Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, October 27, 2005
5:01 p.m Session

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.


16:57:31
[Sounding gavel] 16:57:39
Tampa City Council is called to order. 17:05:55
The chair will yield to Ms. Rose Ferlita. 17:05:56
>>ROSE FERLITA: Repeat performance. 17:06:07

Rose Ferlita. 17:06:12
That still goes to the heart of how disagree and we are 17:06:13
still friends. 17:06:17
Good evening again, Madam Chairman and colleagues, 17:06:18
ladies and gentlemen. 17:06:21
Good evening as well. 17:06:21
Keeping with what we have done this month and inviting 17:06:23
the community leaders to start our invocation, tonight 17:06:26
I am very privileged to introduce yet another new face 17:06:30
to Tampa, and that's Jacqueline Landry. 17:06:33
Why don't you join me if you would? 17:06:37
Jackie comes from a city as the president of the CEO 17:06:38
academy of holy names. 17:06:42
She received her BA degree from eastern Mennonite 17:06:44
college in Harrisonburg, Virginia. 17:06:48
She then earned her masters of divinity from Wesley 17:06:53
theological seminary in Washington, D.C. 17:06:57
Before arriving in Tampa this summer she was chaplain 17:06:59
and advise or to the Catholic student association at 17:07:02
the Harvard Catholic student center. 17:07:06
She worked in ministerial capacities at the University 17:07:09
of Minnesota and Georgetown university in Washington 17:07:12
D.C. 17:07:16
Her resume is very long and impressive and I'm 17:07:16
extremely happy she brought her experience to my alma 17:07:20

mater. 17:07:22
The academy is very fortunate to have her. 17:07:23
I probably would not have been a student and been able 17:07:25
to graduate when she was there because I'm sure her 17:07:27
standards are higher than what I would subscribe to. 17:07:30
But in any case, it's my pleasure to introduce her this 17:07:33
evening. 17:07:35
I thank you, Jackie, for coming. 17:07:36
And the city welcomes you and we are just proud to have 17:07:38
you as a leader at the academy. 17:07:41
I would ask that everybody please rise as she leads us 17:07:43
in the invocation and remain standing for the pledge of 17:07:45
allegiance. 17:07:48
>>> Jacqueline Landry: Let us place ourselves in the 17:07:52
spirit of openness, for always when that comes to us, 17:07:56
we ask in all the voices that we speak and all the ears 17:08:01
that we hear, that we may be empowered to be both 17:08:03
participants, as leaders, and as community, rather than 17:08:08
timid viewers, that we exercise the authority of 17:08:12
honesty rather than to defer to power, or deceit to get 17:08:15
it, that we influence someone for justice rather than 17:08:21
impress anyone for gain, that you continually grace 17:08:24
this community and its leaders as they focus on not 17:08:28
only the most prominent of all members, but those who 17:08:32
are weakest, most vulnerable, so that building up the 17:08:36

City of Tampa, that this is a place when people leave 17:08:40
they say, this is a place of justice and fairness and 17:08:43
of great joy. 17:08:47
We ask this blessing upon all your leaders, small and 17:08:49
large, that we may continue to grow and all that is 17:08:53
true and honest, all that is fair and just. 17:08:56
We ask this to the names of all those who we call holy 17:08:59
in all traditions. 17:09:04
Amen. 17:09:06
(Pledge of Allegiance): 17:09:08
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call. 17:09:22
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here. 17:09:23
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: (No response.) 17:09:25
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here. 17:09:26
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here. 17:09:27
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here. 17:09:28
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here. 17:09:29
>>GWEN MILLER: Here. 17:09:31
We are now ready to begin our public hearing. 17:09:33
We need to open number 1. 17:09:35
>> So moved. 17:09:37
>> Second. 17:09:38
(Motion carried). 17:09:38
>>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff. 17:09:38
We have six plan amendments to the Tampa comprehensive 17:09:44

plan for your action this evening. 17:09:47
They were transmitted to the Department of Community 17:09:51
Affairs for their review in the early summer of this 17:09:52
year. 17:09:57
They are now back for your adoption or not, depending 17:09:58
on your inclination. 17:10:02
It is up to council to make that decision. 17:10:08
The Department of Community Affairs issued one 17:10:09
objection to the amendments you are going to hear this 17:10:12
evening. 17:10:15
It happens to be the last one, and it's plan amendment 17:10:16
05-08, 40th street and Bougainvillea. 17:10:19
And we will address that at that time. 17:10:23
Just a word, the state statute provides the opportunity 17:10:27
for interested citizens to receive a courtesy 17:10:29
information statement regarding the Department of 17:10:33
Community Affairs' notice of intent. 17:10:34
The notice of intent is the final action of the 17:10:38
Department of Community Affairs. 17:10:41
After these amendments proceed completely through the 17:10:43
amendment process. 17:10:45
Any citizen wishing to receive this information 17:10:47
statement from the Department of Community Affairs 17:10:49
should provide their name and address at a sign-in 17:10:52
sheet located just behind the security desk in the 17:10:56

vestibule. 17:10:59
With that I will turn over it over to Rose Petrucha. 17:11:01
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: The first amendment before you tonight 17:11:12
is plan amendment 04-14. 17:11:14
It is an amendment which was initiated by the Tampa 17:11:18
City Council, and it is an amendment to include 17:11:21
language in the future land use element to add a 17:11:25
state-wide significance as a possible criteria for 17:11:29
senior quarter designations. 17:11:34
This amendment would also add the Courtney Campbell 17:11:35
causeway to the list of possible scenic corridors 17:11:39
within the land use development. 17:11:43
The Department of Community Affairs had no objections 17:11:44
to this amendment. 17:11:46
>>GWEN MILLER: Question by council members? 17:11:47
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 17:11:48
on item number 1? 17:11:50
>> Move to close. 17:11:56
>> Second. 17:11:57
(Motion carried). 17:11:58
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair, I wanted to say in Ms. 17:11:58
Saul-Sena's absence, I know she put a lot of work into 17:12:06
this, and she deserves a lot of praise for having this 17:12:08
amendment placed in, and working on the beautification 17:12:13
of the causeways. 17:12:17

>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa 17:12:18
comprehensive plan future land use amendment by 17:12:25
identifying and designating the Courtney Campbell 17:12:27
causeway as a scenic corridor, providing for repeal of 17:12:29
all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability, 17:12:32
providing an effective date. 17:12:36
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 17:12:36
(Motion carried). 17:12:38
Open item 2. 17:12:39
>> So moved. 17:12:40
>> Second. 17:12:41
(Motion carried). 17:12:41
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff. The next 17:12:41
amendment in front of you is plan amendment 04-21. 17:12:46
This is the annual update to the capital improvements 17:12:50
element, which updates the schedule of projects. 17:12:53
This amendment received no objections from the State of 17:12:58
Florida. 17:13:00
And it's in front of you for adoption into the capital 17:13:01
improvements element. 17:13:04
>>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members? 17:13:07
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 17:13:08
on item 2? 17:13:10
(Motion carried). 17:13:15
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita. 17:13:17

>>ROSE FERLITA: An ordinance amending the Tampa 17:13:18
comprehensive plan capital improvements element by 17:13:22
updating the schedule of projects for fiscal year 2005 17:13:25
through fiscal year 2010 providing ordinances in 17:13:28
conflict, providing an effective date. 17:13:39
(Motion carried). 17:13:41
>> Number 3. 17:13:45
>> Move to open. 17:13:45
[Motion Carried] 17:13:46
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff. The next 17:13:47
amendment is plan amendment 04-13 which is an amendment 17:13:49
to the future land use map for the Palma Ceia 17:13:51
neighborhood. 17:13:54
This amendment was initiated by Tampa City Council in 17:13:55
response to requests of the civic association. 17:13:59
The original request that we looked at was 17:14:01
approximately 100 acres of land that was designated as 17:14:04
residential 20 and moved to add an amendment to 17:14:08
residential 10. 17:14:12
In the course of the review of this plan amendment, 17:14:14
staff held a number of informational open houses in 17:14:19
November of last year and in April and sent notices to 17:14:23
over 800 property notices. 17:14:27
The Planning Commission held a public hearing in April 17:14:31
of this year, and as a result of the public testimony 17:14:33

provided, the recommendation was to amend approximately 17:14:38
33 acres in the entire Palma Ceia area to residential 17:14:42
10. 17:14:45
Tampa City Council held a public hearing on June 17:14:46
9th, and as a result of the public testimony 17:14:49
provided at that point in time, the Tampa City Council 17:14:54
also added and motioned other petitioners had had 17:14:56
requested to opt in for residential 10 to be added to 17:15:01
it, and, as a result, the amendment included 17:15:04
approximately 41 acres. 17:15:08
This amendment was sent to the Department of Community 17:15:10
Affairs and regional agencies for review. 17:15:11
The Department of Community Affairs had no objections 17:15:14
to this amendment. 17:15:18
I wish to bring to your attention that we have received 17:15:20
requests from a few individuals at this point in time 17:15:26
to opt out of the amendment to residential 10. 17:15:29
An individual by the name of Greg Johnson at 3312 17:15:35
Empedrado, folio number 126-184.0000, is requesting to 17:15:41
be left residential 20. 17:15:50
Mr. Bruce Kelly, owner of property at 3213 west San 17:15:53
Pedro, folio 126-587.0000, has also requested to be 17:15:59
opted out of this amendment to residential 10 to be 17:16:09
left residential 20. 17:16:13
We received an e-mail from a Mr. Jeff Pittman who owns 17:16:15

property located at 3107 Barcelona. 17:16:20
He is not in the amendment area whatsoever. 17:16:24
And the fourth e-mail that we received was from a Susan 17:16:28
Paxton who owns property located at 3206 west Palmira, 17:16:32
folio number 12596.0000 and her mother's property at 17:16:39
3202 west Palmira, folio 125-955.0000. 17:16:47
Also requesting to be opted out. 17:16:56
It is up to City Council as to -- to allow these people 17:16:58
to opt out through the course of this public hearing. 17:17:02
That concludes my presentation. 17:17:05
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Rose, thank you for all your hard 17:17:06
work on this. 17:17:12
And at the late hour, my office received these requests 17:17:13
that were referred to you and you just took care of 17:17:16
which I think is excellent. 17:17:19
I think we should allow these people to opt out which 17:17:20
is consistent on what we have done on just a handle of 17:17:23
other folks that want to opt out. The only other 17:17:26
question I had related to an individual was John Santa 17:17:30
Cruz, 1602 south Arrawana. 17:17:36
I don't know if you heard from him. 17:17:38
He sent us an e-mail -- no, he called, and he says he 17:17:41
opposes the plan amendment change from R-20 to R-10. 17:17:46
1602 south Arrawana might be in the. 17:17:52
affected area. 17:17:57

And if it is, and he's so supposed to the, I think we 17:17:58
should allow him to opt out as well. 17:18:02
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: 1602? 17:18:04
>> Arrawana. 17:18:11
>>> That folio number is 118596.0000. 17:18:12
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it would be appropriate to 17:18:24
include that one, since he did seem very adamant on his 17:18:25
phone call. 17:18:30
That's all I have for right now. 17:18:41
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone in the public like to speak 17:18:43
on item number 3? 17:18:45
Motion and second to close. 17:18:48
(Motion carried). 17:18:49
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There seemed to be some vacillation 17:18:55
back there. 17:18:58
>>GWEN MILLER: If you want to -- we asked if you want 17:19:01
to speak and nobody came up and we closed the public 17:19:04
hearing. 17:19:06
We have to have a motion to reopen it. 17:19:07
>> So moved. 17:19:09
>> Second. 17:19:09
(Motion carried). 17:19:10
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public would like to speak 17:19:11
on item number 3? 17:19:13
If you are going to speak, please come up and speak. 17:19:14

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Don't be shy. 17:19:17
We move fast. 17:19:20
>> Name is Brent Paris. 17:19:20
I have not been sworn in. 17:19:22
>>GWEN MILLER: You don't have to be sworn in. 17:19:23
>>> Fine. 17:19:27
We have been before you in the past. 17:19:27
I'm here to just show you, the members in the audience 17:19:31
that do support this, and at this time I ask those 17:19:34
members in the audience that support the plan amendment 17:19:37
to please rise. 17:19:39
We're asking you to approve the plan amendment. 17:19:45
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:19:49
Next. 17:19:50
>>> Karen Crawford, 1306. 17:19:52
We are just here to applaud and support the efforts of 17:19:55
Palma Ceia on behalf of Bayshore Gardens, the adjacent 17:19:57
neighborhood. 17:20:00
>>CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 17:20:01
Would anyone else like to speak? 17:20:02
>>> I don't know if it's too late to opt out now. 17:20:09
>>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record for me 17:20:12
please. 17:20:15
>>> Beverly Taylor. 17:20:16
The property is at 1603 south Georgia Avenue. 17:20:17

I would like to opt out also if it's possible. 17:20:23
>>GWEN MILLER: Rose, is it too late? 17:20:25
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: She just needs to get the folio 17:20:31
number. 17:20:32
What's the address again? 17:20:34
>>> 1603 south Georgia Avenue. 17:20:35
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: 118596.0100. 17:20:41
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:20:49
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are the full owner of the 17:20:49
property? 17:20:53
>>> Yes. 17:20:54
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you. 17:20:55
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 17:20:55
If you are going to speak, please come up and speak. 17:20:58
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: My address is suite 3700 Bank of 17:21:07
America plaza. 17:21:11
And I apologize for arriving at the last minute. 17:21:12
My clients are Devonshire properties owned by Neil 17:21:15
Layton. 17:21:20
We do not have an objection to the plan amendment. 17:21:20
You recall back in spring, I explained that they were 17:21:22
in the midst of permitting their property. 17:21:25
And they have provided to me a copy of their permit 17:21:28
application. 17:21:30
It has the permit numbers on it. 17:21:30

I received a fax this afternoon at 3:37, virtually at 17:21:32
the last minute. 17:21:36
All I want to do is file this in the record to show 17:21:37
that they are proceeding in good faith with their 17:21:39
permit, and just reference the address, and that would 17:21:42
be all. 17:21:45
Hopefully they'll have the permit by the time you come 17:21:47
back for second reading. 17:21:48
>>GWEN MILLER: Give to the Planning Commission staff. 17:21:49
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it a single address you are 17:21:55
referring to? 17:21:57
>>> Yes. 17:21:58
4402 west Granada. 17:21:58
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that one that we have previously 17:22:01
included? 17:22:04
Or is that one that we had previously opted out? 17:22:04
>>> We elected not to opt out, it's -- go ahead. 17:22:10
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You don't want to opt out? 17:22:14
I thought your point is you want to opt out. 17:22:16
>>> Well, as long as they have their permit and they 17:22:19
can build like in the present plan category, then I 17:22:21
feel that they are vested and they may proceed and then 17:22:24
the plan amendment can be adopted for the remainder of 17:22:27
properties. 17:22:30
They have no intention to rezone or replan any other 17:22:31

properties for multifamily. 17:22:36
>>GWEN MILLER: Rose is coming up. 17:22:37
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: Okay. 17:22:42
Folio 3402 west Granada, folio number 126093.0000. 17:22:43
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess I'm a little confused. 17:22:58
Is that one we previously had thought was going to be 17:23:00
included? 17:23:02
>>> Yes. 17:23:04
Every one that I have given you now, in this recording, 17:23:05
was a recommendation for residential 10 as part of the 17:23:09
plan amendment, residential 10. 17:23:12
>> So Mr. Grandoff, I guess I'm confused because you 17:23:18
had given us other addresses when we started this 17:23:21
process and I thought we had pulled those off of the 17:23:24
lists. 17:23:26
So how does this one relate to that? 17:23:27
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: They have another parcel next door, 17:23:31
I'm sorry. 17:23:33
They had another piece of property next door that's 17:23:34
already permitted and completed. 17:23:36
This is a corner parcel. 17:23:38
This is the corner. 17:23:40
That's right. 17:23:41
They do have another piece. 17:23:44
>>ROSE PETRUCHA: The property off of Grenada, at this 17:23:45

particular location, which is located south of 17:23:53
Concordia. 17:23:58
It's about like the second and third lot and that was 17:23:59
not part of the amendment to residential 10 because 17:24:02
they were processing activity on that. The parcel he's 17:24:06
now asking for is located at the southwest corner of 17:24:13
Granada and Concordia. 17:24:16
That is the one that is at 3402 west Grenada. 17:24:22
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And why is that the your client 17:24:27
didn't raise the issue on that property before? 17:24:30
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: They have a tenant to the property and 17:24:36
they were trying to see if the tenancy can be 17:24:38
negotiated. 17:24:40
The tenancy goes beyond January 1 and I think they were 17:24:41
talking to the tenant and seeing if the tenant would be 17:24:44
finished before the plan amendment was adopted, and 17:24:47
they would permit the property, and in my opinion they 17:24:52
would be invested against the plan amendment. 17:24:55
They have not been able to conclude the tenant. 17:24:57
Tenant's name would still be in there, and they 17:25:01
notified me this afternoon that they are at least in 17:25:04
the permit process. 17:25:05
I have a copy of their permit information from the 17:25:07
city. 17:25:09
So I think my best advice to them was, well, let's at 17:25:10

least put the city on notice tonight that you're trying 17:25:13
to permit the property in good faith, under the current 17:25:15
plan designation. 17:25:22
>> So that's your intent. 17:25:22
You're not asking to opt out? 17:25:24
>>> Well, I think opt out -- we'll take an opt out. 17:25:25
I just don't think it's necessary. 17:25:28
>> Okay. 17:25:30
Well, then we won't. 17:25:30
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. 17:25:31
So you're not opting out. 17:25:33
>>> No. 17:25:34
Proceeding in good faith in my opinion. 17:25:35
I think the government is going to be fair-handed about 17:25:36
it and we're moving along. 17:25:39
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:25:40
Next. 17:25:41
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: Would you like to see it? 17:25:41
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just put it in the record. 17:25:45
>>> I would like to file this telecopy which identified 17:25:47
3402 Grenada and has the to two project numbers from 17:25:50
the City of Tampa government web site. 17:25:55
Thank you for your time. 17:25:57
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:25:58
Next. 17:25:59

>>> I'm Jan Phillian, west Barcelona street. 17:26:03
I want to thank you oh all for enormous patience and to 17:26:09
congratulate those people in the community who helped 17:26:12
our community group do something that was very 17:26:13
important to us, save our neighborhood. 17:26:17
And I congratulate all our neighbors. 17:26:19
Thank you. 17:26:21
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:26:21
Anyone else like to speak? 17:26:22
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close. 17:26:24
>> Second. 17:26:26
>>JOHN GRANDOFF: I'm sorry to be belaboring this. 17:26:26
I apologize. 17:26:29
In an abundance of caution we will opt out this parcel. 17:26:31
It was referenced by rose Pa Trish A.I don't want to 17:26:35
leave any stone unturned. 17:26:39
If we just opt out this parcel and also show that we 17:26:41
are relying on the permit application, we'd appreciate 17:26:43
it. 17:26:46
>>GWEN MILLER: I show you opt out. 17:26:47
Motion and second to close. 17:26:52
(Motion carried). 17:26:53
Mr. Shelby. 17:26:56
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry. 17:26:57
I want to be clear with Ms. O'Dowd. This would require 17:26:58

a separate motion to accept the amendments that you 17:27:02
have been keeping track of? 17:27:05
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department. 17:27:07
What I have done, I had already filed an ordinance with 17:27:08
the clerk's office that identified all the properties 17:27:10
that were going to be included in this plan amendment. 17:27:13
As Rose Petrucha was speaking I was crossing out those 17:27:15
folio numbers that requested to be opted out. 17:27:21
I'm assuming council is going to support that request 17:27:23
so I can file this amended exhibit with the clerk's 17:27:26
office and it can be placed on first reading. 17:27:29
It can be placed on first reading. 17:27:34
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll read it, please. 17:27:37
This is very near and dear. 17:27:42
And I did want to make clear on the record because 17:27:47
there was some question, this does not specifically 17:27:49
impact my house, so therefore I can vote onto, I have 17:27:52
been advised by counsel. 17:27:55
Impacts property very close to mine but not my house. 17:27:57
So Mr. Shelby has advised me I can vote. 17:28:00
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Shelby would never ill advise you. 17:28:03
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing I want to say in all 17:28:06
seriousness to everybody that's come down here is I was 17:28:09
extremely proud to work with the Palma Ceia 17:28:12
neighborhood association, with Lori GENNIS and the 17:28:14

whole team. 17:28:21
Together we were able to come up with this mechanism to 17:28:21
protect and preserve the neighborhood as a single 17:28:25
family neighborhood. 17:28:27
There are certain parts of town when you drive through 17:28:29
there, you just know that this is an needs to forever 17:28:31
remain a single family neighborhood. 17:28:34
And Palma Ceia is one of them. 17:28:36
If there are other neighborhoods out there that feel 17:28:38
that way, then we are going to figure out a way to 17:28:40
protect those neighborhoods as well. 17:28:43
With that, I'll move an ordinance amending the Tampa 17:28:44
comprehensive plan future land use element, future land 17:28:46
use map for approximately 100 acres located in the 17:28:49
Palma Ceia area, the general location of which is east 17:28:52
of south Himes Avenue, south of west Neptune street, 17:28:55
west of the Crosstown express way, north of west San 17:28:59
Luis street, from residential 20 to residential 10, 17:29:03
providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, 17:29:06
providing for severability, providing an effective 17:29:08
date. 17:29:11
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second. 17:29:11
(Motion carried). 17:29:12
We need to open 5. 17:29:14
>> Move to open 5. 17:29:17

