.
Well, I'm probably going to be a little outnumbered tonight.
I'm going to flatter myself and hope that me and Steve are going
to be the voices of reason tonight in the face of overwhelming
numbers.
In principle, I do support this project also.
Of course, it is absolutely great that we have the opportunity
for new commercial development in the historic district where we

have comprehensive design review.
That's a great opportunity for the neighborhood.
However, this application is not about permission for a popular
brand name of coffee.
This is about a commercial site development process.
Unfortunately, I think that the site plan offered tonight is the
wrong site plan.
And I say this not because I want to kill the project but to ask
that the project, get the kind of oversight for the appropriate
development that belongs in historic district.
And that is so our community can get the best that's possible
out of this situation.
I'm going to deviate just a little bit.
When I was in architecture school, we had a visiting chair,
Robert Campbell who won a Pulitzer prize for architectural
criticism a few years ago.
And when he was speaking with thesis students, he advised us
when you're ready to present your final solution to the problem,
what you have to do, you have to go back through all of your
process and design it also so that the conclusion is foregone so
you get to the end and it was inevitable.
That's what you should try to convince your audience.
Saying that, I'm going to ask that perhaps we all just have a
little bit of skepticism tonight.
Also when we're told there's only one solution to a problem.

I'm going to try and summarize my objections in three general
points, provided I have time.
And my first point really is that communities must require
better in order to get better.
I'm just going to put this on the elmo.
I'm not going to really speak about it.
But here's a book about design guidelines, working across the
country for national chain business enterprises.
After protection of the actual historic fabric itself of a
historic district, the purpose of historic district design
guidelines is for improving the quality of new development, not
just in the building, but in the total way that that development
takes place in its planning and how it fits into the community.
The historic district and its design guidelines have had an
improving effect already, especially on new residential
construction in Seminole Heights and hopefully it will do the
same for commercial development also.
This project is going to set a precedent for future commercial
development.
There are adjacent parcels here that are also commercially
zoned.
And so they have the potential also to change over time.
So with that, I'm just going to say that what we've gotten
instead of the quality that I'm asking for is a very
conventional suburban style development with the building in the

middle of a racetrack essentially, beautiful to a car, but I
don't think for a historic district.
My second point has to do with the A.R.C.
>>GWEN MILLER: Time is up.
Next.
>> I'm Steve rice from 4118 Central Avenue.
What you have been handed is a package you received that letter
this morning by e-mail and then some other information that I'll
go through.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, have you been sworn?
>> Yes.
Here's an alternate site plan which is the one that the A.R.C.
was advocating, which is to bring the face of the building up to
Central Avenue.
And put the parking in the rear.
This is showing a drive-thru in the back.
It probably isn't optimal for what Starbucks wants but it's
workable and it begins to meet the design guidelines.
Also it puts a great pedestrian feature on Central Avenue.
Great tree line street with a patio.
It connects directly with our neighborhood.
You don't have to walk across the racetrack to get to it from
the center island.
Also, some Burgett Brother photos of historic siting.
I won't bother to go through them.

What I'll move on to is exactly what Ms. Saul-Sena was talking
about.
This happens to be a Starbucks out on Fletcher Avenue by hidden
river corporate park.
It's exactly the site plan that's being suggested here.
There is the row of parking along Fletcher Avenue.
There's the poor little patio sitting in a sea of asphalt with
absolutely no shade.
This is the antithesis of Seminole Heights.
And this happens to be an urban design one.
This is in St. Pete on 4th street North.
It's brought up to the street wall.
It's adjacent to all the other commercial buildings.
It becomes a walkable commercial core which again is what
Seminole Heights is about.
It's not about that suburban design.
What our recommendation is, we would like Council to suggest to
the applicant that they return to the A.R.C.
We believe that's the body that should be working on this.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Sir, the picture there on Fletcher Avenue,
what's the size of that property in comparison to Hillsborough
Avenue?
>> I don't know.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well --
>> It's similar.

It's a already is size store.
Maybe the Starbucks rep can talk about it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: This property that Starbucks wants to be put on
is not a big site.
It's trying to make a comparison to the Fletcher Avenue that
you're talking about.
And I mean, I can't tell --
>> I'm using --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I know Fletcher Avenue, it's an arterial.
It's a big ol' highway too.
But it's just without a comparison, I can't tell.
>> What I'm trying to point out, it's suburban versus urban
design and it just doesn't belong in Seminole Heights.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
Thank you.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to put your rendering of what you
thought it should be back up there.
After listening to the petitioner, what I see as a problem with
this drawing, not saying that can't be modified even more.
Your main entrance is coming off of Hillsborough and going
directly into the drive through.
That leaves no stacking lane at all.
Once you get ten cars in that --
>> There could be a bypass lane.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I'm sure there could be but the bypass would go