>> Second. 17:29:19
(Motion carried) 17:29:19
(Applause). 17:29:21
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Congratulations. 17:29:23
The other thing I was going to say, I'm very proud also 17:29:23
that we allowed due process for folks who didn't want 17:29:26
to participate in this, we let them opt out, and that's 17:29:28
fair. 17:29:32
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 17:29:37
You have before you future land use map on the Elmo for 17:29:40
your consideration. 17:29:43
Plan amendment 501. 17:29:45
Another plan amendment that was initiated by council at 17:29:47
the behest of the -- request of many of the 17:29:51
individuals, residents that live in this particular 17:29:54
area of the river bend neighborhood association. 17:29:56
As you can see on the future land use map over here, 17:29:59
the area in question lies just east -- west of the 17:30:02
Hillsborough River, east of Rome Avenue, south of 17:30:07
Hanna, north of Powhattan. 17:30:10
The predominant land use was residential 20, requested 17:30:12
down planning to residential 10. Let me go ahead and 17:30:17
show you the affected change. 17:30:20
For the area. 17:30:25
Now the area is approximately 20 acres in size, has 17:30:28

existing uses consisting of vacant lands, so neighbors 17:30:31
with single uses and single family detached homes. 17:30:35
The intent of the petitioner, density in half and also 17:30:38
consideration of commercial development along this 17:30:46
segment along the east side of roam. 17:30:49
DCA had no objections regarding this particular plan 17:30:51
amendment. 17:30:54
And it has been very well received by a variety 17:30:54
majority of neighbors in the area. 17:30:57
Planning Commission staff has brought this forward for 17:30:58
your final adoption. 17:31:05
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Garcia, why is that little spot 17:31:10
there, looks like it's opted out? 17:31:15
>>TONY GARCIA: This piece here, Ms. Alvarez? 17:31:17
That piece already has a land use designation R-50 and 17:31:19
already has a land use. 17:31:23
It has a zoning of RM-35. 17:31:24
So legally, there's nothing that can be done on that 17:31:26
particular site. 17:31:31
Would you basically make at nonconformity reducing the 17:31:31
plan amendment, from anything less than R-50 which has 17:31:34
already been designated. 17:31:37
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was going to ask the same question 17:31:39
about that cut-out. Is there an existing complex on 17:31:42
there or something? 17:31:45

>>TONY GARCIA: There is an apartment complex. 17:31:46
It's not developed to its highest and best potential on 17:31:50
the site. 17:31:53
There's about, I would guesstimate, about 20 units on 17:31:54
the site. 17:31:56
It's only one floor in height, and it's been there for 17:31:57
a considerable amount of time. 17:32:01
It's not -- it in the not in the best possible quality 17:32:02
it can be in. 17:32:07
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would 17:32:10
like to speak on item 4? 17:32:11
>> Move to close. 17:32:13
>> Second. 17:32:14
(Motion carried). 17:32:15
>>MARY ALVAREZ: . 17:32:15
>> Did you want to speak now? 17:32:26
>> Yes. 17:32:27
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to reopen 17:32:27
the public hearing. 17:32:29
(Motion carried). 17:32:30
>> My name is Edith hooten, 1408 Alicia Avenue, vice 17:32:30
chair of the river bend association. 17:32:36
I simply want to thank the council and applaud them for 17:32:38
initiating this change in rezoning. 17:32:41
We are a family unit of single-family dwellings in 17:32:44

river bend, and we want to keep it that way. 17:32:49
Thank you. 17:32:51
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 17:32:52
Would anyone else like to speak? 17:32:52
>> Move to close. 17:32:55
>> Second. 17:32:55
(Motion carried). 17:32:56
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa 17:32:56
comprehensive plan, future land use element, future 17:33:01
land use map, for the property located in the general 17:33:03
vicinity east of Rome Avenue, south of Hanna Avenue and 17:33:05
north of Powhattan Avenue in the river bend area from 17:33:10
residential 20 to residential 10 providing for repeal 17:33:13
of all ordinances in conflict, providing for 17:33:16
severability, providing an effective date. 17:33:19
>>GWEN MILLER: You have a motion and second. 17:33:19
(Motion carried). 17:33:21
>> Move to open number 5. 17:33:23
>> Second. 17:33:25
(Motion carried). 17:33:25
>>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff. 17:33:26
This amendment is plan amendment 05-07, in the vicinity 17:33:30
of 7th and Nebraska Avenue. 17:33:34
The request is for a parcel that's approximately 15 17:33:38
acres in size. 17:33:44

It is the current headquarters of the GTE federal 17:33:45
creditdownion. 17:33:48
And encompasses adjacent vacant land which has been 17:33:50
acquired by the credit union for expansion of its 17:33:53
operations. 17:33:58
The request has come before you so that GTE can bring 17:34:00
con -- consolidate its entire operations in 17:34:07
Hillsborough County throughout this one site. 17:34:10
As you know this site is just north of the downtown 17:34:13
Tampa, just west of Ybor City, and is within the Tampa 17:34:15
Heights neighborhood. 17:34:21
You have support it by a transmittal to the Department 17:34:24
of Community Affairs. 17:34:26
We have no objections to the request. 17:34:31
And the Planning Commission's recommendation was one 17:34:33
for consistency for this request. 17:34:36
>>GWEN MILLER: Questions from council members? 17:34:37
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 17:34:40
on item 5? 17:34:42
Anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 17:34:44
5? 17:34:46
>>> Good evening. 17:34:51
My name is Ethel Hammer and I am here this evening with 17:34:52
Becky Sebastien, the president and CEO of GTE federal 17:34:58
credittionion. 17:35:01

I would like to say we are here to answer any 17:35:02
questions. 17:35:03
Or I do have a presentation. 17:35:04
But I'll leave it up to you as to whether you want me 17:35:05
to proceed. 17:35:08
No. 17:35:09
Okay, that's fine. 17:35:10
Thank you very much. 17:35:11
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 17:35:11
>> Move to close. 17:35:14
>> Second. 17:35:15
(Motion carried). 17:35:15
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa 17:35:17
comprehensive plan, future land use element, future 17:35:20
land use map for the property located in the general 17:35:22
vicinity of East 7th Avenue and Nebraska Avenue, east 17:35:24
Kay street, Lamar Avenue and interstate 275 in the 17:35:27
Tampa Heights, V.M. Ybor and historic Ybor from 17:35:30
residential 83 to community mixed use 35 providing for 17:35:35
all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective 17:35:39
date. 17:35:42
[Motion Carried] 17:35:43
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Hammer's, your presentations would 17:35:44
convince me to support it. 17:35:49
Thank you. 17:35:50

(Laughter). 17:35:51
>> Move to open number 6. 17:35:52
>>MICHELE OGILVIE: We need to slow down ever so 17:35:54
slightly for this one. 17:35:57
Bougainvillea is the location of this request, 17:35:59
PA-05-08. 17:36:01
It is a plan amendment located at the northwest corner 17:36:04
of 40th street and Bougainvillea. 17:36:06
The acreage of the plan amendment is 28 acres. 17:36:09
The request is to change the land use from heavy 17:36:11
industrial to community mixed use 35. 17:36:14
The site is in the Tampa industrial park, an area 17:36:18
defined in north Tampa between 30th street and 17:36:22
46th street, between Fowler and Bougainvillea. 17:36:25
The site is just north of Busch Gardens, just south of 17:36:29
the University of South Florida. 17:36:34
Both major assets and economic engines in our city. 17:36:36
The request has gone to the Department of Community 17:36:42
Affairs having been transmitted by the City Council in 17:36:44
June. 17:36:51
The request has received an objection from the 17:36:54
Department of Community Affairs in which they have 17:36:56
asked the city to consider the impact of this amendment 17:37:00
on Fowler Avenue, which is a failing road, State Road. 17:37:04
The City of Tampa's strategic planning on technology 17:37:10

department has been coordinating the response of that 17:37:14
objection with the Department of Community Affairs. 17:37:17
And I will now ask Randy to speak to you on that effort 17:37:22
and where we are with it. 17:37:26
>>RANDY GOERS: Strategic planning and technology. 17:37:29
As Michelle indicated there were two objections to this 17:37:34
plan amendment. 17:37:37
One is in regard to a lack of analysis of the impact on 17:37:38
Fowler Avenue. 17:37:43
And the second was the lack of mention of coordination 17:37:45
with the school board and the school impacts. 17:37:50
We prepared a draft response which I believe was about 17:37:54
85% complete. 17:37:57
There's was official information at the time, we sent 17:37:59
it up to DCA that we didn't have related to some 17:38:02
comment. 17:38:06
We haven't coordinated discussing with the DCA the last 17:38:06
three weeks. 17:38:10
Compilation of DCA staff yesterday, the response, the 17:38:12
draft response, addresses DCA's staff concerns on both 17:38:16
issues. 17:38:21
We did provide the analysis of Fowler Avenue that they 17:38:21
were looking for. 17:38:24
And we did provide them the information on the school 17:38:25
coordination and the impacts as they requested. 17:38:28

However, they said they are still sending the draft 17:38:31
response to FDOT for the Department of Transportation. 17:38:34
They are the agency that had the initial objection on 17:38:37
the lack of analysis, and the SR findings to Fowler 17:38:39
Avenue, and they are waiting to get back FDOT's remarks 17:38:46
within the next week or so. 17:38:50
We are going to continue with coordinate with DCA at 17:38:53
this point in time. The comments come from the staff 17:38:55
indicate we have met their objections unless there's 17:38:58
something out of the ordinary that FDOT would raise. 17:39:01
We feel confident moving forward at this stage, this 17:39:06
is -- stress that it will give us a more definitive 17:39:10
answer before the final adoption hearing. 17:39:14
And if there's anything that we feel that would place 17:39:16
the city at risk within the administrative area we'll 17:39:18
bring to the your attention and advise accordingly. 17:39:22
>>GWEN MILLER: Question from council members? 17:39:24
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 17:39:26
on item number 6? 17:39:28
The. 17:39:30
>>> Good evening, Madam Chairman and council. 17:39:32
Michael English with Ed Miller. 17:39:34
I'm representing property owner. 17:39:36
No presentation. 17:39:38
I would be happy to answer any questions. 17:39:39

>>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members? 17:39:40
>> Move to close. 17:39:44
>> Second. 17:39:45
(Motion carried). 17:39:46
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa 17:39:46
comprehensive plan, future land use element, future 17:39:49
land use map for the property located in the general 17:39:51
vicinity of 10420 McKinley drive from heavy industrial 17:39:54
to community mixed use 35 providing for repeal of all 17:39:57
ordinances in conflict, providing for severability, 17:40:01
providing an effective date. 17:40:03
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second. 17:40:03
(Motion carried). 17:40:05
>>GWEN MILLER: All right. 17:40:05
We will be in recess until 6:00 p.m 17:40:12
(City Council in recess) 17:40:15
17:40:46
17:50:01
17:50:02
18:05:44
[Sounding gavel] 18:14:26
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to 18:14:26
order. 18:14:28
Roll call. 18:14:29
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here. 18:14:29

>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here. 18:14:32
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here. 18:14:33
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here. 18:14:34
>>GWEN MILLER: Here. 18:14:35
At this time I am going to ask Catherine Coyle to come 18:14:37
forward. 18:14:41
She just walked out the door. 18:14:42
We'll wait a few minutes for her. 18:14:43
>> Boyle Boyle land development. This is for 18:14:47
continuance cases? 18:14:51
I'm going to do them. 18:14:53
Item number 9 on your agenda, file number Z 05-76, we 18:14:55
have received -- our offices received no new site plans 18:15:03
since May 17th. 18:15:08
We have four staff objections to the current plan. 18:15:10
The petitioner sent us an e-mail today asking us for a 18:15:11
continuance. 18:15:15
The first available meeting would be February 9th. 18:15:16
Item number 9. 18:15:27
76. 18:15:30
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Would this be the third continuance 18:15:31
or the fourth continuance? 18:15:34
>>> Is the petitioner here? 18:15:35
I now it's been several. 18:15:36
Cathy, do you know? 18:15:38

>>CATHERINE COYLE: They were originally scheduled in 18:15:48
June. 18:15:50
They continued to August. 18:15:50
And then to tonight. 18:15:51
So this would be the fourth hearing. 18:15:52
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I will not support a continuance, 18:15:54
Madam Chair. 18:15:59
Not four times. 18:16:00
>>ROSE FERLITA: Me neither. two -- 18:16:02
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have a copy of that e-mail? 18:16:17
>>> In the e-mail I don't have it with me but he did 18:16:23
state he wanted more time, the architect, to be able to 18:16:25
redesign. 18:16:28
>>GWEN MILLER: What's the pleasure of council? 18:16:31
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Just call it when it comes up and 18:16:34
just deny it. 18:16:36
Right? 18:16:37
Because the petitioner is not here to present the case. 18:16:38
>>> Petitioner doesn't appear to be here. 18:16:41
>>GWEN MILLER: If he's not going to be here we can do 18:16:42
it now. 18:16:44
>>MARTIN SHELBY: You can go in order. 18:16:44
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let's dot in order so there's no 18:16:47
question what we did to advance any case between now 18:16:51
and number 9. 18:16:53

See if he comes in. 18:16:55
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. 18:16:56
We'll go to the next one. 18:16:57
>>> Item number 10. 18:17:00
Z 05-81. 18:17:01
It's a continued public hearing from August 25, 05. 18:17:03
Originally there was a letter sent from Dave mechanic's 18:17:08
office requesting a continuance to January 26th. 18:17:12
The petitioner is here, and they are actually going to 18:17:15
be asking for a withdrawal. 18:17:18
>>GWEN MILLER: Is petitioner here? 18:17:19
>>> Good evening. 18:17:25
Ann Pollack with Mechanek Nuccio, 305 south Boulevard. 18:17:26
We realize that this project has a lot of problems. 18:17:30
And so at this time the petitioner is looking to 18:17:33
withdraw the application. 18:17:35
We really don't want to have to go forward and waste 18:17:37
more people's time coming back. 18:17:40
But we would like to request of the council that they 18:17:43
allow us to potentially file a substantially different 18:17:46
application six months from now. 18:17:51
It will be we go ahead and move forward to be denied, 18:17:59
we could potentially come back with a sub stacksly 18:18:01
different application almost at any time with the City 18:18:04
Council's approval. 18:18:06

But with the withdrawal we are limited to either 12 18:18:07
months or six months with your approval. 18:18:10
Just to give us a little more flexibility, and to avoid 18:18:12
wasting people's time, we are respectfully requesting 18:18:15
that you allow us to potentially file something six 18:18:19
months after the date of withdrawal. 18:18:23
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to speak? 18:18:25
>>> I would like to ask a question. 18:18:30
My name is George BEDELL. 18:18:33
I live directly adjacent to the property that is the 18:18:37
subject of that petition. 18:18:41
I've been here at least three times. 18:18:43
I have spent hours trying to talk to the land 18:18:45
development office. 18:18:49
I have spent quite a bit of time trying to find out 18:18:50
what the rules are and the regulations are so that I 18:18:54
can be well informed on this. 18:18:57
And while I have gotten some responses from 18:19:00
Mr. Mechanik's office and from Ms. Pollack in 18:19:03
particular, I don't know what this means. 18:19:06
Are they going to have to give us notification when 18:19:10
they resubmit, if they resubmit it? 18:19:12
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, they will. 18:19:16
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Probably a new notice will be given, 18:19:18
Mr. BEDELL just like last time. 18:19:19

>>MORRIS MASSEY: It would be an entirely new 18:19:22
application. 18:19:25
They would have to initiate the process all over again. 18:19:25
A new hearing date would have to be set. 18:19:28
They would have to comply with our notice requirements. 18:19:29
Our code allows council -- typically what the code 18:19:32
provides is there's a 12-month period between the date 18:19:35
of withdrawal, when somebody -- we file an application 18:19:38
for the same property. 18:19:42
Council has discretion under our ordinance to reduce 18:19:43
that to six months. 18:19:46
And that's what Ms. Pollack is asking, that they are 18:19:48
planning to come forward with a substantially different 18:19:50
application. 18:19:52
So they would like to have the six-month waiver if 18:19:53
council is willing to grant that. 18:19:56
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 18:19:57
>>> My name is Janet Sturman, and I also live behind 18:20:00
the property at 2430 Prospect Road. 18:20:05
And we have not received anything from their office or 18:20:09
anything. 18:20:11
I thought that within 250 feet of a project that we 18:20:12
were supposed to get notification of various changes, 18:20:16
or anything like that. 18:20:20
And we have not. 18:20:22

And I'm kind of opposed to the fact that we're not 18:20:23
going to make them wait the 12 months, because they 18:20:26
haven't worked with our neighborhood at all. 18:20:29
Our neighborhood was and is against what they have 18:20:32
planned. 18:20:36
They have not been working with our neighborhood at 18:20:37
all. 18:20:39
And we have over 100 petitions that state that we do 18:20:40
not want that. 18:20:44
So I'm inclined, because there's not a real reason why 18:20:45
they need the extra six months, I haven't heard a cause 18:20:51
yet as to why they need six more months. 18:20:54
I'd rather them wait the 12. 18:20:59
Thank you. 18:21:00
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, can you answer that? 18:21:01
>>> Ann Pollack: First of all I want to you know we 18:21:05
submitted a certified list of everybody that we 18:21:09
noticed, and Ms. Sternham and all the neighbors were on 18:21:10
that list and should have received notice. 18:21:17
In fact, we got one back from an address that 18:21:18
apparently the person no longer lived there but it 18:21:21
wasn't these people. 18:21:24
Also, we realize that there have been problems, that 18:21:26
there's been a lack of communication with the 18:21:29
neighbors. 18:21:31

In the beginning, the property owner was moving forward 18:21:33
with the neighbors, trying to -- I think there was a 18:21:36
meeting or two set up. 18:21:40
And then as things kind of fell apart, the whole thing 18:21:41
fell apart. 18:21:44
And that's sort of where the problems have arisen, I 18:21:45
think. 18:21:49
As for a reason why we are looking for the six months, 18:21:53
the property owner currently doesn't have any immediate 18:21:57
plans for what they want to do with the property. 18:21:59
But we are asking this because we think it's just sort 18:22:02
of a gesture of fairness, considering if we went 18:22:06
forward and were denied, then we theoretically could 18:22:09
come back with a substantially different application. 18:22:13
And with your approval could kind of proceed with it at 18:22:16
any time, was with the -- whereas with the withdrawal 18:22:19
we are stuck with the 12 months. 18:22:23
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder? 18:22:25
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess I have a question to staff 18:22:27
and a comment to the petitioner. 18:22:29
For one thing, you're fortunate that you're surrounded 18:22:30
by three very active neighborhoods. 18:22:35
New suburban, Palma Ceia and Bayshore Gardens none of 18:22:37
which are hard to get in touch with. 18:22:41
So I'm sure if your client had a hard time getting in 18:22:44

touch with them has not done a very good job of trying. 18:22:47
But secondly a question. 18:22:49
Morris, why do we have to make that decision tonight? 18:22:51
Why can't we just wait and see what -- see what they 18:22:56
submit the next time. 18:23:01
If staff comes in and say, yes, it is significantly 18:23:01
different, and then they can come to us and set a 18:23:04
hearing date. 18:23:06
And at that point we would make that six-month 18:23:07
determination. 18:23:10
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I think could you do that if you 18:23:10
wanted to. 18:23:12
If that was council's decision tonight. 18:23:14
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we should do that and wait 18:23:15
and see. 18:23:18
And if it is substantially different then maybe it's 18:23:19
something we would consider down the road. 18:23:21
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Ms. Coyle, let me take a look at the 18:23:22
language. 18:23:30
18:23:30
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing I was going to say 18:23:39
to petitioner while they are looking, from way read in 18:23:41
the paper, which of course is not always necessarily 18:23:45
reliable, it looks like you have a significant 18:23:48
difference in height and mass and scale between what 18:23:50

you're proposing and what is in the surrounding 18:23:53
neighborhood. 18:23:55
And so I hope your client is going to be more sensitive 18:23:55
to that issue. 18:23:57
>>MORRIS MASSEY: The code states no application can 18:23:58
befied. 18:24:08
Cannot receive unless you waive the time frame. 18:24:10
That's why the decision would be better made tonight. 18:24:14
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: They can still come back in a month 18:24:17
or two when they have the new plans and walk in front 18:24:19
of us on any Thursday morning. 18:24:22
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Yes, they comment. 18:24:24
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we do that then? 18:24:26
>>MORRIS MASSEY: She was saying that they would have to 18:24:31
come and ask you all for permission to make 18:24:34
application, that LDC would then have to review the 18:24:37
application to make sure that it's complete, a complete 18:24:40
application, and then LDC would have to come forward a 18:24:43
week or two later and ask you all to set the public 18:24:45
hearing. 18:24:48
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's do that. 18:24:48
>>GWEN MILLER: Need a motion forthwith drawl. 18:24:49
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have to move to let them withdraw? 18:24:55
I mean, can't they -- if they said they want to 18:24:57
withdraw why do we need to do anything? 18:25:01

>>MARTIN SHELBY: You can move to withdraw. 18:25:04
What. 18:25:10
>>MORRIS MASSEY: What council has done -- 18:25:11
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Motion is denied. 18:25:13
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to accept the withdrawal. 18:25:17
>> Second. 18:25:19
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second. 18:25:20
(Motion carried). 18:25:21
>>GWEN MILLER: Need another motion? 18:25:21
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, I think just leave it like that. 18:25:26
>>GWEN MILLER: Leave it like it is. 18:25:28
Don't have to make a motion. 18:25:30
We go to the next item. 18:25:31
>>> Item number 11. 18:25:34
Z 05-140. 18:25:36
The petitioner's affidavit was not perfected and it was 18:25:38
filed late. 18:25:42
They in he is sense misnoticed. 18:25:43
We request that council make a motion to allow the 18:25:46
petitioner to amend the petition and pay the $300 18:25:48
amendment fee. 18:25:51
The first open slot for a new rezoning request would be 18:25:52
the February 9th meeting. 18:26:00
>>GWEN MILLER: Need a motion. 18:26:03
>> So moved. 18:26:06

>> Second. 18:26:06
(Motion carried). 18:26:06
>> Set for February 9th at 6 p.m 18:26:10
The next one? 18:26:13
>>> Item number 12. 18:26:16
V 05-52. 18:26:18
The site plan submitted was not sufficient for a public 18:26:22
hearing to proceed. 18:26:27
Staff does support a continuance. 18:26:28
If the council agrees to a day agenda, if there's no 18:26:32
public opposition, staff supports that. 18:26:35
The first available day meeting would be December 18:26:40
1st, 05. 18:26:43
The petitioner has worked very hard with staff to 18:26:47
address the staff's comments. 18:26:51
He is under a code violation. 18:26:56
And so that's why we are suggesting the day meeting. 18:26:58
Because he is working very hard to try to meet staff's 18:27:01
comments. 18:27:06
And he is here. 18:27:06
And I believe he would like to speak to you. 18:27:07
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open number 12. 18:27:08
>> We have a motion and second to open item number 12. 18:27:12
(Motion carried). 18:27:14
Put your name on the record for me, please. 18:27:15

>>> My name is Herbert Harrigan. 18:27:18
My address is 5117 north 17th street. 18:27:20
And I was -- this property, as a church site, and I had 18:27:23
a violation, that's the second plan I draw, and I'm -- 18:27:30
I want for to the be done to get it legal. 18:27:43
>>ROSE FERLITA: I know we are addressing the issue of 18:27:48
the site plan, but the question is, what is the nature 18:27:50
of the code violation? 18:27:53
Is there a code violation? 18:27:54
>>> I think that was for the sign, and they say the 18:27:56
sign was illegal. 18:27:58
And I take the sign down. 18:27:59
But I still ask to use the property like I use to. 18:28:01
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's what was illegal, the sign, sir? 18:28:07
>>> Yes. 18:28:10
>> You haven't complied yet then? 18:28:10
My concern is if he hasn't complied and he needs the 18:28:12
time to comply, I'm not going to support that earlier 18:28:15
date, because I don't know if it's going to be enough 18:28:18
time to do what he has to do. 18:28:21
>>> I believe he's in code violation because he's 18:28:22
operating a church in a residential -- the zoning is 18:28:24
RS-50. 18:28:27
And he's coming through for special use. 18:28:28
He was not aware he's operated it for awhile, and 18:28:31

unaware that that was illegal. 18:28:36
And we believe he's come in good faith and is working 18:28:39
with staff wanting to -- 18:28:42
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's fine, that's fine. 18:28:45
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would 18:28:46
like to speak against the continuance? 18:28:47
Anyone want to speak against number 12 for having a 18:28:49
continuance? 18:28:52
Can we get a motion? 18:28:54
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to continue to December 1st 18:28:56
at 10 a.m. 18:28:59
>> Second. 18:29:01
(Motion carried). 18:29:01
>>GWEN MILLER: December 1st at 10 a.m. 18:29:01
>>> Next item, item number 13, V 05-66. 18:29:12
The petitioner has submitted a revised site plan as of 18:29:17
this date. 18:29:20
Today he submitted a revised site plan. The 13-day 18:29:22
planned deadline waiver is being requested. 18:29:27
Our recommendation is if the council does waive the 18:29:30
13-day rule, a discussion on the site plan could occur. 18:29:34
However, the first reading must be continued for full 18:29:37
staff review of the site plan. 18:29:39
We haven't had a chance to review the site plan. 18:29:41
Due to many issues, including a fire objection which 18:29:44

speaks to the life safety code. 18:29:49
Staff has not reviewed the plan and reserves right to 18:29:51
offer additional comments to City Council at first 18:29:56
reading. 18:29:58
Staff supports a continuance if council agrees to a day 18:29:58
agenda if there's no public opposition. 18:30:01
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to open the public hearing. 18:30:03
>> So moved. 18:30:05
>> Second. 18:30:05
(Motion carried). 18:30:05
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would 18:30:06
like to speak against the continuance for item number 18:30:08
13? 18:30:10
>>SHAWN HARRISON: How long does he need? 18:30:11
>>GWEN MILLER: What date can he come? 18:30:17
>>> We are asking for December 1st. 18:30:20
The plan that he submitted appears to meet the fire 18:30:22
code today. 18:30:24
But we haven't been able to do a full review and send 18:30:26
it out to the agencies that need to look at it. 18:30:30
>>GWEN MILLER: December 1st at 10 a.m. is okay? 18:30:33
>> So moved. 18:30:36
>> Second. 18:30:37
(Motion carried). 18:30:37
>>CHAIRMAN: You wanted to speak, sir? 18:30:38

>>> Yes. 18:30:41
The reason -- I didn't get a notice from staff until 18:30:41
the 18th of October. 18:30:44
So I couldn't make the 10 days. 18:30:46
But once we got the information, it's pretty simple as 18:30:49
to what was needed. 18:30:52
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 18:30:53
(Motion carried). 18:30:56
>>> Item number 16. 18:31:02
Z 05-146. 18:31:03
There was no affidavit filed. 18:31:07
We request council make a motion to allow petitioner to 18:31:10
amend petition and pay the $300 amendment fee. 18:31:12
The next available meeting would be at 6 p.m. 18:31:16
It would go as a new for February 9th. 18:31:21
>> So moved. 18:31:29
>> Second. 18:31:29
(Motion carried) 18:31:29
We are going to go to item number 7. 18:31:42
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, do you want to swear the 18:31:47
witnesses? 18:31:51
>>GWEN MILLER: Everyone in the audience who is going to 18:31:51
speak on items 7 through 18, please stand and raise 18:31:52
your right hand. 18:31:56
>>THE CLERK: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, 18:32:00

the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you 18:32:03
God? 18:32:06
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that members of the 18:32:09
audience who wish to testify, please to move things 18:32:13
along, there's a little sign up front to remind you 18:32:17
that when you state your name, please also reaffirm 18:32:19
that you have been sworn. 18:32:22
Secondly, Madam Chair, at this time, I would ask that 18:32:24
all written communications relative to today's hearings 18:32:26
that have been available to the public at council's 18:32:29
office be received and filed into the record at this 18:32:31
time. 18:32:33
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved. 18:32:37
>> Second. 18:32:38
(Motion carried) 18:32:38
>> If any member of City Council has had any verbal 18:32:43
communications with any petitioner or his or her 18:32:46
representative or any members of the public in 18:32:49
connection with any of the hearings that are going to 18:32:51
be heard, that that member of council should please 18:32:52
disclose the following: The identity of the person or 18:32:54
entity with whom the verbal communication occurred, and 18:32:58
the substance of that communication. 18:33:00
Thank you, Madam Chair. 18:33:01
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Coyle, did you want to come up -- 18:33:02

Catherine Coyle, did you want to come up and say 18:33:05
something? 18:33:07
You had an item you wanted to talk about? 18:33:09
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development. 18:33:11
This is an off the agenda item. 18:33:17
I spoke to you beforehand with Mr. Shelby. 18:33:21
Really, Mr. Michelini can address the issue. 18:33:24
It's wet zoning. 18:33:27
He has a contractual issue, if he can explain. 18:33:28
This was originally submitted to our office on 18:33:30
September 12th. 18:33:32
There were issues with the legal description. 18:33:33
It went back and forth, to Jimmy Cook and the surveyor. 18:33:36
It is within a fraction of being correct. 18:33:40
We do have to have it to the clerk by 9 a.m. to be 18:33:42
posted. 18:33:45
To meet a December 1st hearing, he would have to be 18:33:46
scheduled tonight in order to do his notice. 18:33:48
If you're willing to entertain it. 18:33:50
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Council, this petition is -- 18:33:52
>>GWEN MILLER: Name on the record. 18:33:56
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I've been sworn. 18:34:00
>>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record. 18:34:01
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Steve Michelini. 18:34:03
This petition was filed in September. 18:34:05

Again they have to finish all of their contractual 18:34:06
obligations before the end of the year. 18:34:08
In order to do that, hearing has to take place 18:34:11
within -- on the first of December, because of your 18:34:14
holiday schedule. 18:34:18
That will enable them to have a second hearing and 18:34:19
adoption before the end of the year. 18:34:22
And that's why we are requesting. 18:34:24
There are some typos in the legal description which 18:34:27
should be corrected. 18:34:30
And we respectfully request that you set that hearing 18:34:31
for 10 a.m. on December 1st. 18:34:34
And that's a wet zoning 05-127, 1241 east Fowler 18:34:37
Avenue. 18:34:42
>>KEVIN WHITE: You said it was a contractual issue? 18:34:47
>>> Yes. 18:34:49
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second. 18:34:49
All in favor of the motion say Aye. 18:34:51
Opposed, Nay. 18:34:53
(Motion carried) okay. 18:34:53
We are ready for number 7. 18:34:55
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before you start, I think I have a 18:35:02
conflict. 18:35:04
Mr. Bentley, I think my property is in the 250-foot 18:35:05
circle, wasn't it? 18:35:08

Are we on the list? 18:35:10
>>MARK BENTLEY: Mark Bentley. 18:35:11
That's correct, sir. 18:35:13
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: On advice of council since our 18:35:14
homestead is within the 250-foot circle Mr. Shelby 18:35:18
advised I shouldn't participate so I am going to recuse 18:35:21
myself. 18:35:25
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay. 18:35:25
Are you ready? 18:35:26
>> Marty Boyle, land development. 18:35:27
I have been sworn. 18:35:29
Item number 7. 18:35:31
Z 05-11. 18:35:31
This is a continued public hearing from August 18:35:33
11th, '05. 18:35:36
It is the palm bank. 18:35:39
The zoning currently is commercial neighborhood and 18:35:47
commercial general. 18:35:50
And they are asking to go to PD. 18:35:51
It is on the east side of MacDill. 18:35:54
The aerial shows the property. 18:36:03
There is an existing structure of a bank, a bank 18:36:06
existing. 18:36:16
Also, you have have before you, the petitioner just 18:36:23
gave us new elevations that you can look at showing 18:36:25

that it's no longer three-story but two-story. 18:36:27
They are requesting to go from commercial neighborhood 18:36:33
to commercial general -- from commercial neighborhood 18:36:34
and commercial general to a planned development. 18:36:37
The property is located at 3012 west San Miguel street, 18:36:41
and 2302 South MacDill. 18:36:46
And they are wanting to construct a 6,000 square foot 18:36:50
bank with two drive throughs. 18:36:54
The drive-through lanes -- I'm sorry, the bank stands 18:36:56
two stories with a maximum height of 40 feet. 18:37:00
The plan proposes 17 parking spaces, one handicapped, 18:37:03
six standard and ten compact. 18:37:09
However, 24 spaces are required by code. 18:37:11
A six-foot masonry wall with a two-foot decorative 18:37:14
extension on the south side to buffer it from 18:37:19
residential use, and then there is a four-foot masonry 18:37:22
wall with a two-foot metal extension will be located 18:37:27
along the eastern and northern lines. 18:37:29
As depicted on the site plan, the majority of site will 18:37:33
be impervious. 18:37:34
A six to seven-foot landscape strip will separate the 18:37:36
building from MacDill and seven to eight-foot strip 18:37:39
place add long the San Miguel street side. 18:37:42
I believe -- I think you only have one elevation but 18:37:45
the petitioner will be able to show you more. 18:37:47

The waivers are to reduce the required buffer between 18:37:49
residential commercial uses from 15 to 3 feet to allow 18:37:52
the use of a four-foot masonry wall with a two-foot 18:37:56
extension between residential and commercial uses on 18:38:00
the south side, and in lieu of a six-foot masonry wall, 18:38:02
reduce required landscape area between vehicular use 18:38:07
and right-of-way from eight to three feet, on the west 18:38:11
side an eight to one foot on the north side, reduce 18:38:14
required parking from 24 to 17 spaces, and reduce the 18:38:17
separation of drive in the queueing lane from 18:38:21
residentially zoned property from 50 feet to 25. 18:38:24
The objections are as follows: From transportation, 18:38:29
transportation objects to the reduction in the parking 18:38:33
spaces from 24 to 17. 18:38:35
29% reduction in parking. 18:38:39
And they feel it is excessive. 18:38:41
From land development, we would like them to put the 18:38:43
waivers on the site plan per those that we have noted 18:38:46
in our staff report. 18:38:48
The following criteria we use in deciding a 18:38:51
drive-through window and a special use -- the 18:38:56
drive-through facility. 18:38:58
Land development believes the council may consider 18:38:59
these standards as part of this PD given that the 18:39:01
property may be impacted as a result of this 18:39:05

development. 18:39:07
Both the queueing lane and the drive-in window should 18:39:09
be at least 50 feet from any property on which a 18:39:11
residential use is located. 18:39:14
And we noted that the queueing lane, the end of that is 18:39:15
only 25 feet from residential property. 18:39:18
The site plan does meet the intent of the following 18:39:20
regulations, chapter 27, section 130, buffering and 18:39:25
screenings. 18:39:29
Land development also suggests that the limited -- that 18:39:33
the lighting height be limited to 12 feet high. 18:39:37
We did have -- and we passed it out from solid waste. 18:39:43
We got comments yesterday, was written yesterday and we 18:39:49
received them from solid waste, and they had some 18:39:55
objections to this site. 18:39:58
It's from Wanda Shay. 18:40:04
And she's asking that they revise the site plan. 18:40:07
And she gave two attachments. 18:40:11
Attachment 1 and attachment 2. 18:40:12
I've spoken to the petitioner, and he is willing to do 18:40:15
attachment number 2 to satisfy solid waste. 18:40:21
He would need to go back for approximately -- take a 18:40:26
week to redot and be able to -- if you approve it and 18:40:29
be able to come back with the plan. 18:40:34
And that is the end of our comments. 18:40:37

>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 18:40:46
Yes, I have been sworn in. 18:40:48
The future land use map that you have for your viewing 18:40:53
as shown on the Elmo, the predominant land use category 18:40:56
along this segment of south Dale Mabry Avenue is mixed 18:41:01
use, along here on MacDill, and then you have 18:41:07
residential 20, as one transitions away from the 18:41:11
commercial corridor of MacDill and residential 10 18:41:14
and residential 6. 18:41:16
This is recreational space, the golf course. 18:41:18
As far as the general character of the existing uses in 18:41:22
the area, the predominant uses in the immediate area 18:41:24
surrounding, this is a dry cleaner to the south, a 18:41:27
medical office directly to the north, there is a newly 18:41:31
constructed office which I believe houses a bank 18:41:34
directly to the west, also a two-story structure. 18:41:37
Historically, the site was a former location of Chicken 18:41:41
which I'm sure at one time or another everyone has 18:41:47
frequented way back when. 18:41:50
The site has dual land use designation for the site, 18:41:51
residential 20 and CMU 35. 18:41:54
The applicant has worked -- this is something that's 18:41:57
been going on for quite a bit of time now between staff 18:42:00
and the applicant. 18:42:04
As far as the location of the structure, they have 18:42:06

reoriented the structure where it's closer to 18:42:08
MacDill Avenue and is more urban in style. 18:42:10
And as they have previously stated, Ms. Boyle stated, 18:42:13
it's knock ago three story structure to a two-story 18:42:16
structure. 18:42:20
I think also a good benefit, it's located at the site 18:42:20
you do have a signalized intersection which will help 18:42:23
manage the traffic as one transitions south towards the 18:42:26
intersection of Bay to Bay, and MacDill further to 18:42:28
the south. 18:42:32
This is, we feel, a logical point of departure for any 18:42:33
kind of significant commercial uses, as the commercial 18:42:37
uses that you have further to the south. 18:42:39
Since most is wider -- some professional office uses, 18:42:41
and of course you have as one transitions further down 18:42:48
to the intersection of Bay to Bay and MacDill one 18:42:52
has few opportunities for parking. 18:42:56
Planning Commission has objections and finds the 18:42:58
request consistent with the surrounding use and the 18:43:02
planned development area. 18:43:11
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 18:43:12
>>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street, Tampa 33602. 18:43:50
I represent the palm bank. 18:43:54
At this time, I ask the council to receive and file 18:43:56
composite exhibit number 1 which consists of some code 18:44:00

sections, photographs, and other exhibits that I intend 18:44:03
to refer to during the course of my presentation. 18:44:06
The palm bank is a local bank that was established in 18:44:09
2003. 18:44:22
The first location, you might be familiar with, is on 18:44:23
Dale Mabry across from Einstein bagels and extreme 18:44:25
juice on the east side of Dale Mabry. 18:44:29
Most of the officers and directors and shareholders 18:44:32
associated with the palm bank are actually residents of 18:44:34
Tampa. 18:44:36
So not only do they have a vested interest in the 18:44:37
performance of the bank but likewise in the community. 18:44:39
The bank focuses its energies in South Tampa and 18:44:42
primarily on professional CPAs, attorneys and 18:44:46
businessmen. 18:44:50
It's not like your traditional bank. 18:44:52
There's a lot lot of check cashing and things like 18:44:55
that. As a matter of fact, over one half of the 18:44:59
deposit that the point in time relate to CDs. 18:45:01
So best case, some of the depositors show up maybe once 18:45:04
a year. 18:45:07
So that's going to relate to this parking issue we are 18:45:08
going to get to in a second. 18:45:11
Some of our officers and directors are shareholders, 18:45:13
and specifically Chris Anderson is here. 18:45:16

Chris is the president and CEO. 18:45:18
Also Ron Solonsky is a director with the bank. 18:45:20
On the Elmo right now is the zoning map. 18:45:26
Our request is rezone from CN, CG to PD. 18:45:29
I think it's important for council to realize we 18:45:33
already have commercial zoning which would allow for a 18:45:35
multitude of purposes without any constraints 18:45:37
whatsoever without the uses, hours of operation, 18:45:39
et cetera. 18:45:41
So what we are trying to do here is the existing 18:45:42
facility is a Palm Bank administrative office, which is 18:45:44
an interim use for the property. 18:45:47
And that's located on the original Palio site which 18:45:49
consists of three lots. 18:45:52
The Palio's on the for the lot -- excuse me, third lot. 18:45:58
The third lot was zoned CN and that would accommodate 18:46:05
parking their parking. 18:46:08
I think it's important to note further to the east one 18:46:12
more lot before you get into the neighborhood is 18:46:15
another lot zoned commercial. 18:46:17
So we are surrounded entirely by commercial for the 18:46:18
project. 18:46:21
As I mentioned this is the flagship facility for palm 18:46:40
bank and Dale Mabry. 18:46:44
And you can see here that they had an existing double 18:46:45

drive-through. 18:46:49
And the logical -- I think a lot of you realize that 18:46:50
commercial drive-through, then there's typical 18:46:54
non-commercial, and also if one of the drive throughs 18:46:56
breaks down you have the ability to have one. 18:47:01
It's like a convenience store with one pump on it. 18:47:03
You have a drive-through. 18:47:06
Here's Davis Island the most recent facility, a 18:47:08
conversion of our former Amoco gas station on Davis 18:47:10
Island, on Davis Boulevard, as you can see. 18:47:15
This is the existing facility at the subject property. 18:47:17
It was conversion of Palio's chicken restaurant. 18:47:20
The proposed development consists of 6,000 square feet, 18:47:34
would be 3,000 square feet on two-story building. 18:47:39
The bottom of the building, the first floor is 18:47:44
dedicated to bank purposes. 18:47:46
And the second floor is dedicated office use. 18:47:48
And 25% of the second floor would be solely dedicated 18:47:50
to the board room. This is where the Board of 18:47:53
Directors intends to have their monthly meetings at 18:47:55
this facility. 18:47:57
That's important, because if you look at note 15 on the 18:47:58
site plan, what we agreed to do is we stipulate the 18:48:01
second floor would not relate to institutional banking 18:48:04
institution uses, simply office and 25% board room. 18:48:06

So when you look at your code, your code says that for 18:48:10
bank you are required four spaces per thousand square 18:48:15
feet. 18:48:17
So that's where they came up with the 24. 18:48:17
Four times six. 18:48:20
6,000 square feet. 18:48:21
However, the first floor would require 12, and with the 18:48:22
stipulation per note 15, we would only require with the 18:48:25
board room another seven spaces which is 19. 18:48:29
And we are requesting 17. 18:48:32
I would also like to point out here again, we don't 18:48:35
have a lot of walk-in traffic. 18:48:37
And based on historical use of this bank, they feel 18:48:39
that 17 would suffice. 18:48:43
Also, another issue relating to the parking is what 18:48:46
they do on this facility is they shred a lot of the 18:48:52
papers and things like that, so from our perspective we 18:48:56
didn't really need a big dumpster to accommodate part 18:49:00
of the site, a parking space or two, but solid waste 18:49:03
insisted that we do that. 18:49:06
So there's kind of a trade-off here. 18:49:08
So to accommodate solid waste we are going to need 18:49:10
approximately -- lose approximately two parking spaces. 18:49:13
Here again it's our desire because of the limited 18:49:16
amount of garbage we didn't really need that. 18:49:20

So I guess the fundamental reason we are here is not 18:49:23
withstanding the fact that property is already zoned 18:49:27
commercial is because we have a drive-through facility. 18:49:29
I remember a few years ago, I think the catalyst for 18:49:31
making this come before council and us too is there was 18:49:34
a drugstore that caused some problems. 18:49:36
In any event, we are looking for a waiver of 50 feet to 18:49:38
25 feet. 18:49:42
And if council would look at the site plan here, 18:49:44
there's a small portion of the property 18:49:55
To the south. 18:49:57
This is the dry cleaning facility that I am pointing it 18:49:57
a W my finger. 18:50:02
To the east is a nonconforming multifamily. 18:50:04
It's zoned multifamily. 18:50:09
That's the need for the waiver. 18:50:11
So the way the city measures the setback is from the 18:50:13
last car, the rear of the drive through. 18:50:17
25 photo to the property line. 18:50:21
This property already has an existing 8-foot wall. 18:50:25
We intend to put a 6-foot wall with 2-foot metal top on 18:50:28
that. 18:50:33
So there's going to be two eight-foot walls there 18:50:33
essentially. 18:50:36
Also I would like to point out to council with respect 18:50:36

to the waiver that the activities here with where the 18:50:39
windows are, if you see elevation it's enclosed. 18:50:42
You almost like into it like a garage. 18:50:47
That's roughly 110 feet away from the structure on this 18:50:50
facility. 18:50:54
Here again the activity is over here. 18:50:54
And one of the concessions we made going through this 18:50:56
process, we have more of like a suburban type design 18:50:58
with the building located at the property as a result 18:51:02
of input from the civic association, neighbors, staff, 18:51:04
what have you. 18:51:07
We shifted that over to a more urban design, put the 18:51:07
drive-through over here, as far away as we could from 18:51:11
the residential. 18:51:14
In discussion was the neighbors, here again, we have 18:51:18
gone over this for quite a few months. 18:51:21
Generally speaking, they feel that this is an 18:51:24
appropriate use, because it's a bank, instead of, for 18:51:26
example, a restaurant with a lot of activity, noise, 18:51:29
debris, odor, et. 18:51:32
Also, we stipulate on the site plan, all activity at 18:51:34
the facility would end at 6:00 in the evening and only 18:51:37
operate Saturday morning and nothing on Sunday. 18:51:40
So when these people are enjoying their property, we're 18:51:42
not in operation. 18:51:45