around the parking and then they have to go around central, come
around Hillsborough and come back and make a new loop to come
back in.
In theory, some of your people would be hanging out --
>> It may not be 100% what Starbucks wants.
It begins to be a compromises and also works for the
neighborhood.
>>KEVIN WHITE: That was the only question I had.
I want to take this opportunity to make a comment, Madam Chair,
if I can.
I got your e-mail, and I didn't know if you all were going to be
here, but I was going to read that into the record as a couple
of others, very short, Madam Chair.
Have asked to be read to the record.
But since you and the gentleman here before you were able to
speak on your own, that won't be necessary for those -- for that
one.
Real briefly, this is a letter from the old Seminole Heights
Neighborhood Association to Randy, president of the old Seminole
Heights Neighborhood Association from southeast Seminole Heights
Civic Association.
It is with unanimous board approval that southeast Seminole
Heights Civic Association stands in support of construction of
the new Starbucks coffeehouse in the northeast corner of
Hillsborough and Central Avenue.

We believe in addition this type of business will be an asset to
the greater Seminole Heights area for the following reasons.
It is a neighborhood-oriented type of business; two, it will
serve the needs of the community that is not currently being
offered by other businesses; three, it will serve as a positive
indicator for other neighborhood-oriented -- that the greater
Seminole Heights community is a viable area for future and
successful development respectfully submitted Beverly A. Morrow,
president.
The second one I will paraphrase from Robin MULLIS of 101 West
Lambright.
Our neighborhood is literally -- I'll paraphrase a few because
she got explicit.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Our neighborhood is literally overrun with falling down,
explicit motels.
Sleazy car dealers and I take exception to that one.
[ LAUGHTER ]
And abandoned buildings.
Finally at long last, reputable businesses want to build here,
please do not run them off.
Starbucks should be open with open arms.
Whatever they build will be a vast improvement over the
abandoned corner we have here.
Just in brief summary and I'll be done with my comments for this

particular petition.
I am not only a resident of Seminole Heights, I am not a huge,
huge, huge fan of Starbucks, although my wife is.
[ LAUGHTER ]
That's very important, Ms. Alvarez.
[ LAUGHTER ]
But that won't affect me in my decision on this particular
petition.
I think the people in this audience speak volumes tonight
because the old Seminole Heights Civic Association as well as
the southeast Seminole Heights Civic Association as well as
South Tampa Civic Associations are very, very protective of
their neighborhoods.
They don't -- South Tampa they don't want trees cut down.
And Seminole Heights, code enforcement and conformity to the
neighborhood and the character of the neighborhood is paramount
in southeast Seminole Heights and old Seminole Heights.
But to have something come in that does not meet the character
of the neighborhood and have both organizations come out in
droves to say they support this speaks volumes for these two
neighborhoods.
And it is an awful ugly site that needs to be developed.
If we have contract deadlines, that if we send this back to the
A.R.C. and this does not get approved by the 24th, well, maybe
something will come in next year, the year after, ten years

after.
But why not let's move forward with something that the great
majority wants.
They want now.
This is something the community will support, and embrace and
everyone will be happy and this is a win-win situation.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>GWEN MILLER: On that note, those who are supporting the
Starbucks, don't have the need -- don't feel the need you have
to speak.
But show your support by raising your hand that would tell us a
big thing.
If you need to speak, you can speak.
But if you don't have a real need to speak, we see your support.
If you're going to speak for it, please, let's don't repeat
ourselves.
If you have something new to say, say it.
Let's don't get up and repeat and everybody say I want a
Starbucks.
Let's give something new.
Let's go.
>> Madam Chair accept the speaker waiver form.
>>GWEN MILLER: That's it.
Just one?

You don't even need to speak three minutes.
You don't have to speak three minutes.
You can tell us real short.
We'll appreciate it.
>> Bill Duval.
I'll do it in three.
Bill Duval, 5408 branch Avenue, yes, I've been sworn in.
I really want to address Ms. Saul-Sena's concerns.
I'm probably the only one in this room who was on the design
guideline committee.
And I can tell you that the word commercial never came up and
that's why the guidelines are so vague and so weak on commercial
development.
The word commercial appears three times in the guidelines, and
drive through is not mentioned at all.
This is over ten years ago.
The only drive through we knew of is McDonald's and Burger
King and we never expected McDonald's and Burger King to come
to Seminole Heights.
So there was no discussion.
The only reason this site and the others on the East side of
Florida Avenue are in there is because of some -- I'll call it a
scrivener's error.
When the map came back, we found that it embraced this site and
the three adjacent sites and East of Florida Avenue.