I could go over a list of concessions but we totally 18:51:56
redesigned the project over several months, including 18:51:59
lighting, reduced the size of the project from 6600 to 18:52:01
6,000 square feet, we stipulated like I mentioned on 18:52:04
the second floor the board room would be 25%, ADA 18:52:07
sidewalk, remove the dumpster at the request of the 18:52:11
residential property owner. 18:52:13
Originally it was situated in this corner here near the 18:52:15
property, and we have located it over here. 18:52:17
Reduce the bulky scale from 3 stories to two stories. 18:52:24
I can go on and on. 18:52:28
I know you have a long agenda. 18:52:29
Here again, concerning the parking waiver, I think I 18:52:35
have explained that sufficiently. 18:52:38
Also with respect to some of the buffers, the 18:52:40
drycleaning facility -- Mr. Ponte is here in sport, is 18:52:44
my understanding -- is zoned commercial. 18:52:48
We don't need a buffer to that. 18:52:51
We do need a buffer to the multifamily. 18:52:53
We are going to have an 8-foot wall and we are going to 18:52:56
provide an additional wall and some landscaping. 18:52:59
The on the waiver the staff mentioned was from a 18:53:01
four-foot block wall with two feet of wrought iron on 18:53:05
top. 18:53:08
That was at the request of the neighborhood that we do 18:53:08

that. 18:53:11
It doesn't meet the six foot. 18:53:13
It's four plus the two but that's what the neighbors 18:53:15
wanted with some vegetation. 18:53:17
In terms of the waiver, I just point out to council, 18:53:22
petition V 03-74, that first commercial bank at the 18:53:28
corner of Gandy and MacDill and City Council 18:53:37
approved a waiver, similar circumstance with how many 18:53:39
double drive-through in 2003, they requested to reduce 18:53:41
the setback from 50 feet to 14. 18:53:46
Here again we are asking from 50 to 25. 18:53:48
They also got a waiver from 15 feet to 3 feet having 18:53:52
just a wall next to that trailer park on Gandy 18:54:00
Boulevard. 18:54:04
So unless you have any specific questions, I'm pretty 18:54:11
geared up and I don't know if you are in the mood for 18:54:14
that unless there's any necessity. 18:54:19
It's my understanding at this point we don't have any 18:54:21
opposition. 18:54:23
I have a letter from -- you don't get letters anymore 18:54:24
in support. 18:54:28
But I got an e-mail of support from Ginny Vickers who 18:54:29
lives on San Miguel just down the street and I would 18:54:33
like to submit that into the record as well and I'll 18:54:36
stand ready for any questions you might have. 18:54:38

>>GWEN MILLER: Questions from council members? 18:54:40
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 18:54:41
on item number 7? 18:54:43
Come up and speak now if you are going to speak. 18:54:44
Come up. 18:54:48
Get up, everybody who is going to speak, get up and 18:54:48
speak. 18:54:51
>>> I have been sworn in. I'm Lee Humes for the 18:54:52
South Tampa chamber here to address the council on the 18:54:58
South Tampa Chamber to support their efforts. 18:55:00
The palm bank has been a tremendous asset to the 18:55:05
community and the way they support the community. 18:55:08
They are the small business of the year this year 18:55:11
because of what they've done for our community, 18:55:13
financially, and with their efforts. 18:55:17
And we just feel that the building that's been proposed 18:55:20
to us is very much of a compliment to the neighborhood 18:55:23
compared to what has been there in the past. 18:55:27
And we've talked to several people in the civic 18:55:29
associations. 18:55:32
And neighbors, and had heard nothing but positive 18:55:34
things that have come to us. 18:55:37
And I just wanted to be here in support of their 18:55:39
efforts. 18:55:41
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 18:55:42

Next. 18:55:43
>>> My name is Brent Farris, 3405 ARSONOTO street, I 18:55:50
have been sworn in, and do stand here on behalf of the 18:55:57
Palma Ceia neighborhood association in support of this 18:56:01
PD. 18:56:03
One thing that Mr. Bentley did not mention, which was 18:56:04
on the plan, is that the exit for both of their exits 18:56:07
on the residential street, at San Miguel is a left turn 18:56:12
only. 18:56:18
I want to make sure that is in the PD which I believe 18:56:18
it is. 18:56:22
It shows up on the site plan. 18:56:22
We support this project. 18:56:24
Thank you. 18:56:24
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 18:56:25
Next. 18:56:25
>>> My name is Anni Ellis. 18:56:28
I live at 1612 south Arrawana Avenue. 18:56:30
I also support this project. 18:56:33
They have really worked with the neighborhood. 18:56:35
I did want to mention, though, about the Wanda Shay 18:56:36
saying about the dumpster issue. 18:56:40
It seems to me that possibly David McCarry could look 18:56:42
at that again instead of just having an associate 18:56:47
decide that for him, that he could possibly look at 18:56:50

seeing on a case-by-case basis. 18:56:53
It doesn't seem that they need the two spaces to be 18:56:57
taken up for the dumpster for what their needs are. 18:56:59
As well as I'd like to bring up the fact that they were 18:57:02
doing a pilot program on the units which were the quiet 18:57:04
units, and I don't know if that has occurred yet but 18:57:08
that would be a totally appropriate space for that to 18:57:10
be put in. 18:57:13
It seems that there should be some distance that's 18:57:15
related to residential areas, that those should be 18:57:19
required. 18:57:23
So I just wanted to bring it to your attention again. 18:57:23
But we do support them. 18:57:25
Thank you. 18:57:28
I was sworn in. 18:57:29
Thank you. 18:57:30
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I was sworn. 18:57:32
I'm here on behalf of pioneer cleaners and Sam FONTE 18:57:33
the owner of the cleaners. 18:57:40
They have worked with him on various issues including 18:57:45
lighting, access, buffering, as well as the request for 18:57:47
the waiver of parking, and they are supportive of this 18:57:51
petition, and respectfully request your approval. 18:57:53
Thank you. 18:57:56
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 18:57:56

>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close. 18:57:58
>> Second. 18:57:59
(Motion carried). 18:57:59
>>MORRIS MASSEY: One brief issue. 18:58:04
I understand from Ms. Coyle and Ms. Boyle that there 18:58:05
may have to be some changes made to the site plan to 18:58:08
address the solid waste issue. 18:58:11
And so you can vote on the petition tonight, but we 18:58:13
would have to bring the ordinance back for first 18:58:17
reading to show the graphical changes that need to be 18:58:18
made. 18:58:21
>>GWEN MILLER: Bring it back next week? 18:58:21
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Yes, ma'am. 18:58:24
We can bring it back next Thursday morning. 18:58:24
>>MARTIN SHELBY: We have a motion to bring it back for 18:58:27
next week? 18:58:30
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Yes, you can do that. 18:58:31
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Make the revisions to the site plan 18:58:32
and schedule it for next Thursday morning. 18:58:35
>>GWEN MILLER: Second? 18:58:37
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second. 18:58:40
(Motion carried). 18:58:40
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I want to make one 18:58:41
quick comment to Mr. Bentley. 18:58:46
Mr. Bentley, this neighborhood is well-known for 18:58:47

protecting their neighborhood. 18:58:50
And for them to be here standing in support for your 18:58:51
project and for Ms. HUMES to come and support it as 18:58:55
well, that's a great partnership. 18:59:01
And this is a nice outcome. 18:59:02
>>MARK BENTLEY: I want to -- my client, they have a 18:59:05
vested interest in the community and really enjoyed 18:59:08
getting to know the neighbors. 18:59:11
There's a free toaster if you open an account. 18:59:18
(Laughter). 18:59:21
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 8 is a continued public hearing. 18:59:26
Item number 8. 18:59:28
>>> Marty Boyle, land development. 18:59:50
I have been sworn. 18:59:51
We're at item number 8. 18:59:53
Z 05-40. 18:59:55
This is a continued public hearing from August 18:59:57
11th. 19:00:00
It is a site located at 512 south Melville. 19:00:02
The site is located just south of Horatio. 19:00:08
And on the side of notice of Amendment RM-16 19:00:18
multifamily. 19:00:29
The aerial depicted the south Melville and west 19:00:35
DeLeon street. 19:00:39
This is a picture of the existing site. 19:00:47

And this is under construction across the street. 19:00:50
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you have pictures of other houses 19:01:00
up and down the street? 19:01:02
>>> I do not. 19:01:05
I know that when it came before you, I believe Ms. 19:01:08
Coyle did show pictures previously. 19:01:12
The petition is located at 512 south Melville Avenue 19:01:17
and it's to construct four single family attached 19:01:20
units, with all two-car garages. 19:01:23
Three units are oriented towards DeLeon street, and 19:01:26
one is oriented towards Melville Avenue. 19:01:29
One unit has its garage accessing the alleyway in the 19:01:32
rear. 19:01:35
There are three off-street parking. 19:01:37
Parallel parking spaces are shown adjacent to the site. 19:01:41
The structure stands three stories with a maximum 19:01:44
height of 36 feet. The elevations, I believe of you 19:01:47
have, are on the plan. 19:01:50
You should see in front of you. 19:01:51
This petition is continued from August 11, 05, City 19:01:53
Council public hearing to allow petitioner to redesign 19:01:57
the project. 19:02:00
Reducing -- some of the comments were that they need to 19:02:00
reduce the mass and scale of the townhouse project. 19:02:04
In the October 11th site plan, we indicate that it 19:02:09

shows little change, since the August 9th site plan 19:02:13
as regards to the size and scale. 19:02:21
Transportation comments of August 9th are that they 19:02:24
object to the driveways. 19:02:27
Said the code requires the garage to be placed 18 feet 19:02:31
from the back of the sidewalk, the driveways do not 19:02:33
meet the standard. 19:02:36
Commercial site review services has also reviewed the 19:02:39
site plan, and they noted that the oak trees shown on 19:02:42
the plan as a 12-inch and 19-inch oak is actually a 19:02:44
26-inch live oak, that this oak is healthy and in good 19:02:50
condition. 19:02:54
The tree labeled as a 15-inch China Berry is the 19:02:55
actually a holly tree, in severe decline. 19:02:59
The tree meets all criteria for removal. 19:03:03
And the tree code needs to be revised to reflect the 19:03:06
changes of tree sizes and species of trees. 19:03:10
There is a waiver. 19:03:14
They are asking to remove the 12 to 19-inch protected 19:03:14
oak, which construction services has noted that it's 19:03:18
actually a 26-inch live oak, and to replace it with 19:03:21
4-inch caliper live oaks. 19:03:25
The City Council has directed city staff to draft an 19:03:29
ordinance requiring visitor parking for town homes and 19:03:32
multifamily developments, a ratio of .25 spaces per 19:03:36

unit to be located in a common area. 19:03:40
An ORIUS has not come into effect yet. 19:03:44
However, we took a look at that. And the site plan -- 19:03:48
this site plan as opposed to the one that you saw 19:03:52
previously, they took it back and redesigned and they 19:03:54
did account for guest parking by redesigning unit 2 and 19:03:57
unit 3. 19:04:01
They have put in ribbon driveways, and they have 19:04:01
reduced the length of the ground floor footprint from 19:04:04
27 feet to 40 feet by making us change, each unit will 19:04:07
have two-car garage and two tandem parking spaces for 19:04:11
guests, and it will be similar on the site plan to the 19:04:16
design of unit 1. 19:04:20
In looking at the project, land development has 19:04:24
reviewed the proposed site plan anti-and believes it 19:04:26
meets the intent for the single family attached design 19:04:30
standards. 19:04:33
All time house units, maintain an entryway and public 19:04:35
sidewalk, each unit contains a two-car garage, and 19:04:41
there are no more than four units in a row. 19:04:45
The property contains 8,114 square feet. The current 19:04:51
zoning district RM-16 allows two units on the subject 19:04:57
parcel. 19:05:00
The properties to the north, south and east are zoned 19:05:01
RM-16. 19:05:04

The property to the south for east is zoned CG. 19:05:04
And the property to the west is zoned PD. 19:05:08
That is the end of my presentation. 19:05:15
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess I'm a little confused. 19:05:21
You indicated that the last time this issue was in 19:05:23
front of us, council specifically told the petitioner 19:05:26
to go back to the drawing board pursuant to all the 19:05:30
comments and testimony that we heard and reduce the 19:05:34
mass and scale and height to better be consistent -- 19:05:39
more consistent with the neighborhood. 19:05:45
That was our comment, right? 19:05:47
>>> I believe the comments, and also the opposition 19:05:48
comments, were they were opposing the mass and size. 19:05:51
>> Right. 19:05:57
>>> Correct. 19:05:57
>> Then at the beginning of the presentation you said 19:05:58
from your evaluation of the former site plan compared 19:06:00
to this site plan, the mass and size, scale, what have 19:06:02
you, has not changed significantly? 19:06:06
>>> We don't see the change. 19:06:09
>> And so that would lead me to confuse yesterday staff 19:06:12
would recommend approval if they didn't address 19:06:15
council's concern. 19:06:18
>>> We do have objections. 19:06:19
>>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 19:06:21

You didn't reference them. 19:06:21
>> You still don't? 19:06:24
>>> No, we have objections. 19:06:25
If I didn't make that clear -- 19:06:26
>> I heard objection about the tree. 19:06:28
I heard objection from transportation. 19:06:29
But you said that it meets -- I thought you said you 19:06:31
don't have an objection, it meets something criteria. 19:06:35
>>> It meets the single family attached design 19:06:40
standards. 19:06:40
But we have objections based on the comments that were 19:06:40
made, that council made, that there should be a 19:06:45
reduction in the mass and scale of the property. 19:06:51
>> Okay. 19:06:54
Maybe I misheard and I'm sorry if I misunderstood. 19:06:55
Thank you. 19:06:59
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 19:07:04
We present much did a presentation last time. 19:07:13
I believe what we are discussing this evening is going 19:07:15
to be site plan specific because of the concerns that 19:07:17
were brought up by council regarding scale and mass. 19:07:19
From the comprehensive planning consistency basis, 19:07:22
predominant land use for the entire area is R-35 in 19:07:25
this particular neighborhood. 19:07:28
There is an integration of different types of uses. 19:07:29

You do have a larger, similar type of structure that is 19:07:33
existing right across the street on this particular 19:07:36
segment of Melville. 19:07:39
I will also acknowledge what Mr. Dingfelder has stated, 19:07:40
that this public hearing,fuls in the prior public 19:07:43
hearing, that there is an adjacent single-family home 19:07:45
directly to the north of the site on the same side of 19:07:48
Melville and there are approximately I think three 19:07:51
single family detached homes on the east -- directly 19:07:53
north of the new town home development that's been 19:07:58
recently constructed north of the one I believe Ms. 19:08:01
Coyle has shown a picture of this evening. 19:08:03
From the comp plan recommendations I believe our 19:08:05
recommendations are the same as consistent with the 19:08:08
overall integrated segment. 19:08:09
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have to say that I think you 19:08:15
all too often look at the maps, and the numbers on the 19:08:18
maps in terms of the greatest numbers of units, instead 19:08:20
of going into the field and looking at the context. 19:08:25
And I just found so often that the Planning Commission 19:08:28
decisions reflect the greatest number of units that 19:08:33
would be allowable rather than the reality of the 19:08:39
street. 19:08:43
That's just a comment. 19:08:43
It doesn't call for a response. 19:08:44

>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 19:08:45
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I agree with you, Mr. Dingfelder, 19:08:52
the report was a little confusing because the first 19:08:57
part it said didn't meet the mass and scale criteria we 19:08:59
have been asked to meet. In fact we did go back and 19:09:02
reduce the size of the units, as they referenced in the 19:09:05
back end of the report. 19:09:08
But they said now we have two tandem spaces in the 19:09:09
driveways. 19:09:12
We went back, we put in the ribbon drives. 19:09:13
We did a variety of things to reduce the mass and 19:09:16
scale. 19:09:19
We were also asked to change the design scheme from med 19:09:19
REV to a bungalow style which we did, and we reduced 19:09:24
the height. 19:09:27
We were previously asking for 40 feet, reduced to 35 19:09:28
feet, which is consistent with single family height 19:09:31
decree ter yeah. 19:09:35
In terms of site visit I know for a fact that Mr. 19:09:38
Garcia did visit this site because I brought to the 19:09:41
their attention the last time that we talked about the 19:09:45
proximity of this project to post Hyde Park and the 19:09:48
TECO station that's immediately station. 19:09:52
If I could direct you to the overlay here. 19:09:56
The subject property is outlined in red. 19:10:03

The TECO substation is outlined in blue. 19:10:05
And this massive area here is post Hyde Park 19:10:07
apartments. 19:10:12
They were noticed, and they are basically about 100 19:10:12
feet away from the subject parcel. 19:10:16
This parcel right here on the corner is CG. 19:10:18
That's general office commercial. 19:10:22
Directly across the street. 19:10:25
And I have outlined in here in yellow the areas that 19:10:31
are commercial or planned developments which are 19:10:33
apartments, or townhouse developments or offices, areas 19:10:36
of commercial properties. 19:10:40
In terms of location, this is on the perimeter. 19:10:42
It's ideally suited for transition into single-family 19:10:46
neighborhood residential. 19:10:50
And we provided you in the past two letters of support 19:10:53
from the property owner immediately to the north 19:10:56
indicating their strong support for this project. 19:10:59
And they've come down to the previous public hearings 19:11:02
and put that on the record. 19:11:05
And I believe that we have already entered the other 19:11:06
information into the record for your reference. 19:11:09
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Michelini, before you move on, 19:11:15
the property, the subject property is in red. 19:11:17
>>> In red. 19:11:20

>> What are the five parcels to the north? 19:11:21
>>> Single family residential is here. 19:11:24
And I believe that the next house, and maybe the next 19:11:26
two, may be single -- single family across the street, 19:11:33
or going across the street is the town home. 19:11:37
>> But the five to the north I think are all single 19:11:40
family, correct? 19:11:43
>>GWEN MILLER: Excuse me, sir, you cannot speak out. 19:11:45
You will have time in a few minutes. 19:11:48
>>STEVE MICHELINI: He's the petitioner. 19:11:52
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: He can whisper to you or whatever. 19:11:53
19:11:56
>>STEVE MICHELINI: That's a nonconforming -- that's the 19:12:08
one at the corner. 19:12:10
Actually up here. 19:12:11
There's two, and then there's three, in a ten-unit 19:12:19
apartment complex. 19:12:22
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you. 19:12:23
>>STEVE MICHELINI: The design scheme that we mirrored, 19:12:23
although we adopted it, was basically a lot more 19:12:30
exciting project project that was and is more 19:12:34
reminiscent of a bungalow style with more of the same 19:12:39
kind of roof pitch. 19:12:42
This is the picture of the Post Hyde Park. 19:12:43
This is a picture from the subject site looking 19:12:46

eastward toward post Hyde Park. 19:12:50
This is looking from the subject site directly across 19:12:53
the alley, which is the TECO power station. 19:12:55
This is a picture of the commercial office. 19:13:11
I don't know if you can see that or not. 19:13:16
This is the commercial office that's diagonally across 19:13:20
the street, looking south I guess there's a 19:13:23
southeastward. 19:13:28
Then again the TECO power station which is immediately 19:13:31
adjacent to it. 19:13:34
This is the TECO power station on the right-hand side. 19:13:37
These are a number of the guest parking spaces that 19:13:39
have been developed in the right-of-way with the 19:13:42
commercial office on the left. 19:13:45
This project is immediately across the street to the 19:13:52
west. 19:13:54
And then the subject parcel is here on the right. 19:13:56
Back to the beginning whereof we started, this the 19:14:16
development itself is much larger. 19:14:17
It has been scaled back. 19:14:20
The height has been brought down. 19:14:22
And I guess what's deceiving here is that the design is 19:14:24
gone from med rev which typically had a flat roof. 19:14:28
It has now a pitched roof. 19:14:33
And again the top of the pitched roof is 35 feet. 19:14:34

In our research, we did analysis of the entire area 19:14:40
from Swann to Howard, Kennedy oh to Rome, and out of 19:14:45
that area, there's 812 folio numbers. 19:14:50
Of the 812, there's 291 that are homesteaded. 19:14:53
114 of those are condominiums or townhouses. 19:14:58
There are 108 single family residential properties 19:15:04
within that boundary. 19:15:07
Of which are homesteaded. 19:15:12
So 51, 59 of the 108 are rental properties that are 19:15:13
single-family detached homes. 19:15:23
And I also put on the record before that over the years 19:15:26
these new developments have brought in new water lines, 19:15:31
new sewer lines, drainage systems, the repaid alleys, 19:15:34
they have reclaimed alleyways that were previously used 19:15:39
in all kinds of different crimes, they also were 19:15:43
dumping trash and de. 19:15:47
We have turned them into landscape gardens as we have 19:15:51
shown you on previous projects. 19:15:54
In 2001 was $7,441,000 in round numbers. 19:15:59
The assessed value for the same area is now 19:16:07
$163,387,000. 19:16:09
We believe that we're trying to do a good thing here, 19:16:14
and renovate and provide appropriate in-fill 19:16:18
development. 19:16:21
We're not trying to damage single-family houses or 19:16:22

appropriate bungalows that are historic in nature or 19:16:25
that deserve to be restored and renovated. 19:16:28
What we have done is taken a duplex, which is a ranch 19:16:33
style house that sits on the corner, and the plans are 19:16:36
to demolish that and replace it with four single-family 19:16:39
attached homeowners. 19:16:43
That takes it off of the rental rolls and puts it into 19:16:46
homeowner rolls. 19:16:51
It makes it one of those contributors for all the 19:16:52
important things we have talked about -- impact fees 19:16:54
for transportation, improving, increasing water lines 19:16:57
and water sizes, improving if school system by the 19:17:00
impact fees, and granted it's probably due to go up. 19:17:04
But the demand for services is being improved. 19:17:07
And these are services the city can't afford to pay for 19:17:09
on their own. 19:17:13
They rely on new development and construction to come 19:17:14
in and fund those improvements. 19:17:17
Within the last eight years, the property has gone from 19:17:20
a neighborhood where you couldn't receive loans for 19:17:24
redevelopment to a neighborhood that is in demand and 19:17:28
is highly desirable for residences. 19:17:30
That's evidenced by the traffic and the number of 19:17:32
people who are wanting to build, wanting to live in the 19:17:35
area. 19:17:38

We have done our best to meet with city staff for 19:17:43
criteria for redevelopment and we respectfully 19:17:47
request -- obviously we have got issues here. 19:17:50
We tried to address them. 19:17:51
We think we have adequately addressed them. 19:17:52
And I'll reserve any time for rebuttal. 19:17:54
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions for council members? 19:17:58
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 19:18:01
on item number 8? 19:18:02
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Michelini, the staff report said 19:18:04
that 12 and 19-inch trees, was a Laurel, it was 19:18:11
actually a 26-inch live oak that's in good shape, and 19:18:16
you're asking to remove that. 19:18:19
And I just wondered when you were going back and making 19:18:21
some improvements if you didn't try to think of a way 19:18:24
to allow that tree to remain. 19:18:26
>>STEVE MICHELINI: That comment just came to us 19:18:32
regarding that tree. 19:18:34
It may have been available but I was just made aware of 19:18:35
that. 19:18:37
It's not a protected grand tree. 19:18:37
>> It's one that's shy. 19:18:40
>>> It not a grand tree but protected. 19:18:43
>>STEVE MICHELINI: The evaluation hasn't been done. 19:18:45
And we are agreeing to replace the 4-inch trees, inch 19:18:47

for inch for every tree that's required. 19:18:51
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's all. 19:18:56
>>STEVE MICHELINI: We can certainly look at it. 19:18:57
But the analysis here is that it's appropriate for the 19:18:59
location. 19:19:02
And I refer you back to the two letters that were 19:19:03
previously submitted from adjoining property owner. 19:19:05
TECO substation is immediately to the west. 19:19:10
And there are other -- excuse me? 19:19:12
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That wasn't the question. 19:19:16
The question was just about the tree. 19:19:18
>>> I was following up on our summary. 19:19:21
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought you were done. 19:19:23
>>> Kelly McGary, 505 south Melville. 19:19:31
I have been sworn. 19:19:35
This was actually last heard by you in discussion at 19:19:36
the end of May. 19:19:39
It was continued in August for I think administrative 19:19:39
purpose. 19:19:43
At that hearing, in May, you probably heard from 10 to 19:19:44
15 relative neighbors in our neighborhood. 19:19:48
While they aren't going to be here tonight I I 19:19:50
represent the sentiment. 19:19:53
I would like to say that we felt very supportive in 19:19:54
terms of the scale and the mass of what they had 19:19:59

proposed by City Council. 19:20:01
We are confident the develop worry go back and work 19:20:02
with us to find a development, a new development, you 19:20:04
know, tear up the existing structure down, if that's 19:20:06
what they wanted to do with the property that they own, 19:20:10
and to make it fit with the neighborhood, not have the 19:20:12
parking in front so we can't walk down the street. 19:20:15
So we met with them once. 19:20:18
We showed them some really unique designs for duplexes 19:20:20
actually, some historic designs that we showed 19:20:23
previously in Historic Hyde Park that puts parking in 19:20:26
the back. 19:20:30
They met with us. 19:20:31
It was kind of a happy nice lunch and then came back to 19:20:32
show us that essentially nothing other than the design 19:20:34
had changed. 19:20:37
And an enormous footprint. 19:20:37
They might have reduced the scale. 19:20:39
I want you to know the existing structure is about 1400 19:20:41
square feet. 19:20:43
So if they reduced it from 10,000 to even 9,000, it's 19:20:44
meaningless essentially. 19:20:49
There's hardly any green space. 19:20:51
I don't know why they would think that homeowners are 19:20:56
going to live there. 19:21:00

I don't think it's meaningful at all the renters of 19:21:01
family homes in our neighborhood. 19:21:04
The homes make the character of the neighborhood. 19:21:06
That's what's driving the tax base growth, it's funding 19:21:08
so many city services, not impact fees. 19:21:11
They are marginal. 19:21:14
Revenue, earners for the city relative to any growth 19:21:15
which I think maintaining our neighborhood, and not 19:21:20
continuing to allow these massive structures will do. 19:21:23
The last time we were here we talked about, on this 19:21:26
project, about the tipping point. 19:21:28
You know, there is a huge development across the 19:21:29
street. 19:21:32
And I'm saddened that I wasn't living in the 19:21:32
neighborhood when it was -- was before you for a PD 19:21:35
because I would have been here doing this same thing. 19:21:39
I just want to say that unit, we just saw two rental 19:21:41
signs in the yard of that unit. 19:21:44
I think it's silly to think that these won't be rented 19:21:45
unless you can document it somehow but I don't know how 19:21:47
you can. 19:21:50
And so I just want to say, this is too big for our 19:21:51
neighborhood. 19:21:54
The developer told us he was going to take his chances 19:21:55
with you, and he just changed the design, and not the 19:21:59

scale or the mass. 19:22:02
Really none of our concerns were addressed. 19:22:04
So I respectfully ask that you deny this planned 19:22:06
development. 19:22:09
And I know he might build two huge things that we think 19:22:09
are terrible as well. 19:22:12
But I think that to allow the development of four 19:22:14
units, whether it's nine or ten thousand total square 19:22:17
feet on this project would be a huge disservice to the 19:22:22
neighborhood. 19:22:24
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 19:22:24
Next. 19:22:25
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: While the next person is coming up, 19:22:25
I'll ask staff to give me the old site plan versus the 19:22:27
new site plan since it was May since we last saw this. 19:22:30
I am going to pass these down for everybody to look at 19:22:34
so you can see old site plan versus new site plan. 19:22:36
Just so you have something to compare it to. 19:22:39
>>GWEN MILLER: You may go ahead. 19:22:41
>>> Devlin, 506 south Melville Avenue. 19:22:43
We have thanked the council for the support you have 19:22:48
given to the neighborhood over the past several months. 19:22:50
You have been, I think, really supportive of our 19:22:53
efforts to try to maintain some historic fabric in our 19:22:54
neighborhood. 19:22:58

As Kelly said we have a number of historic buildings in 19:23:00
our neighborhood. 19:23:02
We have sort of a feel of the historic neighborhood. 19:23:03
We are not actually officially in a historic 19:23:06
neighborhood but we are about to hit the tipping point 19:23:09
with these new developments that are tearing down 19:23:10
buildings. 19:23:13
I did bring some pictures so could you see what our 19:23:13
neighborhood looked like and I'll give them up to you 19:23:15
when I'm done showing them to you. 19:23:18
This is the oak tree that they have been trying to tear 19:23:32
down. 19:23:35
That's the street that's directly to the north. 19:23:35
If you look in the left-hand corner of that picture you 19:23:40
can see the apartment building. 19:23:43
That's the apartment building that they are talking 19:23:50
about. It's not huge. 19:23:51
It's right next door to my house. 19:23:53
There's a lot of people living there, that's true. 19:23:54
But it's not overwhelming to the neighborhood in 19:23:56
terms -- 19:23:59
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: This picture is the two or three 19:24:00
houses that are immediately next door to the subject 19:24:02
property? 19:24:04
>>> Yes. 19:24:05

Those are the three bungalows immediately to the north. 19:24:06
The fourth one you can sort of see the orange roof, the 19:24:08
apartment they are talking about, which is a good one 19:24:11
that goes to the historic fabric even though it's an 19:24:14
apartment building. 19:24:17
On the other side of the street, this one right here is 19:24:27
a two-family duplex. 19:24:29
This one is sort of kitty corner across from the 19:24:41
development. This is the house directly north. 19:24:44
And this is the family trying to support the 19:24:46
development. 19:24:52
This is the -- that's directly to the south, across the 19:24:52
street directly to the south. 19:24:59
And this is the development directly across the street 19:25:01
which unfortunately that picture really isn't fair 19:25:04
anymore because I took in the May. 19:25:07
And they have done a terrific job landscaping. 19:25:08
It doesn't look like that really. 19:25:11
It's that huge but the landscaping is nice and it's not 19:25:13
as awful as that. 19:25:16
I have a map of the historic preservation. 19:25:27
This is the building 512 at the very bottom there, is 19:25:30
the building that they are going to tear down. 19:25:33
Right here. 19:25:37
Here's the substation. 19:25:42

All the way up the street. This is the apartment that 19:25:44
contributes. 19:25:46
This is my home. This is another house. This is the 19:25:47
building they are going to tear down which is a 19:25:50
building that contributes to the historic fabric. 19:25:52
No one is going to claim it's a beautiful house. 19:25:55
It's not. 19:25:57
But it does contribute to the historic fabric. 19:25:58
So I think if they are going to tear it down and build 19:26:00
something else they ought to put up something that is 19:26:03
not going to take away from the historic fabric. 19:26:06
And I see the light has changed so I have to go. 19:26:08
I'll give you these photos. 19:26:10
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in, ma'am? 19:26:13
>>> I was sworn in. 19:26:16
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can you give me an approximate 19:26:17
height of the multifamily to the north of this? 19:26:20
>>> It's two stories. 19:26:22
I don't really know. 19:26:27
It's two stories. 19:26:28
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 19:26:29
Next. 19:26:30
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Not three. 19:26:32
>>> Good evening. 19:26:36
My name is Walter crumbly. 19:26:37

I live at 503 south Westland Avenue. 19:26:39
A frequent visitor down here. 19:26:42
I have not been sworn yet this evening. 19:26:45
>>GWEN MILLER: Just a minute and you will be. 19:26:47
(Oath administered by Clerk) I went to the mayor's 19:26:50
meeting last week, Ms. Saul-Sena, some of the others of 19:27:00
you all were there. 19:27:03
And I live a couple blocks west of this development. 19:27:04
And I don't like condominiums. 19:27:09
And townhouses. 19:27:11
And I can tell you why. 19:27:13
I have a three-story condominium next door to me. 19:27:15
I came down here and objected about this and you all 19:27:19
approved it and it's a fact that I've got to live with 19:27:23
it. 19:27:26
But it's sort of like being in a life boat next to the 19:27:27
Titanic when it goes by. 19:27:32
I can't go out in my yard and sit around or anything. 19:27:33
But what I've got my neighbors, oh, look ooh there, 19:27:37
crumbly down there having a party or whatever, now. 19:27:43
This destroys a single-family neighborhood. 19:27:45
Let me tell you, don't do this. 19:27:51
We have got plenty enough. 19:27:53
A six-foot wall is not going to solve three stories 19:27:56
right next to you. 19:28:01

Now think about that. 19:28:02
Think about whether you would like to have that next 19:28:03
door to your house. 19:28:06
The other part that I noticed about these townhouses 19:28:14
is, zero green space. 19:28:16
By the time you get through with the six-foot wall that 19:28:19
I insisted they build, you've got five feet of grass 19:28:22
and two palm trees that hang over that wall, and that's 19:28:26
it. 19:28:31
And you have got a little bit on the other side. 19:28:32
It's a different style. 19:28:36
Look at this neighborhood. 19:28:39
I can't believe staff is driving around looking in this 19:28:40
neighborhood. 19:28:42
You know, I have got a 1945 bungalow that I completely 19:28:44
restored. 19:28:49
It's just like it was when it was built. 19:28:49
And you got all this other ultramodern junk sitting 19:28:53
around it. 19:28:57
And we get a lot of complements from people, gee, you 19:28:59
got the only nice house on the block. 19:29:03
We only got one of two on that block anyway now. 19:29:06
Save the homesteads. 19:29:14
You know, I know there's a lot of people that have 19:29:16
rental property there and they are thinking some day I 19:29:21

am going to make a big killing and sell it to a 19:29:23
developer. 19:29:26
But I'm telling you that the 100 acres for homestead 19:29:27
there are to stay and we don't want to see our 19:29:31
neighborhood destroyed. 19:29:33
This is another crack in the dike. 19:29:40
You go across the street and six months or a year from 19:29:45
now the guy immediate to the north says I can't stand 19:29:50
it, I got this great offer from this or whoever, and 19:29:53
I'm going to sit out and have somebody down here asking 19:29:56
for another townhouse, two or three stories tall. 19:29:59
The interesting part about it is, all of these 19:30:04
beautiful townhouses, all of a sudden we seem to have 19:30:08
everybody wanting to sell out now that they have lived 19:30:11
there exactly two years and they can get the big tax 19:30:15
break. 19:30:18
>>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up, sir. 19:30:19
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sir, quick question. 19:30:20
Some folks in the neighborhood have complained to my 19:30:24
office about street parking, about difficulties in 19:30:27
getting through. 19:30:30
Have you experienced any of that? 19:30:33
>>> Well, I can tell you this. 19:30:36
I have got a standard size pickup truck, and on Friday 19:30:37
and Saturday nights especially the parking is so bad 19:30:41

that I can scarcely get in my driveway. 19:30:43
Now, imagine if you're trying to bring a fire truck or 19:30:47
something like that down the street. 19:30:50
And I asked my daughter who works with the fire 19:30:53
department. 19:30:55
She says, well, you just aim down the middle and you 19:30:56
just start tearing off mirrors and doors and stuff. 19:30:58
But, you know, if my life is on the line, I don't want 19:31:01
to have to depend on some ambulance or fire truck 19:31:05
trying to get through a maze of cars. 19:31:08
It's unbelievable out there. 19:31:11
You know, come out and see me any Friday or Saturday 19:31:14
night and I'll show you a nightmare. 19:31:16
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, sir. 19:31:18
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 19:31:22
Petitioner. 19:31:25
>>STEVE MICHELINI: A couple of things for the record. 19:31:29
Whether you build one house, two houses, for house, the 19:31:32
height limit is 3535th feet on the property. 19:31:36
And that's why we chose the height of 35 feet. 19:31:38
Because it's the scale that's approved and allowable 19:31:42
for the neighborhood. 19:31:45
That's what's allowed under the zoning classification. 19:31:47
So in terms of massing, height, or those kinds of 19:31:49
issues, if that criteria is going to be held at 19:31:54

something less than 35 feet then all single family 19:31:58
residential development in the city should be held to 19:32:01
the same standard. 19:32:03
There are no homesteaded properties that are being 19:32:05
affected by this. 19:32:10
This is a duplex. 19:32:11
And I find it hard to believe that that is a 19:32:13
contributing structure of the historic fabric of the 19:32:17
area. 19:32:20
It's a 1960-style ranch house. 19:32:21
And it's a duplex. 19:32:25
So, I mean, that's what's being removed. 19:32:26
I don't want to lead you into believing somehow we are 19:32:29
removing a very attractive 20s or 30s or 40s 19:32:33
bungalow. 19:32:37
This is the building that's going down. 19:32:37
Granted, the design is not that design, but it's scaled 19:32:42
down from that. 19:32:46
And that's what we are proposing. 19:32:47
In terms of green space, we are not asking for waivers 19:32:52
on green space. 19:32:54
We meet the code on green space. 19:32:55
With respect to parking in the neighborhood, we can't 19:32:58
be held responsible for commercial properties along 19:33:01
Howard, or residential properties or apartments that 19:33:04

don't have adequate parking. 19:33:08
We meet the code and we exceed it. 19:33:10
We meet the intent of your guest parking code by 19:33:11
increasing the size, length of the parking areas to 19:33:15
accommodate guest parking. 19:33:19
One of the things that did happen with us that was very 19:33:24
disheartening was that a neighborhood meeting was held 19:33:28
on the 4th of October, and at that meeting the 19:33:32
attendees were told basically that if you own property 19:33:36
and you are a resident, you can vote, and you can join 19:33:40
the association. 19:33:43
If you own property and you're not a resident, you can 19:33:45
join but you cannot vote and you cannot determine the 19:33:48
scope, the scale, size, direction or any of the 19:33:51
decisions made by the homeowners association. 19:33:55
In fact, they were told if you were an owner, one of 19:33:58
the owners was told this, that he owned an apartment 19:34:01
building, that the apartment tenants could join and 19:34:04
they could vote. 19:34:06
But he is the only apartment building to join and 19:34:07
couldn't vote. 19:34:10
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order. 19:34:10
>>> Excuse me. 19:34:15
>> No. 19:34:16
I'm asking our attorney. 19:34:17

He's talking about a neighborhood meeting, and their 19:34:19
rules and their procedures. 19:34:21
I see no relevance whatsoever to this particular 19:34:22
petition. 19:34:26
>>> You have given them a forum here to come before 19:34:28
you. 19:34:30
I had to notify them in terms of this hearing. 19:34:30
I was specifically told even after they were not part 19:34:33
of the association, notice on the city zoning list, 19:34:36
that I had to notify them. 19:34:40
We met with them, and basically were told that this is 19:34:41
a residence-only homeowner association. 19:34:45
And as I pointed out to you earlier in the evening, 19:34:49
there are 49 homes out of 812 in the whole area that 19:34:52
are single family residential homeowner occupied 19:34:57
homesteaded properties. 19:35:01
We have no seat at the table. 19:35:03
We cannot come in here. 19:35:04
We can't sit down with them and sit and have a square 19:35:06
meal with them in terms of the presentation of our 19:35:10
projects and understand that they are coming in with 19:35:14
opposition to programs and projects that we have been 19:35:17
working on for many, many months. 19:35:23
All I'm saying is it's not a level playing field. 19:35:24
And when we are asked to sit down and meet with someone 19:35:28

and not given an opportunity to address the issues, not 19:35:29
given the fair shake at the table in terms of 19:35:33
membership, or helping to determine the direction of 19:35:35
any of these neighborhood decisions, then I would say 19:35:39
the city is in a position to direct us to notify them, 19:35:42
to participate with them, and to have a forum with 19:35:47
them. 19:35:51
And it's a minority within that district. 19:35:53
>>MARTIN SHELBY: (off microphone) 19:35:55
>>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead, petitioner. 19:36:44
>>> The only point was that the notice had gone out, 19:36:47
anyone who has a commercial property, multifamily 19:36:49
property, who has been specifically excluded, they are 19:36:52
not being invited to meetings, they have no way of 19:36:55
providing input into the direction of the homeowners 19:36:57
association, and I can read from some of the e-mails. 19:37:01
One of them says we will attend the meeting and we 19:37:04
clearly state we have the right to establish a resident 19:37:06
homeowner association, and the city will be on hand to 19:37:09
quell any attempts to Jove ride our intentions. 19:37:12
One minor note. 19:37:14
For your peace of mind and comfort please let me add 19:37:15
that the commercial property owners are not receiving 19:37:19
this post. 19:37:21
If neighborhood associations are being effective -- 19:37:24

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Excuse me. 19:37:28
I have another point of order. 19:37:29
I have another point of order. 19:37:29
We could go on all night long about rules and 19:37:31
regulations of homeowners associations. 19:37:33
This is about this particular petition. 19:37:35
You have already made your point, Mr. Michelini. 19:37:36
You don't like the way their homeowners association is 19:37:38
set up. 19:37:41
Okay. 19:37:42
If you go out and on and waste everybody's time on that 19:37:42
issue then let's have another issue. 19:37:46
I think we should move on. 19:37:48
Otherwise we are going to hear rebuttal in the 19:37:50
neighborhood association and we can go on all night 19:37:51
talking about whether that's an appropriate homeowners 19:37:53
association. 19:37:56
I think that's appropriate for a Thursday morning 19:37:56
discussion and not a Thursday night. 19:37:57
That's my point of view. 19:37:59
>>> I believe it's my opportunity to provide a rebuttal 19:38:02
for all of the issues that were put on the record. 19:38:04
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's not an issue on the record. 19:38:06
You've made your presentation that you went to the 19:38:09
homeowners association and you made your presentation. 19:38:12

I don't see any apartment owners here in support of 19:38:15
your petition. 19:38:17
If you wanted to contact them, could you have contacted 19:38:18
them. 19:38:21
Okay? 19:38:21
But they're not here. 19:38:22
So that's your point. 19:38:23
>>GWEN MILLER: Continue, petitioner. 19:38:27
>>> The point is simply that when you rely on 19:38:29
information, you expect the information to come in and 19:38:31
be at least unbiassed and balanced. 19:38:34
And I don't believe you are getting an unbiassed and 19:38:38
balanced view of the presentations that are being made. 19:38:41
As I've said to you before, the adjoining property 19:38:44
owner immediately to the north has provided two letters 19:38:47
of support. 19:38:49
We've shown you that the size and scale is appropriate 19:38:51
for the specific location. 19:38:53
We've also shown you that it backs up to the TECO power 19:38:56
station. 19:38:58
And we believe that it's a design that's compatible 19:38:59
with the area, and should be approved. 19:39:02
I respectfully request your approval. 19:39:06
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions from council members? 19:39:08
>> Move to close. 19:39:11