It's like what do we do now?
Okay.
Well, we perhaps should have taken some action.
We didn't.
That's why the guidelines are weak on commercial.
This site -- the other important thing I think is -- unique to
the site which has been pointed out.
The other three sites are vehicular driven.
Lee Roy's four by four, you don't walk there.
Richard's auto service, without a car, what would you do there
but get a coke.
Go to the gas station, maybe get a beer, but you got to probably
show up in a car.
A drive-thru is very appropriate and compatible with this site
that is adjacent as has been pointed out to a six-lane highway.
It's not Davis Island, West Davis Boulevard.
It's not safety harbor Main Street.
If it were at the garden center, we would not be in favor of a
drive-thru.
And certainly not in favor of a McDonald's.
And it would be totally pedestrian friendly.
We feel that this site in order to be developed has to have
something with these qualifications and in the passage of ten
years, drive throughs, who thought drive through pharmacy?
Ms. Ferlita doesn't have a drive-thru pharmacy.

Maybe you should consider that?
>>ROSE FERLITA: I don't want to compete with Starbucks.
>> And to piggyback on what Tony Garcia said, it is unusual to
have so much agreement in here.
Tonight is the current president, I'm the past president,
Beverly you just heard of and as a special guest star, we have
the president of the Seminole Heights business alliance on our
side, Mr. Jeff craft.
Is he still here?
Did he go home?
He's still back there!
Unprecedented!
I'll sit down.
>> Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> Good evening.
My name is Victoria Valdez.
I own a home at 5117 Central Avenue and I have been sworn in.
First, I'd like to remind the Council that Seminole Heights is a
historic neighborhood, but not a museum neighborhood, only meant
to be enjoyed and viewed by passersby on weekends.
We are a living breathing, working neighborhood.
We need businesses in our neighborhood that will support the
economic growth of our neighborhood.

And especially a business like Starbucks that I consider to be
in keeping with our front porch community style of neighborhood
that we have.
Where people can meet other friends.
They can walk their dogs.
They can sit and have a cup of coffee and enjoy Seminole Heights
just like we do from our front porches.
Lastly, my last comment regarding A.R.C. is, it's easier to
elect a Pope than get things through the A.R.C.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> My name is Allen Thomas.
I live at 5210 North branch, two blocks away from the proposed
site.
1982 I moved to 5306 North Central Avenue where I live for 21
years.
Right across from the Amoco looking across the street to the
location.
And I would like to applaud the A.R.C. for trying to lock things
down and maintain our historic district.
They've done a great job, and they are to be applauded.
With this particular situation, if there are two poles there
that they want to put a sign up on, they are not putting new
poles, can I grandfather the poles in?
Let them have their sign for the interstate.

And as far as it looks like they are trying to serve the
community.
They are making concessions.
As far as serving the community, I guess why didn't F.D.O.T.
think of that when they widened Hillsborough which cut us North
and South.
So, I mean, there's a whole lot of people that come right
through that don't give a hoot about us.
But yet Starbucks could serve them as well as serve us and I
think that's what they are trying to take into consideration.
I think if you would take -- this is my personal opinion, but if
you would take that into consideration, I would be much obliged.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
Have you been sworn?
>> Yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just out of curiosity, if this was a Burger
King or Wendy's or checkers, would you be in support of it?
>> That's a good question.
It's been vacant for so long, the thought hadn't occurred to me.
If you want my gut level, I think if they came in with as much
due diligence as Starbucks has and as much input from the
community and are trying to service our needs as well as their
own as a viable entity, I think, yeah, I would consider that.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm curious, I'm not going to repeat the
question, but if you all want to answer that question as you go.
>> Hi, Allen wine stock.
7504 North Ola Avenue.
I'll be very brief and to answer your question, probably as many
people support it if it was a checkers, no.
But Starbucks is a different type of business.
One, Starbucks gives back to the community.
In fact, there are students at Hillsborough High School and
memorial high school that have gotten poetry scholarships and
been able to travel paid for by Starbucks.
And, two, people will go and gather and have coffee and talk
about the neighborhood and talk about sports and weather.
People aren't necessarily going to sit outside and hang out at
checkers.
It's a little more of a community driven business.
I'll say that.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn?
>> Yes, I have.
The other thing I want to do before I leave, been a big effort
in our neighborhood, greater Seminole Heights, everyone
involved.
We've had people volunteering to put out flairs on doors to come

to -- Flyers on doors to come to the meeting.
He can success of 500 signatures on petitions of people who
couldn't make it.
Also 120 e-mails that people couldn't be here.
I would be remiss not to give those to you before I leave.
That would be it.
Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This might be the biggest response we've ever
had to a zoning hearing.
>> I think everybody knows that we're kind of a different
neighborhood.
A waiver form --
>>GWEN MILLER: No waiver form.
Just three minutes or less.
You can do less.
We appreciate less.
>> I'll try.
My name is Jeff Harmon.
1006 East Idlewild.
I have been sworn in.
Also a trustee with ocean nah and also practice as an
environmental engineer with a license in the state.
I agree in principle with what the A.R.C. is trying to do.