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question to staff. 19:39:12
I shared this with council before. 19:39:21
Marty, Mr. Michelini made an assertion that to 19:39:24
insinuate in my opinion that he was saying the height 19:39:28
is the same as mass. 19:39:31
And scale. 19:39:34
But I think height is height, and we're all in 19:39:35
agreement 35 feet is standard height for, you know, 19:39:38
single-family. 19:39:41
I'm not in disagreement with that. 19:39:43
From a planning perspective is the S that the same as 19:39:45
mass and scale? 19:39:48
>>> I don't believe so. 19:39:49
I mean, I -- 19:39:50
>>: What's the difference? 19:39:52
>>> Well, you can have a height. 19:39:53
But I think it's the overall -- the square square 19:39:54
footage of the property, and it's just the overall 19:39:59
scale. 19:40:01
The four units. 19:40:02
Can you help me out? 19:40:06
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development. 19:40:09
Technically, scale is the proportion of height and 19:40:11
mass. 19:40:13
The higher the building, the wide ter building, the 19:40:14

larger the mass, the large ter scale. 19:40:16
You can have something very narrow and thin, and have 19:40:18
it 60 feet tall, and it appears to be like a cell 19:40:21
tower, something very small. 19:40:24
The scale of the entire cell tower isn't very large. 19:40:26
It's just the height. 19:40:29
This particular building happens to be over 100 feet 19:40:30
wide, probably 40 or so feet deep and 35 feet high. 19:40:33
The overall mass is large. 19:40:40
The height is low respectively compared to other 19:40:41
single-family residences. 19:40:45
But because the mass is so large, the whole scale 19:40:47
becomes large. 19:40:50
>> In your professional opinion is the mass and scale 19:40:52
changed significantly from what we saw in May to what 19:40:55
we see today? 19:40:58
>>> No. 19:41:00
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Ms. Coyle for the record -- 19:41:00
>>> I have been sworn. 19:41:07
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One question for Marty. The 19:41:07
existing land use allows this to be built for or two 19:41:11
homes attached or detached to be built on the property? 19:41:15
>>> When you calculate it, it's 2.97. 19:41:17
>>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members? 19:41:20
Need to close the public hearing. 19:41:23

(Motion carried) 19:41:25
Mr. Dingfelder? 19:41:28
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair. 19:41:29
Back in May -- and I think we all remember this hearing 19:41:31
very well, it was somewhat of a seminal moment for 19:41:34
council in regard to this area. 19:41:38
We specifically gave the Peter benefit of the doubt 19:41:40
because he said let me go back and redesign something 19:41:42
and work with the neighborhood, okay, to address the 19:41:44
issue. 19:41:48
And the issues that were addressed that night were 19:41:49
specifically not only the design, but also the mass and 19:41:51
scale. 19:41:56
Okay. 19:41:57
You've all seen the old plan versus the new plan. 19:41:57
You've heard testimony from staff. 19:42:01
The mass and scale have not changed. 19:42:02
The design changed slightly, but not very much. 19:42:04
I'm going to move to deny based on the competent 19:42:07
substantial record testimony that we've heard tonight 19:42:09
from the following reasons: Mass and scale, all the 19:42:12
reasons that we stated back in May, still apply to this 19:42:15
site plan. 19:42:18
The transportation still has objections relating to 19:42:19
driveways. 19:42:22

The waiver of removal of the healthy, protected oak 19:42:23
tree, and they did not address this council's concerns 19:42:26
or the neighborhood's concerns. 19:42:31
It's not consistent with the neighborhood, with the 19:42:33
single-family bungalows around this property. 19:42:37
I move to deny. 19:42:40
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I second. 19:42:41
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second. 19:42:43
Any question on the motion? 19:42:44
All in favor of the motion say Aye. 19:42:45
Opposed, Nay 19:42:47
Item number 9. 19:42:51
Asking for continuation. 19:42:52
What's the pleasure of council? 19:42:55
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved. 19:42:56
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's the one the petitioner was not 19:43:02
here? 19:43:04
Why don't we just -- I guess the continued public 19:43:08
hearing, we'll ask publicly if petitioner is present. 19:43:10
>>GWEN MILLER: Is petitioner for item number 9 present? 19:43:14
No, he's not. 19:43:18
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to deny on the failure of the 19:43:19
petitioner to attend the meeting. 19:43:22
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 19:43:23
(Motion carried). 19:43:26

>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open 14. 19:43:27
>> Second. 19:43:30
(Motion carried) 19:43:30
19:43:30
. 19:43:33
>>MARTY BOYLE: Boil boil 19:44:19
19:44:20
19:44:20
>>MARTY BOYLE: 19:44:38
Land development. 19:44:38
Item number 14, V 05-141, the property is located on 19:44:39
Kennedy, at the south side of Kennedy. 19:44:51
It is north of Cleveland. 19:45:02
The current zoning on the property is 03rd and CG, 19:45:04
office professional, commercial general. 19:45:10
The petitioner is requesting the property be rezoned to 19:45:11
planned development. 19:45:18
This is the aerial showing the site. The site is 19:45:30
vacant. 19:45:32
There's a lot of impervious material on the site. 19:45:33
This is the view along Kennedy. 19:45:40
It's looking west. 19:45:44
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Where is the -- 19:45:46
>>> I'm sorry. The property if you can see here, the 19:45:49
property, this is the view looking west. 19:45:51

The property is across the street. 19:45:53
I'll show you a better view. 19:45:56
This is the site. 19:46:01
This is the property. 19:46:11
This is the view on Kennedy looking east. 19:46:14
Again another view of the property. 19:46:19
This is a picture of the 27-inch oak on-site. 19:46:27
The property is located 722 West Kennedy Boulevard. 19:46:34
And they are requesting a PD. 19:46:38
The petitioner is proposing a mixed use commercial 19:46:40
office and multifamily residential project. 19:46:43
The site is located close to the central business 19:46:47
district boundaries, and is located on the south side 19:46:50
of Kennedy, directly across from the University of 19:46:53
Tampa. 19:46:57
The site plan proposes 5,100 square feet of commercial 19:46:57
office, and 346 residential units. 19:47:02
The residential units are comprised of 90 efficiencies, 19:47:05
241 two bedrooms and 16 three bedroom units. The 19:47:09
proposed height of the building is 100 feet maximum, 19:47:14
and eight stories. 19:47:17
The parking garage is located in the middle of the site 19:47:18
and has seven levels. 19:47:21
The parking garage will be hidden by a facade. 19:47:23
The following waivers, to remove more than 50% of the 19:47:30

protected trees on-site, as per City of Tampa code, 19:47:34
section 131-45-G-4. 19:47:38
To meet reduction of the requirement of one tree per 19:47:43
1500 square feet of parcel, section 13-161-A. 19:47:45
To reduce total amount of required berths from 3 to 19:47:51
zero, we drews the drive aisles in the parking garage 19:47:57
to 24 feet wide and allow access to a local street, 19:48:01
fielding Avenue. 19:48:06
We have objections. 19:48:06
And they are based on -- from land development that the 19:48:08
petitioner is removing 100% of the trees on-site. 19:48:12
Staff feels that the building could have been 19:48:16
redesigned to try and save some of the protected trees. 19:48:19
The petitioner has verbally said that they will try and 19:48:23
relocate some of the palms. 19:48:26
Transportation at time of the staff report had several 19:48:28
objections. 19:48:33
However, through petitioner working with 19:48:35
transportation, they have been able to remove all 19:48:38
objections except for number 3 where it says 19:48:42
transportation objects to the driveway on Fielding. 19:48:48
The drive driveway for this project needs to be placed 19:48:49
on Brevard Avenue, the location of the signal at 19:48:51
Brevard Avenue and Kennedy provides safer turning units 19:48:54
and would not impact any residential development along 19:48:57

Brevard Avenue. 19:49:00
And transportation objects to the driveway on fielding 19:49:02
Avenue. The code requires nonresidential parking lots 19:49:05
to streets in nonresidential zoned. 19:49:08
Brevard Avenue does not have any residentially zoned 19:49:11
properties between Kennedy Boulevard and Cleveland. 19:49:14
Under the stormwater objections, in the staff report, 19:49:17
they have satisfied all of their objections. 19:49:21
And they have also satisfied parks and recs by placing 19:49:24
a note that they would comply with their request. 19:49:28
Under findings of fact, under dimensional regulations, 19:49:34
building structures and heights shall be designed using 19:49:38
those prescribed in section 27-77. 19:49:40
Buildings and setbacks for nonresidential would be 19:49:46
allowed provided there's adequate space for site 19:49:48
improvements as far as access. 19:49:51
Flexibility and building heights will be allowed 19:49:52
provided they are compatible with the surrounding 19:49:54
neighborhood and provide increased setbacks to 19:49:56
compensate for added building heights. 19:49:58
Staff feels the building height is compatible with 19:50:01
adjacent neighborhood. 19:50:04
The predominant character of adjacent buildings is 19:50:05
eight story buildings. The university of Tampa dorm 19:50:10
building is directly to the north and is of 19:50:12

approximately height of the proposed building. 19:50:15
The proposed setbacks of this site are consistent with 19:50:17
existing commercial and development along Kennedy. 19:50:21
The streetscape of Kennedy Boulevard and the petitioner 19:50:23
is complying with the Kennedy Boulevard overlay. 19:50:28
And they are going to include an 8-foot wide sidewalk, 19:50:35
with two-foot bands of brick pavers crossing the 19:50:39
sidewalk at approximately 12-foot intervals. 19:50:44
Developer is developing a streetscape along the south 19:50:47
side of Kennedy Boulevard from fielding to Brevard, at 19:50:49
the developer's sole expense. 19:50:52
Shade trees and street lamps will be provided on 19:50:55
Kennedy Boulevard adjacent to the right-of-way on 19:50:58
private property. 19:51:00
And petitioner provided us with an example of 19:51:03
streetlighting, and talking about recommendations go 19:51:08
with the Promenade, and the Franklin base. 19:51:13
That is the conclusion of our comments. 19:51:28
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 19:51:46
I have been sworn in. 19:51:48
I put the future land use map on the Elmo. 19:51:50
>>GWEN MILLER: Use the hand mike. 19:51:52
They can't reach over when you -- they can't hear you 19:51:55
when you reach over. 19:51:59
>>> In this particular segment of Kennedy is regional 19:52:02

mixed use 100. 19:52:04
Then we have community mixed use 35 along this segment 19:52:07
of Platt. 19:52:11
The petitioner as stated by Ms. Boyle is requesting a 19:52:17
mixed use project from residential in character that 19:52:23
will consist of approximately 346 residential units and 19:52:27
approximately -- and of office space. 19:52:32
Regarding consistency of the comprehensive plan, the 19:52:40
site is within close proximity to the central business 19:52:42
district, one of the major employment centers in the 19:52:45
City of Tampa located less than .4 from the 19:52:47
Hillsborough River. 19:52:51
From the context standpoint, taking the mike again, 19:52:55
from the context standpoint, the site is located right 19:53:00
after this turn of Florida as one heads west from 19:53:03
downtown Tampa. 19:53:07
The gardens district almost directly across the street 19:53:08
from the site to the northwest of the site. 19:53:11
As one heads west this way along grand central you run 19:53:14
into Bryn Allen on the south side, to give you some 19:53:17
context as far as the natural existing uses. 19:53:20
As far as the dorms that Ms. Coyle has alluded to from 19:53:24
a height aspect, here are the dormitories that were 19:53:28
recently developed over there for the university of 19:53:30
Tampa and that entrance into that western segment of 19:53:33

the University of Tampa. 19:53:36
The proposed request is consistent with the variety of 19:53:43
policies within the future land use element that relate 19:53:46
to supporting the business district as a high intensity 19:53:50
major office and commercial activity center. 19:53:53
Redevelopment and revitalization strategies and 19:53:55
incentives that can be provided for the production of 19:53:58
development such as this. 19:54:01
To actively enforce in the development review process, 19:54:06
policies in future land use element which support high 19:54:09
density mixed use development. 19:54:11
The proposal has demonstrated its consistency with a 19:54:13
broad list of policy by developing a high density mixed 19:54:16
use project within close proximity to established 19:54:19
activity centers. 19:54:22
It also demonstrates that sidewalks that must meet or 19:54:24
exceed current city standards are depicted in the site 19:54:28
plan provided by the applicant. 19:54:32
There are also two Hartline bus stops adjacent to the 19:54:34
rezoning site. 19:54:38
We have requested, as Ms. Boyle has stated, additional 19:54:40
pedestrian amenities with regard to pedestrian access, 19:54:45
to the intersection directly to the northeast of the 19:54:48
site, and of course enhanced sidewalks and pedestrian 19:54:50
amenities along the south side of Kennedy Boulevard. 19:54:54

Planning Commission staff has no objections to the 19:54:57
proposed request and finds it consistent with the 19:55:00
comprehensive plan. 19:55:02
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 19:55:04
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question before the petitioner 19:55:08
starts. 19:55:10
Does Wilson Stair review this as an urban project? 19:55:10
>>MORRIS MASSEY: It not subject to any special design 19:55:23
guidelines. 19:55:26
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development. 19:55:29
The Kennedy Boulevard overlay is a proposed overlay. 19:55:31
I'm actually author of it. 19:55:34
So I helped with the design of the streetscape. 19:55:35
They came and asked all the questions. 19:55:38
And they actually were encouraged strongly to do it. 19:55:39
And they did. 19:55:42
>>> Truett Gardner, 101 south Franklin. 19:55:49
I have been sworn. 19:55:51
We have before you now what we hope you will find to be 19:55:53
an exciting project for Kennedy Boulevard. 19:55:56
And its revitalization which is desperately needed, and 19:55:58
as Cathy said one of the first things that we did, on 19:56:04
the property under contract, their goal was to create a 19:56:10
development and revitalize Kennedy, put some 19:56:15
streetlight back -- street life back on Kennedy. 19:56:18

We met with Cathy right away, and got a copy of the 19:56:21
proposed design guidelines for the Kennedy overlay 19:56:24
district, used this as a guide for the streetscape, the 19:56:27
lighting, the landscaping, and scale of the building, 19:56:31
and as the team struggled and debated first and 19:56:36
foremost what the buildings look like, should it be 19:56:43
tall, should it be low, we decided it would be best to 19:56:46
honor City of Tampa, stay beneath their buildings, the 19:56:49
dorm center, the dormitories, threw us little a little 19:56:55
bit of a quandary with open space, because we were 19:57:00
spreading the site low, spread it out, and actually 19:57:02
exceed the open space requirements. 19:57:05
So it's been a team effort. 19:57:06
I want to take a second and introduce the team. 19:57:07
Keith Vanderbilt is with Preston partnership, the 19:57:10
architect. 19:57:13
Dave Thompson is with wood partners. 19:57:14
Ray MICONE is traffic consultant. 19:57:17
And Steve and Jennifer willman are with Wilson Miller. 19:57:20
And Dave is going to briefly tell you about partners 19:57:24
and plans for the property. 19:57:30
Keith would like to go over some of the design elements 19:57:31
he. 19:57:33
And we are here to answer any questions you have. 19:57:34
And I'll be back to sum up and be available for 19:57:38

questions and rebuttal. 19:57:43
With that I'll turn it over to Keith Vanderbilt. 19:57:45
>>> Keith Vanderbilt. 19:57:50
I'm the architect for the project. 19:57:52
And with Preston partnership. 19:57:53
I have been sworn in. 19:57:56
I wanted to just take a moment and briefly go over some 19:57:57
of the design elements of the buildings. 19:58:00
I'm going to come over here. 19:58:02
Basically, we have an 8-story structure. 19:58:10
And we have taken the residential. 19:58:13
We have parking. 19:58:15
We have taken the residential component of the building 19:58:21
and wrapped it around three sides of the parking deck 19:58:24
to conceal the deck as much as possible. 19:58:26
We want to achieve three things with this design. 19:58:32
One is conceal the parking deck. 19:58:35
Two, we wanted for the residential elevation to be the 19:58:37
predominant part of the building facade. 19:58:44
The orientation of the residential component, we 19:58:49
oriented east of the site, to take advantage of the 19:58:53
views of downtown. 19:58:55
We have -- we create add landscape courtyard off of 19:59:06
Brevard to link the building lobby, which would be 19:59:10
located right here, to the street. 19:59:13

This courtyard will have brick paved walkways. 19:59:18
It will also have pedestrian seating. 19:59:22
And we are going to propose a water feature. 19:59:24
Right now the parking is currently located off of 19:59:32
fielding. 19:59:35
Lined Kennedy, Brevard, fielding, created uniform 19:59:41
streetscape. 19:59:46
The project also includes an internal courtyard for the 19:59:47
residents. 19:59:52
On the top of the parking deck incorporated an amenity 19:59:53
feature for the building. 19:59:57
Has a pool and landscape terrace, gardens. 19:59:59
Also, on the Kennedy side, the Kennedy overlay criteria 20:00:05
be used as a guide when they develop that streetscape. 20:00:13
The building rendering, this shows how the residential 20:00:22
component, basically it makes up the whole facade of 20:00:25
the building. 20:00:30
The exterior is a combination of stucco and glass. 20:00:31
We have two forms of stucco combined at the glass to 20:00:36
break down the massing of the structure. 20:00:40
We've also, lastly, incorporated into the base of the 20:00:44
building along Kennedy a commercial component. 20:00:48
And that's right here. 20:00:53
That's about it 20:00:58
This is the Cleveland side street elevation. 20:01:19

Basically the residential terraces come right down to 20:01:21
the grade. 20:01:24
We elevated them two feet to create a separation 20:01:25
between the sidewalk and the private terraces. 20:01:28
But right now you would have terraces right down to the 20:01:32
street, the elevation. 20:01:35
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Honestly the Kennedy side looks 20:01:36
great. 20:01:44
Cleveland looks weak. 20:01:45
And maybe I am not reading it right but it looks like 20:01:47
blank walls, taller than people, so if you are a 20:01:49
pedestrian on Cleveland, and there are a lot of people 20:01:52
who go down Cleveland, you're looking at all these 20:01:55
blank walls. 20:01:57
And that, I'm sure -- tell me I'm not seeing something. 20:01:58
>>> Well, right now the rendering paints that, I agree. 20:02:03
>> Well, it could have been better. 20:02:06
>>> Right now, we have shown it as stucco walls. 20:02:08
You know, they are two feet six above the terrace 20:02:11
elevation is two feet six inches above the street. 20:02:14
And that we were going to create a three-foot high 20:02:17
railing so it's about a five foot high wall. 20:02:20
We could easily break that wall up and integrate 20:02:24
railings. 20:02:28
>> I think landscaping would really help. 20:02:29

>>> Well, right now the terraces are right at the edge 20:02:31
of the sidewalk. 20:02:35
By Cleveland. 20:02:37
And we could easily put Ivy or something like that on 20:02:40
it. 20:02:47
>> Well, there needs to be something. 20:02:48
Right now Kennedy side is attractive. 20:02:50
But Kennedy, it has a lot of activity. 20:02:53
And what you're putting there is just like -- it's as 20:02:55
if you have given it no thought. 20:02:59
But it's actually a very active street. 20:03:01
And so you need to do something. 20:03:03
You need to give this some more thought. 20:03:05
>>> Well, we could introduce some -- 20:03:08
>>: Who is your landscape architect? 20:03:13
>>> It's our in-house. 20:03:15
It's a partnership. 20:03:17
You can take the microphone. 20:03:19
>>> I'm Dave Thompson. 20:03:21
I've been sworn in. 20:03:23
Our initial thought along Cleveland, after speaking 20:03:26
with Keith and walking the site and being out there, 20:03:31
was that while there is some activity, it primarily 20:03:33
serves as a fairly high speed, downtown sort of exit 20:03:38
corridor. 20:03:42

And because the design was to bring residential all the 20:03:42
way down to the street level, wherever possible, there 20:03:48
are some construction related issues in addition to the 20:03:54
others that Keith mentioned. 20:03:56
We really wanted the eight or so units that are along 20:03:57
the first floor on Cleveland to have something special 20:04:03
to offer other than going along a street where people 20:04:07
typically drive I think 35, who miles per hour 20:04:15
typically with their headlights on, and particularly at 20:04:18
night with floor to ceiling glass. 20:04:21
So our design template was to give the people who 20:04:23
purchase these units something special, in this case it 20:04:26
would be a patio that's fairly large. 20:04:30
So we did put a lot of thought into it. 20:04:34
Might not be what council would like to see there, but 20:04:40
we did attempt to create something special there. 20:04:42
>>KEVIN WHITE: I believe on the landscape plan, also -- 20:04:44
Keith: We had put some trees otter rases to get some 20:04:52
greenery on that side. 20:04:56
I think the way the rendering is depicted it looks a 20:04:57
little bleak because there's a white wall. 20:05:00
I think it's more of a rendering. 20:05:02
We can easily introduce some railings and open that up 20:05:03
a little to make it a little less -- 20:05:07
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Severe. 20:05:11