I think that the problem that we have that bill has kind of
touched on in the beginning is that Hillsborough really was
never -- when we came up with these guidelines, I don't think
anybody ever imagined that Hillsborough would ever be a historic
street.
And a couple of those mitigating factors that keep Hillsborough
from being like Howard where you might be able to place a
building right up on to it, you have over 60,000 cars that
travel that street a day right there in front of that corner of
central and Hillsborough.
There's been a lot of studies that have been done lately.
Something as very recent.
There is a tremendous amount of air pollution that is emitted
from cars traveling at that speed.
Those have a great impact for people that have health
complication issues.
You might not think that moving that building back 50 meters,
but it cuts down in half the air pollution.
And Tampa right now, our number one problem is car exhaust air
plugs for air quality standards.
The other problem is that if -- it's a safety factor.
If you're going to try -- if you have an area like Howard, you
have slower traffic and most of the places when you look around
at historic development like this, you find that these buildings
that abut the street are actually have a buffer of on-street

parking.
We could never have that on central or Hillsborough.
And quite frankly, this Hillsborough -- I mean, I think we
accepted long ago that it wasn't historic street.
It was over less than two years ago I think that we completed
construction of the wall that goes from central to Florida.
If you look at that wall, it serves as a buffer between the
neighborhood and Hillsborough.
I would guarantee you if you go back and see the people
supporting that law, you know, what they were saying was is
that, look, we don't want to be part of Hillsborough.
Our historic district is split by Hillsborough.
We're trying to deal with it as pest as we can.
And we're putting up this wall as kind of a beautification of a
street which unfortunately runs through our neighborhood.
And it seems like to me that what we've got here is exactly that
type of development.
We're accepting that we have a historic community right behind
it, but we also have a street that we have to deal with.
It's not going to be easy to develop there.
So I guess what I'm asking is that we support this, that you as
the City Council support this so that we can move ahead.
Our residential core has been developing really, really fast.
Our property prices have been going up and we've been seeing a
lot of develop in the residential area.

We've seen none in the commercial area.
We still got over there on Florida and Nebraska, we still have
tons of car lots, pawn shops.
This whole neighborhood, that's the reason they are here.
They are afraid that if we don't get this we're going to drop
backwards.
And I think this is a great compromises.
We have a tough street to deal with and we've got a great
neighborhood.
And what we have is a perfect, what I consider to be a perfect
opportunity to buffer that street with a business in between
that neighborhood.
Don't have anything else to say.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, thank you.
Just for the purposes of clarification for the record.
We have these petitions.
Who was it who submitted these petitions?
>> Allen wine stock.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And also, this book here?
You submitted both.
Okay.
Thank you very much.

>> Hi.
Amy stall.
6104 Swann Avenue.
I have been sworn.
I'm a lawyer by trade, but I'm here as a neighbor.
I just had a few things I want to point out.
I know you all are short on time.
What I heard them say at the beginning of this, the decision for
you all to make was S this an appropriate use of the land?
And does it fit the purpose of the guidelines?
I think everybody spoke as to whether it's an appropriate use of
the land.
I also heard them say that the purpose of the guideline is to
promote the health, prosperity and maybe I'm not quoting it
directly, the economic well-being and welfare of the people.
We all understand and I think you heard that everybody respects
the A.R.C.
This neighborhood has been very involved with the historic
guidelines.
We wanted historic community.
We've been great at enforcing them.
And there's no danger here of a slippery slope, because there
are many people watchdogging this.
It's not going to be just because we let Starbucks do it, the
next thing you know, it's checkers, McDonald's, everything

else.
To answer that question, I would just repeat what Mr. Wiseman
said, sure, there would not be as much support for it.
Again, it's a totally different type of business.
That's a fast food chain.
I'm not going to hang out at McDonald's and sit there with my
dog.
I can guarantee you if you put the Starbucks, I'd be walking up
and having a cup of coffee with my dog and sitting on my outside
patio.
That's a different animal as far as most people are concerned.
And again, if the purpose of the guidelines is the economic
well-being and growth, then it fits because that's what it is
going to be doing.
Maybe it doesn't fit every single technicality, but a wooden
application of the guidelines, that was -- that's why they are
called guidelines.
And that's why we have you guys here when the A.R.C., you know,
when they get two -- we have you guys here to listen to the
people and vote on it.
I would beg to differ, in a way it is a popularity contest.
You, the City Council represents the people and we are here in
huge numbers at 11:00 on a Thursday night.
So you heard us and hopefully you'll do what we're asking.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
>> Good evening.
David Scott banghart.
I have been sworn in.
I'm a resident of 918 East New Orleans Avenue.
Southeast Seminole Heights and that's also considered East
Tampa.
I'm here.
I support Starbucks because, one, I want my coffee.
Secondarily, also the moderator of the Hillsborough County
prostitution task force.
It's a grassroots city community effort to deal with
prostitution on Nebraska and Seminole Heights.
I find this -- and one of the issues that we've discovered in it
is that as the economy improves in the area, the prostitution
evaporates.
You can't have a historic district.
You can't have a historic house if that historic house has been
burnt down.
Economic blight will destroy any history that you have.
One of the things that I find great about Starbucks is two
things.
It's a focal point for the neighborhood.
It's a community meeting place.
But also serves a second purpose that we need in Seminole