>>> Severe. 20:05:12
>>> Anderson: If I may, basically create sort of a 20:05:16
living wall along there and Keith mentioned the facade 20:05:20
on the building the other sides to kind of break up the 20:05:28
severity with basically landscaping elements as you 20:05:31
suggested with the palm trees, and perhaps a little 20:05:33
wall. 20:05:37
There will be enhanced bus stop here, as there is on 20:05:37
this corner, which we have committed to with the city. 20:05:42
Also, there will be some activity, it will feel pretty 20:05:44
nice. 20:05:49
>> Keith: We are going to go back and forth here. 20:05:51
One of the things when we were laying out this 20:05:53
building, the streetscape along Kennedy has sort of -- 20:05:55
we have an 8-foot wide sidewalk, a landscape buffering, 20:06:01
some other things, and it sort of forced us to slide 20:06:05
the building a little closer to Cleveland. 20:06:08
So in order to keep -- try to meet those design 20:06:10
criteria along Kennedy, it sort of pushed the building 20:06:15
over a tad. 20:06:18
If you all have any other questions about that. 20:06:26
>>KEVIN WHITE: Go ahead, sir. 20:06:32
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I appreciate it. 20:06:33
I want to follow up on that issue. 20:06:34
I wanted to get the other gentleman's attention as 20:06:37

well. 20:06:39
I just wanted to follow up on that point Ms. Saul-Sena 20:06:45
made. 20:06:48
You guys are going to be making a major statement on 20:06:49
both Kennedy and Cleveland. 20:06:52
Okay? 20:06:54
And I can assure you that Cleveland will be changing. 20:06:54
Azeele -- Azeele and Cleveland, although they are the 20:07:00
flush streets, I have been talking to a lot of folks 20:07:04
who live in that area, a lot of folks folks who own 20:07:06
property in that area and they want to see those two 20:07:09
streets changing as well. 20:07:11
I know you guys are familiar with new urbanism concepts 20:07:12
and that sort of thing, that are street friendly, okay? 20:07:15
Your wall, a six-foot wall is not street friendly. 20:07:19
I mean, you know, to me if you really wanted to make a 20:07:22
statement and help that street, go in the direction it 20:07:25
should be, you would have stoops and things like that, 20:07:28
where the neighborhood could really interact, where the 20:07:33
folks in your residence could really interact with that 20:07:36
street. 20:07:39
I realize you have some security issues probably today 20:07:40
in terms of what is happening there today. 20:07:43
So I want to be respectful of that. 20:07:45
In light of that, I think you could combine perhaps a 20:07:47

three-foot wall with three-foot iron, and still end up 20:07:50
with the same security, or maybe even a four-foot wall 20:07:53
and two feet of iron with the same security decorated 20:07:56
with landscaping as well. 20:07:59
>> Cathy and I have been talking about this and we 20:08:05
consulted with Dave Thompson, and she brought up 20:08:07
another point as well. The note in the site plan says 20:08:10
there's a little knee wall on Kennedy and we stayed 20:08:12
within the site plan three feet. 20:08:15
Cathy said she would be much more comfortable if that 20:08:16
would be two feet so people could sit on it. 20:08:18
That would be fine. 20:08:21
As far as Cleveland, our note says six feet. 20:08:21
We would be willing to make that four feet with two 20:08:25
feet of railing above that. 20:08:27
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the other question, when I 20:08:30
looked on the site plan I didn't see the enhanced bus 20:08:31
stop that you're talking about. 20:08:33
So I just want to make sure that it's ultimately -- not 20:08:35
naturally that drawing you're pointing at but this site 20:08:38
plan. 20:08:42
Maybe I missed it. 20:08:42
Because I think there needs to be two bus stops. 20:08:51
One on Cleveland. 20:08:53
One on Kennedy. 20:08:55

And they are going to be the enhanced Hartline bus 20:08:56
stop. 20:08:59
>>> That's what Hartline asked for. 20:09:00
>> And you all are going to pay for that? 20:09:02
>>> Yes. 20:09:04
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Two other questions that the staff 20:09:04
raised that maybe you can address. 20:09:20
You realize that Brevard is the street that has the 20:09:22
light which means you can get in and out and fielding 20:09:24
where you are going to have everybody going doesn't 20:09:26
have a light. 20:09:28
So did you all consider flipping those? 20:09:29
>>> Anderson: Initially when we went to our first DRC 20:09:37
meeting, I believe, that issue, I believe Melanie 20:09:40
raised it, we felt very strongly from the beginning 20:09:43
that it was important to orient our building toward 20:09:46
downtown. 20:09:49
We've also had some traffic studies undertaken. 20:09:51
Randy is here tonight to talk a little about those. 20:09:54
Feel like looking at the project as a whole, it's much 20:09:59
better to have the deck on this side for a couple 20:10:02
reasons. 20:10:06
If we were to put the deck here, on the eastern side of 20:10:07
the property, most of these units -- I'm scared to move 20:10:12
this thing, I'm sorry. 20:10:18

These units, of course, wouldn't be able to have the 20:10:23
terrific views of downtown, which we think is pretty 20:10:27
critical for the success of the development. 20:10:29
That's what we're selling. 20:10:32
We can take this down now. 20:10:36
Another alternative that we considered and talked some 20:10:38
with Melanie about was the notion of adding -- this of 20:10:41
course is the parking deck for a number of floors, and 20:10:46
then the roof has the landscape with the pool, and 20:10:48
that's her favorite, mentioned that. 20:10:55
And a tunnel created through the building here so that 20:10:59
we would be able to have access on Brevard, also. 20:11:03
And we really felt like that broke up the building in a 20:11:08
very bad way. 20:11:13
There would be no connectivity from the lobby to the 20:11:14
southern portion of the building, for one, or 20:11:16
potentially two floors. 20:11:18
It also added a good bit to the cost. 20:11:21
And of course as Truett mentioned as we have done on a 20:11:25
number of other places our goal is really to provide 20:11:29
the most attainably priced, urban style housing that we 20:11:31
can. 20:11:35
So we did consider that, based on orientation of the 20:11:37
building, what we feel like we're selling, also our 20:11:41
traffic study, which we do have a professional 20:11:44

difference of opinion on that. 20:11:48
We had decided that it's pretty critical to leave it 20:11:49
where it is. 20:11:52
And we also have letters of support for the project 20:11:52
from -- with the exception of two neighbors. 20:11:57
We have letters of support from every other adjacent 20:12:03
property owner that we were able to get in touch with. 20:12:06
And if now is a good time I'm take you through those 20:12:10
letters and tell you a little about who is in support 20:12:13
of the project that will be most exacted by that. 20:12:16
Would now be all right for that? 20:12:19
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have one more question on the 20:12:21
Cleveland side. 20:12:22
I noticed that there weren't any trees. 20:12:23
There's a sidewalk. 20:12:27
But there are no trees to speak of. 20:12:29
>>> There are palm trees in those cut-outs in the wall 20:12:35
there. 20:12:37
>> In the cut-outs? 20:12:39
>>> See how the wall sort of -- it attenuated. 20:12:40
>>> Gardner: The color doesn't bring it out but there 20:12:59
are trees there, there, there, there. 20:13:01
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's my experience that palm trees 20:13:03
aren't really much of a shade tree. 20:13:08
It looks like you have a lot of space there. It looks 20:13:09

like hopefully some day there will be pedestrians on 20:13:11
the Cleveland side. 20:13:13
>>> Anderson: Especially if some of these terrific 20:13:17
plans for the far side of the street there where the 20:13:19
Crosstown comes down and out, so that comes to 20:13:21
fruition. 20:13:24
I suppose, again, our basic feeling, having done some 20:13:25
projects like this before, is that they really wanted 20:13:30
those units along Cleveland to feel special. 20:13:34
And because of the issue raised earlier with security, 20:13:36
crime, now, maybe that will change. 20:13:40
And the fact that eventually, hopefully there will be, 20:13:44
as we have committed to do on the site plan, there will 20:13:47
be that trail system on the other side of the street. 20:13:49
So kind of a combination of those factors. 20:13:54
And the fact that we are going to go in later with the 20:13:56
landscape plan as we committed to work with the 20:13:59
neighbors and with the city, and Doug Yurcus and 20:14:02
everyone to make that as attractive as possible. 20:14:05
But bigger shade trees, essentially because of the way 20:14:08
the building is pushed back from Kennedy, very tough to 20:14:13
fit those in with the full size sidewalk. 20:14:18
And also have these patios which we want to provide 20:14:20
for -- 20:14:26
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: If you're saying that oak tree might 20:14:30

be a problem but I'm sure between an oak and a palm, 20:14:32
but a palm is just a stick with a thing on top. 20:14:36
>>> We would be happy to take suggestions for any sort 20:14:39
of tree that will work well there as we have done on 20:14:41
Kennedy. 20:14:44
Cathy has some suggestions for us. 20:14:45
>>KEVIN WHITE: One of the things, looking at palms that 20:14:48
you have here, if you put some type of big type of 20:14:50
shade tree, the residents that own these particular 20:14:53
units have no view at that point in time. 20:14:57
So -- 20:14:59
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No view with the Crosstown anyhow. 20:15:04
>>KEVIN WHITE: I understand that. 20:15:07
I don't want to want theory point but I think the palms 20:15:10
may be a little more attractive from that standpoint. 20:15:12
I don't think I would buy one of these units on the 20:15:15
second, third, fourth or fifth floor if I don't have a 20:15:17
view at all. 20:15:19
>>> We would be happy to work with staff on that. 20:15:25
Cathy mentioned they have a tree they selected and we 20:15:28
would be more than happy to work with them on the 20:15:33
selection of those trees. 20:15:34
I don't know exactly what a dapham Polly is. 20:15:36
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Make sure Ms. Saul-Sena does because 20:15:41
she's the landscaper. 20:15:45

>>> Greg Yurcus. 20:15:48
There is currently power lines that run along Cleveland 20:15:50
so palm trees really won't work too well. 20:15:52
So we can come up with power lines, tree species, the 20:15:54
full list unless they go underground with them. 20:15:59
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the sidewalk gets some shade. 20:16:01
>>> Staff will be happy to work with them. 20:16:07
>>GWEN MILLER: Let me go to the audience. 20:16:08
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak 20:16:11
on item 14? 20:16:13
We are going to come back for rebuttal. 20:16:16
>>> I just wanted to read the letters of support. 20:16:18
>>GWEN MILLER: You can read them. 20:16:20
Come on up and speak, sir. 20:16:22
>>> My name is Bill mason. 20:16:25
I live at 313 spring lake highway, Brooksville, the 20:16:28
Florida. 20:16:32
And I have not been sworn in. 20:16:32
>>GWEN MILLER: Raise your right hand, please. 20:16:33
(Oath administered by Clerk) 20:16:37
We own a building at 105 south fielding, an 80-year-old 20:16:43
four-plex which is currently two offices downstairs and 20:16:47
two apartments upstairs. 20:16:52
And in principal, we have known something is coming for 20:16:54
a long time on this place. 20:17:01

In principle I don't really object to the. 20:17:05
I do object to the using fielding as a service street. 20:17:09
Fielding is a brick street. 20:17:15
Myself and Brad and Kerry Souders own the only two 20:17:18
buildings existing on the street. 20:17:26
They have done a very nice renovation job. I did a 20:17:27
renovation in the 1980s on mine and we are now 20:17:30
starting to develop plans to do a second renovation on 20:17:33
the building. 20:17:37
We have always hoped that whatever happened would have 20:17:38
more of a commercial component on Kennedy, a component 20:17:45
on Cleveland with residential components on at least 20:17:50
fielding which interacted with the street. 20:17:52
5,000 square foot of commercial is almost not able to 20:17:57
call that really mixed use. 20:18:02
It will have 10-foot ceilings, which no large chain or 20:18:05
anything will be able to go there. 20:18:11
My concern is also with the footprint along fielding. 20:18:15
That building, from what I understand, is within a few 20:18:19
feet of the property lye line, and that creates a 20:18:25
tremendous canyon. 20:18:28
Now, my place would look out at the parking garage, and 20:18:29
all the garbage services, everything would come up that 20:18:36
brick street which the city rebuilt about 10 or 15 20:18:40
years ago. 20:18:44

The aesthetics of the building, I would like to see, it 20:18:47
looks sort of like something from Atlanta, not 20:18:50
something from around the University of Tampa. 20:18:53
It looks like it would go better in the Channelside 20:18:54
district. 20:18:57
We are maybe not technically, but it is an urban 20:18:59
neighborhood. 20:19:02
I have periodically lived in one of the units in my 20:19:02
building, and we actually enjoyed it very much. 20:19:07
It's a very fine place to live. 20:19:09
So I do support the residential component of it. 20:19:11
I would like to see a little more scaling, at least on 20:19:16
the fielding side, so that it's not a straight-up 80 or 20:19:19
100-foot wall that exists there. 20:19:24
And I would also like to see residential that uses, 20:19:26
that has individual access to the street rather than a 20:19:31
courtyard on Brevard and it's basically everybody is 20:19:34
can tained. 20:19:37
Also, the open space mainly appears to be in the 20:19:39
interior of the building. 20:19:42
And, you know, the courtyard and staff, and I would 20:19:45
like to see if there's not a way that it could be 20:19:51
worked that the footprint could be sort of brought in, 20:19:53
and that green space be on the outside. 20:19:57
Thank you very much. 20:20:01

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question. 20:20:01
I'm looking at the elevation, or the plan, rather, and 20:20:03
it's hard for me to tell -- 20:20:08
>>> It was hard for me. 20:20:10
I don't even know what the setbacks on fielding are 20:20:11
actually planned at. 20:20:15
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, that's a question but I'm 20:20:16
trying to point out, your property -- 20:20:19
>>> I'm the yellow brick building at 105 south fielding 20:20:21
which would be almost right across from the garage. 20:20:24
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are you closer to Kennedy or 20:20:30
fielding? 20:20:32
>>> I'm closer to Kennedy. 20:20:32
>> So there's a vacant lot -- there's a building, then 20:20:33
there's you from Kennedy. 20:20:36
>>> Right. 20:20:37
>> And then there's a vacant lot? 20:20:38
>>> The vacant lot -- yeah, this is our building. 20:20:40
The vacant lot has been zoned, list to build a 6-unit 20:20:42
Mediterranean style condo unit on that lot. 20:20:49
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You approved that last year? 20:20:54
>>> Maybe two years ago now. 20:20:55
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you. 20:20:56
>>> That's our building, yeah. 20:21:00
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is your setback from fielding? 20:21:04

>>> The setback of the building is actually fairly 20:21:06
close on fielding. 20:21:10
It's about six feet from the sidewalk. 20:21:11
But I have 14-foot side setbacks, and in the rear I 20:21:14
have a large setback, too. 20:21:19
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the approximate width of 20:21:21
fielding? 20:21:23
>>> The street itself is probably, what, 35. 20:21:28
>>> Anderson: Right-of-way is fairly wide. 20:21:40
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak? 20:21:43
Okay. 20:21:46
Petitioner, you can come back. 20:21:46
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have a facade, an elevation 20:21:50
of the fielding facade? 20:21:53
>>> Anderson. 20:22:00
This here shows Cleveland looking at fielding. 20:22:01
We don't. 20:22:05
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is it going to look like? 20:22:05
>>> We have this elevation here. 20:22:10
>>GWEN MILLER: Take the mike. 20:22:12
>>> We have this elevation here, which of course this 20:22:18
is Cleveland, and this is fielding. 20:22:20
So it does show a little bit about fielding there. 20:22:22
Keith: Basically the elevation, this piece of the 20:22:29
elevation here, is going to be along the fielding side. 20:22:31

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The plan that we have doesn't have 20:22:37
any kind of scale on it. 20:22:39
So it's really hard to tell what we are looking at. 20:22:40
It looks as if there's a sidewalk, and then there's 20:22:44
something, and then there's a building. 20:22:48
But there's no sense whether it's five feet or 20 feet. 20:22:49
What are we looking at on fielding? 20:22:53
>>> From the back of the sidewalk to the building is at 20:23:00
least 10, 15 feet. 20:23:02
Don't have a dimension. 20:23:03
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is it? 20:23:05
Softscape? 20:23:06
>>> It's planting beds with low indigenous plant 20:23:07
material. 20:23:11
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And is it sheered? 20:23:13
You can't read whether it's like windows, or just 20:23:17
stucco, or what's going on. 20:23:20
On the side of the building. 20:23:22
I'm looking at this picture that you showed us and you 20:23:23
can't tell what's going on there. 20:23:25
Can you tell me what it is? 20:23:30
>>> Keith: These residences down at the street level 20:23:34
also have -- there will be a planting strip separating 20:23:37
them from the sidewalk. 20:23:43
It will be sort of recessed into the sod. 20:23:48

>> They won't have these white things? 20:23:51
>>> No, no. 20:23:54
These will just be terraces behind the planting decks. 20:23:55
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mrs. Saul-Sena was talking about the 20:24:00
stucco issue. 20:24:01
But, you know, just a question. 20:24:02
When you went through your process, your thought 20:24:05
process awhile ago, somebody, maybe Mr. Garner, 20:24:08
referenced the fact that you wanted to be sensitive to 20:24:11
the heights that university of Tampa. 20:24:13
And in keeping with that same type of idea or -- 20:24:16
another thing, a lost brick -- obviously university of 20:24:21
Tampa even in the parking garage. 20:24:24
Any consideration of some sort of a brick trim or 20:24:26
something that might blend with it? 20:24:27
Never thought about that? 20:24:31
>>> No, we had a discussion on it. 20:24:34
But we are trying to create a more contemporary, edgy 20:24:35
type building. 20:24:39
We thought the stucco and glass worked better, was a 20:24:39
better pallet to work with. 20:24:43
We didn't think introducing brick into this design was 20:24:46
appropriate. 20:24:49
And we thought -- we did mix the colors with the 20:24:49
stucco. 20:24:56

But we didn't think we needed to actually introduce 20:24:56
brick. 20:24:58
>>ROSE FERLITA: I didn't mean introduce. 20:24:58
I wondered if that was one of the considerations. 20:25:02
Obviously not. 20:25:05
Thanks. 20:25:06
>>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members? 20:25:06
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes. 20:25:08
Last but not least, big beautiful tree. 20:25:09
About 10 feet from where your courtyard is going to be. 20:25:11
Did you think about moving your courtyard over so could 20:25:15
you maintain the tree instead of removing it? 20:25:17
>>> Gardner: There's one big reason behind that. The 20:25:22
site in order to meet stormwater has to be built up two 20:25:25
and a half, three feet which would pretty much kill the 20:25:28
trees on-site anyway. 20:25:30
And then the courtyard, we wanted to push up to Kennedy 20:25:32
as much as possible, since that's kind of the grand 20:25:35
entrance, lobby spills out onto -- so we just wanted to 20:25:37
push it up towards Kennedy. 20:25:43
And then also to reintroduce some sort of uniform site 20:25:45
as far as treescape, landscape, draw us to that 20:25:52
conclusion. 20:25:55
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where is your drainage? 20:25:57
>>> Keith: Our retention areas will be at the 20:26:03

courtyard and below the landscape courtyard in the 20:26:05
front of the building. 20:26:09
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: All vaulted. 20:26:09
>>KEVIN WHITE: Close the public hearing. 20:26:13
>> Second. 20:26:17
(Motion carried) 20:26:17
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did we get clarification from staff 20:26:24
on if that's added to the site plan before he reads? 20:26:30
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm sorry, this isn't my case. 20:26:34
We changed note number 12 that says all proposed the 20:26:41
city transportation division. 20:26:49
I added "and Land Development Coordination" because we 20:26:51
need to work on the species of the tree and 20:26:54
coordination with transportation. 20:26:56
Note 17. 20:26:58
The privacy walls may be located along Kennedy, Brevard 20:26:58
Avenue, up to two feet high, to Croat that knee wall. 20:27:02
And along Kennedy up to four feet high with a two-foot 20:27:05
rail above. 20:27:08
And -- that's Cleveland, I'm sorry. 20:27:09
That's Cleveland. 20:27:14
In reference to fielding, just so you know, there is no 20:27:15
wall along fielding at all. 20:27:18
And we also added that under story and power line tree 20:27:21
species to be added at a 30-foot interval on Cleveland 20:27:25

street as approved, a coordination between Greg and I 20:27:29
on the species for that. 20:27:33
30-foot interval is what we were using on the Kennedy 20:27:36
Boulevard overlay for all the side streets, and it's 20:27:39
20-foot interval along Kennedy. 20:27:42
King. 20:27:45
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why wouldn't we do the 20 so it's 20:27:46
like a major street, just like 20:27:50
Kennedy? 20:27:59
>>KEVIN WHITE: Isn't that on the cut-outs like the 20:28:04
Cleveland side? 20:28:12
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I had talked to him about doing no 20:28:16
more than a 20-foot span of the wall and having some 20:28:18
kind of notchout or gating, if that's acceptable. 20:28:21
>>KEVIN WHITE: On the plan it looked like there was 20:28:25
some sort of notch-out. 20:28:27
>>> Yeah, it not actually on the plan, it's on the 20:28:30
rendering. 20:28:32
That can change obviously. 20:28:32
But I would like to note the spanning. 20:28:34
I don't know. 20:28:36
Did you hear that? 20:28:37
Do you want to do 20 or 30? 20:28:40
>>> Gardner: I think we're fine with 20. 20:28:43
>>> Anderson: What does the overlay call for I thought 20:28:50

it was 30. 20:28:55
We're happy to do 20. 20:28:56
That's fine. 20:28:57
>>CATHERINE COYLE: It's not actually spelled out. 20:29:02
>>> Probably it's something we have been working for on 20:29:05
30 and we were sort of spacing along the side of the 20:29:07
building. 20:29:09
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm comfortable with whatever you do 20:29:10
on Kennedy, do the same along Cleveland. 20:29:12
>>> Along Cleveland it would be similar, we want to 20:29:15
basically from trees, the wall, the trees there, we 20:29:19
would abut the -- 20:29:25
>>KEVIN WHITE: That's what I'm saying. 20:29:29
Where you place the trees now are those site specific 20:29:30
based on the where the units break? 20:29:33
>>> Yes. 20:29:40
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Or able to commit to a 20-foot span 20:29:42
there's a break in the wall? 20:29:45
Is there a distance? 20:29:46
>>> On Kennedy? 20:29:50
>>CATHERINE COYLE: On Cleveland. 20:29:53
>>> Four, six trees in there. 20:29:55
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the total distance? 20:29:57
What's the distance on Cleveland? 20:30:05
>>CATHERINE COYLE: The property is 237 feet wide. 20:30:06