Heights.
Through the interstate, it draws in the other members of the
community who don't go to Seminole Heights.
It will be a gateway to Seminole Heights when they go through
that drive through and then maybe they'll decide to stop and
then maybe they'll decide to go into the rest of Seminole
Heights.
For two purposes, focal point for the neighborhood for us to
enjoy ourselves and as an economic engine to bring other people
whether they are tourists or commuters, I support Seminole
Heights.
I support Starbucks too.
It's important.
A.R.C. was founded due to public clamor to protect our
neighborhoods.
But I think in this particular unique -- this unique
circumstance, you need to look at the public clamor and let us
have Starbucks.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> Hi.
Denise.
I own two houses in Seminole Heights.

My residence is 105 West Comanche.
I just bought a house at 4801 North central.
I've been a resident of Seminole Heights for 48 years.
When I was a eight years old, they took our house that was on
the interstate at New Orleans, and we moved further into
Seminole Heights on Comanche.
I live one house off of Florida Avenue.
I am right by a tire shop.
I love the guy.
He's wonderful.
When I need air, he's right there.
But looking at that tire shop going home every day it is a
complete annoyance.
I wish he was somewhere else.
Next to that, they let them tear down a historic house to move
mike's laundry further into our neighborhood.
So we listen to that noise from that laundromat which they can
put on Hillsborough Avenue without coming to you.
I listen to that noise.
I have listened to that noise since 1985.
Please don't let these guys get away.
We need someplace.
I want to walk with my son down Central Avenue.
Go visit my friend at Peggy who will watch our other house and
we can stop at Starbucks.

I can discuss paint colors with my neighbors and get to know
them.
This is something that we want there.
If it was a checkers no I would not be here.
Would you gotten my name on e-mail.
I don't want them there.
It's a great place for further done Florida Avenue.
Lee Roy's four by four is the greatest place on Earth.
When he leaves, put something we can walk.
My mom is here.
We've been in the neighborhood since 1956.
We don't want to leave the neighborhood.
I could have moved to Carrollwood or Lutz.
I like my neighborhood.
Thank you for putting the blocks on my street.
We love it.
Pay attention to the people who live there and have lived there
for a while.
We do want someplace we can walk to.
We'll be at the ribbon cutting hopefully.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn?
>> Yes, I was.
>> Hello.
Rebecca clouder.
323 West Verne street and I've been sworn in.

And six months ago, my husband and I purchased a building,
ironically enough in the historic district in Seminole Heights
on Florida Avenue.
And I stood at this spot six months ago dealing with a lot of
what they are dealing with but on a much smaller scale as a
small business owner.
And being here tonight, I think the biggest thing that people
need to realize is that being that we have a small business,
what is going to anchor small businesses?
I'm also a resident.
Something like a Starbucks.
I'll be there every weekend and it will help bring in other
businesses.
Right now, like Denise said, we have so many different car lots
and we have so many different rundown vacant places, we took a
place that was built in 1926 and took it down to the bare walls
and are making something good out of it.
The A.R.C. strongly suggested that we add a front porch so we
did that.
But this is so different.
We're on Florida Avenue and they are on Hillsborough, and young
that everything is always black and White.
And when you have that gray, you have to make a judgment call.
And with that, I really think that we need that in the
neighborhood.

As you've heard from a lot of people today.
It's going to help everybody.
And not just the residents but the business owners, too, which
is something to think about.
Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> Mark, 5603 North central about three blocks North of the
site.
Yes, I have been sworn in.
Most of my comments have already been addressed by other people
so I'll spare you the repeat.
I have two things I would like to talk about briefly.
First, I attended one of the A.R.C. meetings last month in
March, the first one.
I heard some of the negative comments this evening.
I find it interesting that even the detractors of the project,
people that have problems, people that want changes, most of
them, not all of them, but most of them say, "But I support the
concept of this business in my neighborhood."
I don't like this aspect of it, I would like to see the site
turned.
It's almost unanimous, the support for this business in our
neighborhood.
And I don't come to meetings very often, thankfully.

I can't believe you guys do -- I can't imagine that you see this
much support on such an overwhelming sale.
Ms. Saul-Sena, you made the comment earlier about the
overwhelming support that you see.
The last comment that I'll make, the last point I want to raise,
when you guys were running for this wonderful job of yours, you
all made statements like crime is bad.
Education is good.
And probably somewhere along the line, you said I support
neighborhoods.
That's all we're asking you to do tonight.
Thanks.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> I have been sworn in.
Leah Levine.
My husband and I reside at 5115 North Seminole Avenue.
Madam Chair and fellow Council members.
I'm taking this from a little bit of a different perspective and
that is this.
I recognize that the city has a goal.
The City of Tampa's goal is that every day they want to strive
to improve the quality of life for the citizens of Tampa.
There are five focus points that the city addresses and looks to
to meet this objective.

Three of them very specifically from that list of five are
addressed with the Starbucks' project.
The first is investing in neighborhoods.
What an opportunity for you to help us secure a great investment
in our neighborhood.
Not even with any of your monetary capital but simply your
intellectual capital by casting a positive vote.
We would appreciate that.
You have the opportunity to take what is currently a vacant ad
hoc sales lot selling seafood on some days, cars on other days,
and who knows what else on other days.
A lot also as a point of collection for tangible personality
that people are no longer interested in having.
It's an absolute disaster.
Here is your opportunity to make an investment in the
neighborhood.
We would appreciate it.
The second point on the list of five is the economic development
and the city's most challenged areas.
Seminole Heights historical area and specifically the business
district is very challenged.
This would be an incredible catalyst to bringing high-quality
commercial projects to this neighborhood.
Definitely in keeping with that particular focus point on your
list of five.

Thirdly, I would highlight that the objective for efficient city
government focused on customer service could be accomplished
here very quickly with a positive vote.
What I mean by that is this.
I ask you to serve your customers, us, the voting bloc of
Seminole Heights with an approval of this petition as it stands
and the project to go forward as it has been laid out.
Thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> My name is Jeff craften.
I'm a certified public accountant.
I own -- certified public accountants on Nebraska Avenue.
Commercial property owner across the street from Publix.
I've been sworn in.
And I am the president of Seminole Heights business association.
I'm a CPA and tomorrow is a big day for me.
[ LAUGHTER ]

>>GWEN MILLER: You need to be home working.
>> I am honored to be here with my residential friends.
[ APPLAUSE ]
And what Tony Garcia describes as a truly historic event.
You have residential folks and business folks working together.
I'm honored to be working with the residential folks.

I'm just a bean counter.
And bean counters are boring and bean counters really need to be
brief and I'll be brief.
But I'm a pretty good bean counter, and one of the things that
I've done is just look at the economic impact.
We have a piece of property that pretty much is an economically
stagnant.
I know it pays some real estate taxes.
According to my calculations, intangible taxes paid.
Tangible taxes paid.
City licenses paid.
Increased real estate taxes paid.
At a minimum, I think there's an extra six to ten thousand
dollars a year in revenues coming into various governments and
what have you.
And over, of course, the next ten years that could be 60 to 100
thousand in new revenues coming into the city governments and
what have you.
I'm doing what bean counters do, just count beans.
>> Coffee beans.
>> Coffee beans.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Which leads me to my final statement for the evening.
Nothing could make this bean counter happier.
Than to sit at a Starbucks sniff that wonderful aroma of all

those coffee beans and think, they need to be counted.
[ LAUGHTER ]

[ APPLAUSE ]

>> Good evening, Council.
Randy Baron.
I have been sworn.
I live at 217 West Comanche Avenue.
I am the president of the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood
Association.
I have to tell you, I am just proud to represent a neighborhood
that can turn out this kind of support, support of something
that they so vastly and dearly want to have and need to have in
this neighborhood.
Just for the record, the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood
Association, the board has voted in favor of this project,
surprise.
We do have economic blight along Florida Avenue in the historic
district in the commercial area of the historic district.
Frankly, if you were to take that commercial district and make
and see how many contributing structures you have to make a
district on its own, it would fail miserably.
We have car lots, auto repair stores, and this is just in the
historic district.

I don't think that the purpose of the guidelines is to re-create
fabric that is gone.
It is -- once we've determined that the commercial area is in
the district, I think we should use that as an opportunity to
attract businesses and make sure that they are compatible with
building design, that there is something that when people enter
Seminole Heights, they can look at that building and say that's
different.
That's not the Starbucks that I see in the parking lot over at
Anderson at the movie theater.
This is something that's reflective of the neighborhood.
This developer has worked with us very closely to try and create
a building that is distinguished from other kinds of buildings
and it will fit in as a transition area from this six-lane major
highway and the offer.
Let's not forget the off-ramp that's right there.
And will transition into our neighborhood.
It will bring vastly improved economic development.
Anything is better than 25 car lots between Hillsborough Avenue
and the river.
I counted them.
25 car lots, two restaurants.
That's what we deal with.
This is what we live with on a daily basis.
We go up Florida Avenue and we turn next to the auto repair

store A gateway into Seminole Heights.
We turn into the used appliance store, the gateway into Seminole
Heights.
Everything is a gateway into Seminole Heights.
It's a grid pattern.
Of course it's all gateway.
What we have is a developer who is willing to invest their
capital and take this blighted lot and turn it into something
this neighborhood can be proud of that will serve as a -- focus
of a meeting point.
I think that made sense.
A place where we can just gather, a place we can walk to.
A place to hook our dogs to and let them drink the water from
the water spigot.
Putting bike racks, we can bike there and get there from the
Central Avenue site.
God knows we're not going to do it from the Hillsborough Avenue
site.
That is too dangerous.
You put that building up to the front.
This particular site, it is just inappropriate.
So I urge Council to look at this support including Jeff craft
and the business alliance because this is a historic day when
they get together.
And understand that we are thirsting, no pun intended but we are

thirsting for this development and I urge you to vote in favor.
Thank you very much.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>KEVIN WHITE: I move to close the public hearing.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: I would like to say to each and every one of you,
I would like to say thank you.
You were very understanding.
You were patient.
You were just wonderful.
We have never had so many neighbors to come out on a support of
a project that you have done tonight.
We want to continue to say to you, stay together, work hard like
you've been doing, come back again and be understanding and we
are really honored to have you here.
I would like to say for my part, I say things to make you laugh
and clap so that we can send the day on fast and it did.
And you understood that and I appreciate that.
I would like to say really thank you, thank you, thank you for
all that you all are doing.
I will turn it over to Ms. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I don't know if we voted --
>>GWEN MILLER: We closed.
All in favor of the motion, aye.

[ MOTION CARRIED ]
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you very much.
And please indulge some of my comments as well.
I have not said anything yet so in advance of saying something
because I feel very strongly about this, I would like to put
something on the record for purposes of clarification.
-- if anybody thinks there's any inappropriate communication, I
want to put this on the record.
The business abutting this particular site is owned by ginger
and Allen Morgan.
Ginger snips.
And I am a customer of theirs.
And we have both been very respectful of the process.
She has certainly not communicated with me.
But it was important because of the relationship that I that on
the record.
That being said, some of these comments have been said already
and I don't mean to overshadow either of my colleagues and your
representatives, some areas, Kevin and some areas Mary.
But I have a very deep, strong, rich historical relationship
with this neighborhood, as many of you all know.
I've been in that business N that area as a pharmacist since
1967.
Both in the arena of a corporate Eckerd drugs and for the last
20 years as a small independent pharmacy.

Tony Garcia said what has stuck with me throughout the whole
night while everyone was saying different things and expressing
their own opinions.
When he said it was unprecedented that all three Seminole
Heights areas got together, he's absolutely right.
I can attest to that.
Many times the interstate was the line of demarcation between
southeast Seminole Heights and old Seminole Heights.
I never could understand why one portion of that community that
has so much to offer would stay away from the other instead of
uniting.
And now all of a sudden, it's an area that is incredible.
You've got South Seminole Heights, southeast Seminole Heights,
old Seminole Heights.
I have seen that community come together, be stronger than any
of the Civic Associations that I've seen throughout the city.
I'm particularly passionate about that area, but I am a citywide
representative.
When Tony said that this is what everybody has been trying to
work towards, he's absolutely right on target.
Some of his comments here that Ms. Saul-Sena talked about, this
location in particular is actually at the core of three
neighborhood associations that represent the area.
Old Seminole Heights, southeast Seminole Heights.
South Seminole Heights.

Each proposed development in an urban village offers different
opportunities to the area and must be viewed -- and I think this
is the key -- on a case-by-case basis based on location,
transportation connections, potential impacts to residential
uses.
The site has been underutilized for so many years and fronts a
major arterial road and is immediately adjacent to the
interstate.
To complement this gateway the site must accommodate as many
historic design principles and be constructed in a manner that
proper reflects the character of the area.
The site must also be developed in a manner to ensure pedestrian
safety which includes proper orientation of the structure.
And that particular question about pedestrian safety I think was
well explained when Mr. Diaz went through the different
configurations that he did in order to show that the safety or
the lack thereof was the reason that they could not go to any of
those other configurations that he walked us through.
In terms of Bruce Gibson, he is also a big player in our
community.
And I respect his architectural talent.
And Bruce, I understand your concerns, but, you know, in the
very recent past, in the last two weeks or three weeks, I have
appreciated what A.R.C. has said and the position they've taken
and I've supported it on this council, only to be followed the

next week by looking at a position that A.R.C. stated and I
oppose it.
So we have to look at guidelines, but sometimes there are
exceptions and we go back to the case by case that we talked
about versus your concerns about precedent.
So in closing, when you said -- and this should be my closing as
well as yours and we go forward from here, communities must
require better to get better.
And I submit to you and to this audience that this is what
Starbucks is going to do for that community.
And that being said, I move for approval.
>> Second.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>>SHAWN HARRISON: With the possible exception I think of
councilman Dingfelder, every single one of us up here represents
some of or all of Seminole Heights.
And those of us who have been on the Council for more than a
couple of years now know that this night is truly unprecedented.
We have never seen the type of cooperation, the type of
unanimity that we have seen on this particular project.
It's really mind-boggling when you think about the history of
this particular area.
I take the petitioner at their word.
I don't think that this is a game of chicken.

I think that they have given us their absolute best and final
product here, and I think the neighborhood has embraced that.
And the danger that we would have is if we tried to send them
back to the A.R.C., they may very well say, sorry, we're going
to, you know, just pass on this one and maybe in ten years,
Starbucks will take another look.
And that would be a tremendous detriment to the neighborhood.
The bird in the hay is worth two in the bush and I think we
ought to take the opportunity to put something in here that 99
percent of the neighborhood wants and the other 1% I think will
grow to love it as well.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Tonight is extraordinary, and I have to say
that what impressed me the most is the passion of everyone in
here for the betterment of your neighborhood.
And I think that it's important to understand that those of us
who are skeptical of this proposal is not that we didn't want
Starbucks.
It's that we really want something that is superb design and
oftentimes as you've seen by the previous petitions at Council,
if you present things to a petitioner, they come up with
something even better.
I guess the franchise template is the best we're going to get in
this place.
But at least it's a Starbucks and not a checkers.
And I think that -- and I think that bill Duval's suggestion

that we look at how we can improve the commercial side of the
design guideline so that there will be more and better
commercial, I think Seminole Heights is fabulous.
You all have worked so hard.
Your homes are fabulous.
The commercial side needs work.
And I think together we can all work to improve the guidelines
and make sure that in the future that there are more exciting
petitions that everyone can embrace.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: My gut reaction and my knee-jerk response is
to try and support the A.R.C. wherever we can.
You know, we create guidelines and we -- and then we put the
A.R.C. up there as volunteers and they do a really good job.
Also, my gut reaction is not to support a business when the
business says we have a prototype and by God, we're going to
make it fit on the site and if it doesn't fit on the site then
we'll walk away.
As Jim Shimberg recognized that never sits well with any of us
and especially me.
But this is why we have public hearings.
And we are your representatives.
And because of that, in recognition that this is a very unique
location, I really, really can see with the more maps that were
presented and the fact that this is not deep into your
neighborhood, this is really just an offshoot of this exit ramp,

and that's very, very persuasive to me.
And another thing very persuasive and I don't know who said it,
but it was very well said, was that we do go out and talk a lot
about supporting neighborhoods, that we support this
neighborhood, we support that neighborhood.
And I think we really try and support neighborhoods.
And in this case, the neighborhood is speaking very loud and
clear.
And then finally, the best e-mail that I saw in this little
packet was from David banghart who really put it all in
perspective and he says: We need Starbucks because we need
coffee.
[ LAUGHTER ]
With that I'll support the motion.
[ APPLAUSE ]
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I want to chime in a little bit here, too, and
say that a lot of good comments have been made here tonight and
very appropriate and especially the one this young lady said
it's a historic district, not a museum.
I wholeheartedly concur with that.
And design guidelines are just that.
Guidelines.
So we can tweak the guidelines to make them fit.
I don't know what is so historic about a car lot.
I just can't support that.

I mean, if we can get all those car lots out of this and put
some good businesses in there, I think we would really have a
good historic district in there.
[ APPLAUSE ]
But I'm really, really proud of how this neighborhood came
together tonight and in support of something.
It's really good.
And like Mr. Dingfelder said, it's on the outskirts.
It's not in the middle of Florida Avenue or Nebraska Avenue or
anything.
It's on Hillsborough Avenue.
It's right near a ramp.
So what better place to put a Starbucks?
And if you can't find a place to go there, please come to West
Tampa.
I could find you a place.
I want a Starbucks really bad.
So I'm really, really proud that you people came together like
this and supported something as good and viable as a Starbucks.
Thank you.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you for allowing me to read the ordinance.
Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of
502 East Hillsborough Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida, and
more particularly described in section 1, from zoning district
classifications CG to PD, restaurant with drive-in window,

providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
Opposed, nay.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Again, I would like to say thank you for coming.
Drive safe.
[ APPLAUSE ]

>> Move to receive and file all documents.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Ms. Coyle.
We have some business to take care of.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land Development.
I have an additional item for Council.
This morning, Eric -- this morning when Eric cotton from my
office brought in a wet zoning before you to be walked in, in
his haste to get here on time, he forgot one so I'm walking it
on tonight if possible.
WZ 05-78, Ybor City saloon to be set for May 19th, 2005.
>> So moved.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: That's it.
I just need to walk it on.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Who will it.
The clerk has --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to receive and file everything.
>>GWEN MILLER: No, she has something else.
>> We need to.
>>CLERK: We need to receive and file the Planning Commission
neighborhood comprehensive plan for Ballast point.
>> So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
All in favor of the motion, aye.
[ MOTION CARRIED ]
Anything else to come before Council?
We stand adjourned.