If you did a 20-foot span you get 11 breaks. 20:30:22
I don't think you have 11 breaks in there. 20:30:25
You only have four breaks. 20:30:28
>>GWEN MILLER: You need to get to the mike. 20:30:30
>>KEVIN WHITE: Do you think could you do the 20? 20:30:47
>>> What they are showing on there if they do four 20:30:50
breaks, it's a 60-foot span of wall. 20:30:52
That's what you're looking at. 20:30:55
Which I think is probably too wide. 20:30:56
That's too wide. 20:30:58
So -- 20:31:01
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: If the note says you break on the 20:31:03
property line, I'm okay with that because chances are 20:31:05
it's probably going to be 20 or 30 feet anyway, isn't 20:31:08
it? 20:31:13
>>CATHERINE COYLE: On the unit line? 20:31:13
Okay. 20:31:13
>>> Unit modules are generally between 27 and 30 -- 20:31:15
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's perfect then. 20:31:26
Bus stops? 20:31:34
>>> The bus stops are referenced. 20:31:35
It points to the bus stop. 20:31:36
And then we had asked Truett about the note that he had 20:31:37
added, note number 20. 20:31:40
Says ADA ramps and landing pads will be provided for 20:31:42

bus stops on the Cleveland street and Kennedy 20:31:44
Boulevard, the two corners. 20:31:46
If you look at the Hartline letter as part of your 20:31:48
report it doesn't specifically reference the 20:31:52
requirements, put in a shelter. 20:31:54
It does note the developer will comply with the final 20:31:56
report of the Kennedy Boulevard corridor study 20:31:58
completed by the MPO and Oliver. The landscape and 20:32:01
pedestrian treatments, which is kind of vague. 20:32:05
I mean I have the study. 20:32:07
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we put two shelters, 20:32:08
specifically reference the two shelters at the 20:32:14
developer's expense? 20:32:15
That's what they offered. 20:32:16
>>> We were just following what Hartline -- 20:32:24
>>: What's their route now? 20:32:28
They are putting in 340 units. 20:32:34
You probably put in two nice bus shelters. 20:32:36
It would match your building. 20:32:41
>>> Anderson: Per the Department of Transportation 20:32:47
will allow us. 20:32:49
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can put "subject to D.O.T." 20:32:50
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Hartline transportation on all the 20:32:57
site triangles. 20:33:02
>>SHAWN HARRISON: What's the total amount of 20:33:09

transportation impact fees? 20:33:10
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's $5,000. 20:33:13
>>CATHERINE COYLE: That's mitigation. 20:33:17
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay. 20:33:25
You all are going to have 346 total units. 20:33:25
And is there any consideration for public park space 20:33:30
that's anywhere nearby? 20:33:35
Where are these folks if they want to go and visit one 20:33:37
of the nearest parks? 20:33:40
Where do they go? 20:33:41
>>> The courtyard is .16 acres, which won't be isolated 20:33:43
to the public so it will be accessible there. 20:33:51
And so that was our main focus. 20:33:53
So one is completely accessible. 20:33:54
The other is internal to the building. 20:33:57
>>KEVIN WHITE: You also have -- 20:34:00
20:34:11
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You have Valencia Gardens. 20:34:11
>>KEVIN WHITE: All the park space at U.T. to walk along 20:34:17
the river. 20:34:22
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to clarify. 20:34:24
I thought Mr. Macy's question about whether fielding 20:34:25
Avenue would have a tunnel effect, it's a valid 20:34:28
question. 20:34:32
And I'm trying to understand how much space there's 20:34:32

going to be between the granite cushion fielding and 20:34:36
the shear facing this 100-foot high building because it 20:34:39
doesn't appear there are any balconies or anything 20:34:44
happening along fielding. 20:34:47
So it appears to me that there's like five feet of 20:34:48
something, then five feet of sidewalk, then I think you 20:34:50
said ten feet of something else before the building 20:34:53
starts. 20:34:56
So is that 20 feet between the granite curb and the 20:34:56
building? 20:34:59
I want a sense of what it is. 20:35:00
Because I didn't have any notations on my plan. 20:35:02
Gardner: Similar between 21 and 22 feet. 20:35:09
Anderson: There are patios on ground floors and 20:35:14
balconies up to the top floor, which is 78 feet. 20:35:17
100 feet is mostly to allow for -- 20:35:21
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You all did a very nice job of 20:35:26
paying attention to the Kennedy plan, though we haven't 20:35:29
adopted it yet and doing some of these things. 20:35:32
But I think in the future what this says to me if we 20:35:34
are talking about an urban building even if it isn't in 20:35:37
downtown proper we need to see elevations for all four 20:35:41
sides and we need to see what it's going to be like to 20:35:44
walk past because we are going to have public walking 20:35:47
past it. 20:35:51

This will be fine. 20:35:51
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance rezoning the property 20:35:52
in the general vicinity of 722 West Kennedy Boulevard 20:35:54
in the city of Tampa, Florida as more particularly 20:35:56
described in section 1 from zoning district 20:35:59
classifications OP office professional and CG 20:36:01
commercial general to PD commercial office and 20:36:04
multifamily residential, providing an effective date 20:36:07
with all of the modifications that Ms. Coyle has put on 20:36:10
the site plan. 20:36:13
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 20:36:14
All in favor of the motion say Aye. 20:36:16
Opposed, Nay. 20:36:18
[Motion Carried] 20:36:20
Need to open number 15.ding. 20:36:21
>> Motion to open number 15. 20:36:32
>> We had five neighbors who wrote nice letters. 20:36:33
>>GWEN MILLER: Give them to the clerk for the file. 20:36:39
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess on this project they are not 20:36:42
asking for waiver of green space so it's hard to 20:36:44
require the parks like you are doing on the other 20:36:46
project. 20:36:49
However, it brings back something you brought up two 20:36:49
years ago, at least, which is the parks impact fee. 20:36:51
I think we should have a parks impact fee. 20:36:56

I think we have all these projects. 20:36:58
And we have neglected parks. 20:37:00
And we don't have enough parks. 20:37:03
And I think that's an idea that should be revisited. 20:37:04
For what it's worth. 20:37:08
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And I also think we should require 20:37:11
drawings of the sides. 20:37:15
>>GWEN MILLER: Are you ready? 20:37:18
20:37:21
>>MARTY BOYLE: Land development. 20:37:43
This is item number 15. 20:37:43
Z 05-144. 20:37:46
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Hold on one second. 20:37:49
So on the parks impact fee should we just let that 20:37:50
drift away or should we deal with it and start doing 20:37:54
something about it? 20:37:56
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I'll bring it up during new business 20:37:57
next Thursday. 20:38:01
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you. 20:38:03
I'm sorry. 20:38:05
Go ahead. 20:38:08
Item what? 20:38:09
>>MARTY BOYLE: 15. 20:38:12
Z 05-144. 20:38:14
Subject property is located on South MacDill. 20:38:17

It is north of Bay Avenue and south of Wyoming on the 20:38:22
south side. 20:38:30
It is currently zoned PD. 20:38:31
And -- 20:38:33
>>GWEN MILLER: Always use the hand mike when you get 20:38:35
over there. 20:38:37
>>> Thank you. The proposed petition is taking it from 20:38:40
a planned development single-family to a planned 20:38:42
development office. 20:38:45
This is the area -- 20:38:55
>>GWEN MILLER: Hand Mike. 20:38:56
>>> Thank you. 20:38:58
Like I mentioned previously, the petitioner is 20:38:59
proposing to rezone the property at 5813 South MacDill 20:39:16
Avenue from existing PD to a PD, professional office, 20:39:20
the proposed site plan shows the development of two 20:39:26
office buildings, totaling 36,000 square feet, with a 20:39:28
maximum height of 35 feet. 20:39:32
The petitioner -- and I'd like to mention this -- he 20:39:35
went to great lengths when he first came in, he had a 20:39:38
site plan, and if you look at the site plan that showed 20:39:42
two offices to the rear of the property when he 20:39:47
originally came in, and the parking in the front, and 20:39:49
staff's comments at our development review committee 20:39:54
meeting were to move the buildings to the front and put 20:39:56

the parking in the back using the 18-foot alleyway as 20:40:00
access. 20:40:04
We thought it would help two-fold. 20:40:04
It would help with the aesthetic looks, seeing parking 20:40:07
and buildings pushed back and to the rear of the 20:40:13
property you will see a 30-inch oak and moving the 20:40:16
offices forward, they were able to then protect that 20:40:19
30-inch oak and save it. 20:40:22
So they did listen to staff and they came back with 20:40:24
this plan, and moving the offices to the front. 20:40:27
The plan shows 13 parking spaces, 12 spaces are 20:40:34
required by code. 20:40:38
The plan will comply with chapter 13, tree and 20:40:39
landscape standards. 20:40:41
At the time we wrote the staff report there were 20:40:44
objections based on land development, and the one from 20:40:47
land development still does stand. 20:40:52
The parcel to the south is zoned commercial general and 20:40:54
is used as a single-family residence. 20:40:58
It is separated by an 18-foot alley. 20:41:01
Parcel to the north is commercial business. The parcel 20:41:04
to the rear is a single family residence. 20:41:05
The petitioner has not submitted sufficient evidence to 20:41:08
show support of affected residential property owners 20:41:10
for the proposed alternative buffer. 20:41:14

Dave Riley initially had comments. 20:41:23
The petition did, since the staff report, placed a note 20:41:25
on the plan stating that they will comply with parks 20:41:28
and recreational selection and review with plans. 20:41:37
Dave Riley noted there was a 24-inch tree in poor 20:41:40
condition in the right-of-way and that it should be 20:41:44
removed and replaced as part of the rezoning. 20:41:46
The petitioner does show this tree as being removed. 20:41:50
And they need to show on their site plan the 20:41:54
replacement. 20:41:57
Under findings of fact, we are also asking council to 20:42:00
look at the site plan control district for a PD and the 20:42:04
purpose of it, to promote the efficient use of land and 20:42:08
infrastructure, to allow integration of different land 20:42:11
uses and to provide a procedure that can provide type 20:42:14
design layout, non-commercial development. 20:42:18
We feel like that does comply. 20:42:22
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Were there any comments on the pecan 20:42:40
or Magnolia? 20:42:43
>>GREG YURCUS: The one is in very poor condition. 20:42:46
The Magnolia is not in bad condition but not in great 20:42:48
condition. 20:42:52
And then the cedar was actually China Berry tree which 20:42:52
is an unprotected species. 20:42:59
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn? 20:43:01

>>> Yes, sir, I have been sworn. 20:43:03
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The site plan is showing palm trees 20:43:03
on MacDill but then the neighborhood association 20:43:06
indicated there might be power lines there? 20:43:09
>>> Yes, I believe there are power lines there. 20:43:12
>> We are going to have the same issue? 20:43:14
>>> Yes, we'll be looking at something to be a more 20:43:16
power line friendly species. 20:43:19
Most of the required landscaping will be triggered by 20:43:21
the parking lot, Parks Department for the removal of 20:43:24
the 24-inch in the front will require additional 20:43:26
plantings down MacDill for that. 20:43:30
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Have you discussed four inch trees 20:43:31
as opposed to the two inch? 20:43:50
>>GREG YURCUS: I have not, no, sir. 20:43:52
>>MARTY BOYLE: The Ballast Point association, they are 20:43:53
in favor of this project. 20:43:58
If I could enter into the record. 20:44:00
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the neighborhood is asking for 20:44:02
four, two-inch trees. 20:44:06
>>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission. 20:44:28
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 20:44:31
I have been sworn in. 20:44:33
The future land use map, three predominant land use 20:44:36
categories for this area, along MacDill, CMU 35, 20:44:40

community mixed use 35, residential 20, which is 20:44:44
reflected by your dark brown color and residential 20:44:48
10-inch, the most predominant color, as one transition 20:44:51
as way from MacDill. 20:44:55
Going south from MacDill, everyone realizes it's 20:44:56
going south of Gandy, the predominant use along this 20:44:59
segment of MacDill consist of some single family 20:45:03
attached, and detached residential units, so 20:45:05
multifamily units, in addition to a variety of office 20:45:09
and retail serving commercial uses, as well as some 20:45:13
neighborhoods serving commercial uses. 20:45:18
The site is in close proximity to the south of the last 20:45:19
significant commercial activity center serving this 20:45:25
general area of South Tampa. 20:45:27
At the intersection of inner bay and MacDill with 20:45:28
several commercial uses. 20:45:31
There's a new strip center to the south over here, 20:45:32
general store to the south over here, a market, and 20:45:35
there will be another convenience store this side and a 20:45:37
commercial use on the northwest corner of this 20:45:41
intersection. 20:45:43
For a variety of -- also, undeveloped parcels in 20:45:43
proximity to the site. The request is of course for 20:45:46
two offices of approximately 1800 square feet each, the 20:45:50
request is consistent with the intent of the CMU 35 20:45:55

category, and consistent with the existing uses along 20:45:57
this segment of MacDill Avenue. 20:46:00
Planning Commission staff has no objections to the 20:46:02
proposed request. 20:46:03
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 20:46:05
>> 100 South Ashley Drive, sweet 2200 Tampa 33602 and I 20:46:19
have been sworn. 20:46:24
20:46:24
I did want to clarify that each of the buildings are 20:46:31
1800 square feet apiece. 20:46:34
It's just 3600 square feet that we are proposing to 20:46:36
construct on the site. 20:46:39
I'd like to introduce -- I have some photos for council 20:46:47
plus a night map that shows zonings and I can show the 20:46:51
site. 20:46:54
20:46:55
The subject property was zoned CG as were a number of 20:47:14
other properties along this corridor of MacDill 20:47:16
until late 2000. 20:47:19
When it was rezoned to PD to permit two single-family 20:47:20
residences. 20:47:24
The approved PD plan allows two homes with a maximum 20:47:26
height of 35 feet, and I have scaled out the maximum 20:47:30
square footage each home if constructed to the setbacks 20:47:34
that were approved by the PD would be approximately 20:47:38

4600 square feet, if the footprints were maxed out. 20:47:40
What we had proposed is to do two professional office 20:47:45
buildings. 20:47:49
And as Marty said, we redesigned the site to push the 20:47:52
buildings forward, so that we could landscape the 20:47:56
MacDill corridor and have a sidewalk along the 20:47:59
front. 20:48:01
Our plan does exceed code required parking. 20:48:03
We took a lot of care to make sure that we weren't 20:48:05
asking for a parking variance. 20:48:08
We will comply fully with stormwater regulations and 20:48:10
all the transportation requirements. 20:48:14
The plan does keep the grand oak. 20:48:17
We have got a protective radius around that. 20:48:19
The buildings are pushed 61 feet forward from the rear 20:48:22
property line. 20:48:26
We maxed out the distance from the two residential 20:48:27
homes that are to our west. 20:48:30
And the area, I think the photos and the map will show 20:48:35
is that more commercial corridor in that area than 20:48:38
single-family residential, and we think that we are 20:48:40
consistent and our uses will be appropriate. 20:48:43
I'd like to go to the map quickly if you don't mind. 20:48:47
I only have two sets of photos. 20:48:50
I apologize. 20:48:53

The photos are numbered. 20:48:54
If you look at the key on my map, number 1 is a Citco 20:48:56
station. The photos are going to go south to north. 20:49:03
Number 1 is a Citco station. 20:49:12
Number 2 20:49:15
Is the retail strip that's east of that. 20:49:17
Number 3 is the northwest corner of inner bay and 20:49:22
MacDill. 20:49:26
That is a fruit stand plus a small building which 20:49:27
houses a little electronics store. 20:49:29
The northeast corner of that intersection is a lawn 20:49:33
equipment-type store. 20:49:38
Number 5 is part of the complex is one story. 20:49:41
East of that, across the street, number 6, is a day spa 20:49:45
wellness center. 20:49:49
Number 7 is the property immediately south of the alley 20:49:51
in our subject site. 20:49:56
This is the commercial general site but presently being 20:49:57
used for residential. 20:50:01
Across the street, number 8, is also zoned CG, 20:50:02
commercial general. 20:50:06
But there is a residence behind those trees. 20:50:07
Then this is a photo of the subject site. 20:50:12
It's two vacant lots. 20:50:14
Number 10 is the CG property just north of our site. 20:50:19

That's being used as a landscaping business at present. 20:50:23
Photo 11 is the vacant commercial, catter-corner to 20:50:28
this lot looking to the northeast. 20:50:32
Photo 12 is the list town home project which is number 20:50:34
12 on the map. 20:50:40
And number 13 is uncle Rodney's rib house. 20:50:41
And number 14 is the engineering office. 20:50:45
So from the back you can see that the corridor we 20:50:51
think, if we introduce professional office, we would be 20:50:54
consistent with the other uses in that corridor. 20:50:56
We did meet with the Ballast Point homeowners 20:51:09
association. 20:51:12
I went to their board meeting. 20:51:12
And they are in support of it. 20:51:13
I spoke with Al Steenson of sun bay south. 20:51:14
Al said he would defer to Ballast Point since he wanted 20:51:18
them to have control of both sides of MacDill for 20:51:21
their homeowners association. 20:51:23
I did attempt to contact the property owner to the 20:51:30
south of the alley. 20:51:32
I left three voice messages. 20:51:33
But I never received a phone call back. 20:51:35
I do understand that the property is under contract for 20:51:37
a possible redevelopment. 20:51:41
But I couldn't confirm that because I never spoke to 20:51:42

the homeowner. 20:51:45
I do have a letter to introduce from the property owner 20:51:46
to the immediate west. 20:51:48
There are two adjoining land owners on the west. 20:51:50
And I'd like to introduce a letter from one of them 20:51:54
expressing no objection. 20:51:57
20:51:59
I met with the other homeowner on the west, and he 20:52:02
expressed some objections he was concerned about 20:52:11
commercial activity, retail operations such as fast 20:52:16
food potentially, and he didn't want a big dumpster. 20:52:22
And we do not have a dumpster on the site, 20:52:26
understandably. 20:52:28
And I explained to him that we are controlled by the 20:52:29
site plan. 20:52:32
It can only be professional office. 20:52:33
We cannot introduce any commercial. 20:52:34
And the one-story building we felt would be less 20:52:36
intensive and lower, and not even visible, pushed up 20:52:40
along MacDill. 20:52:44
But I'm unaware if he sent a letter to you guys 20:52:46
objecting or not. 20:52:49
I don't see him here tonight. 20:52:50
And last, would you guys like to see elevations, a 20:52:52
couple elevations? 20:52:56

Okay. 20:52:57
We have two. 20:52:58
This is one alternative, which this is the view facing 20:53:13
MacDill. 20:53:17
The ADA access corridor for pedestrians will go in 20:53:18
between those two buildings. 20:53:20
It would just be dormers up on the roof to break it up 20:53:23
with treatments around the windows, and some stone-type 20:53:28
material along the bottom to break up that detail. 20:53:31
The other one that we submitted to Marty, because our 20:53:34
architect was behind and couldn't generate this one, 20:53:39
was more of a more modern look. 20:53:41
It's just a simple step-up building with different 20:53:48
colors. 20:53:56
Parapet roof on the top. 20:53:57
Awning treatments. 20:54:00
And I'll push up the little one on the bottom. 20:54:02
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that the MacDill exposure? 20:54:04
>>> No, Mr. Dingfelder, the MacDill exposure would 20:54:08
be more like this right here. 20:54:14
The two buildings, there will be no doors along 20:54:18
MacDill. 20:54:21
The access will be internal off of MacDill in 20:54:22
between the two buildings. 20:54:24
But we could have the flexibility to maybe select 20:54:26

either one, or if you guys have a preference, we'll be 20:54:31
happy to consider either one. 20:54:34
That concludes my presentation. 20:54:40
I'll answer any questions council has. 20:54:43
>>GWEN MILLER: is there anyone in the public that would 20:54:45
like to speak on item 15? 20:54:48
You may come up and speak. 20:54:52
>>> I have not been sworn. 20:54:55
I didn't realize which number I was. 20:54:56
>>GWEN MILLER: Raise your right hand. 20:54:58
(Oath administered by Clerk). 20:55:00
>>> Good evening. 20:55:06
I'm Kenneth Lewis stokes. 20:55:06
I own the property directly across MacDill from the 20:55:09
property that's being considered tonight. 20:55:15
This is my garden across the street from those 20:55:21
projects. 20:55:25
I would comment that the photography that was presented 20:55:27
before didn't really show the true nature of the 20:55:32
character of the neighborhood rather did not enhance 20:55:37
the appearance of it. 20:55:46
This is my home behind the trees. 20:55:47
I own the property outright. 20:55:52
I will be there for the rest of my life. 20:55:54
The property is zoned commercial. 20:55:58

I'm a semi-retired furniture maker and refinisher. 20:56:00
And that's why I bought the property. 20:56:04
The property to the south of me, which was shown as a 20:56:07
day spa, is a converted period house, Victorian. 20:56:13
The nature of the neighborhood, even though it may say 20:56:21
CG, is more residential. 20:56:26
A commercial building has never been on that site that 20:56:30
they are talking about now. 20:56:33
This is one of the -- the development to the north is 20:56:36
all residential. 20:56:40
It's quite upscale, and quite handsome. 20:56:42
The property, which was shown on the map before as 20:56:45
being vacant, behind my home, is all new luxury 20:56:50
two-story homes. 20:57:02
There's actually one more than that, and another one 20:57:08
being constructed so from Rodney's barbecue place, 20:57:11
there is a commercial triangle there, which has not 20:57:17
been developed. 20:57:20
The land south of that, a new home is being put on 20:57:22
there, the foundation is in, and five behind me. 20:57:25
So six, seven brand new homes adjacent to MacDill 20:57:30
and third Avenue. 20:57:38
It's in an unusual little point there. 20:57:39
I'm not necessarily opposed to the use of the land. 20:57:48
The architecture, I just saw, I was just astounded. 20:57:53

It's not attractive. 20:58:02
The trend in the neighborhood is to residential, 20:58:05
high-end, not commercial. 20:58:09
And anything that's done there is going to be there for 20:58:15
a long time. 20:58:17
It's not something that's going to be bulldozed and 20:58:19
replaced in five years. 20:58:22
So any decision that you make tonight is for a long 20:58:24
time. 20:58:31
The property owner to the south, the reason he didn't 20:58:32
get any response, the man has just been put into a 20:58:36
nursing home, and the property is under contract to be 20:58:39
developed residentially. 20:58:41
(Bell sounds). 20:58:45
The little residential property to the north is a 20:58:45
cottage. 20:58:47
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 20:58:48
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Stokes, is your thought the 20:58:51
appropriate use here is residential use rather than an 20:59:01
office use? 20:59:04
Or is it that you don't like the design? 20:59:05
>>> Well, I think if we look at what is put on the same 20:59:09
size lot behind me, we see really nice, good, 20:59:13
traditional architecture. 20:59:17
What we see there on the rendering is not anything of 20:59:19

that character. 20:59:24
All the area behind it is residential, and the houses 20:59:28
are small to the west, and will most Lukely be torn 20:59:30
down, because they are under 1,000 square foot, little 20:59:36
rental houses. 20:59:43
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 20:59:46
Anyone else like to speak? 20:59:47
Petitioner, you may come back. 20:59:51
>>> I actually am going to occupy one of the buildings 20:59:57
so I can tell you on the record that it will be very 21:00:01
lushly landscaped. 21:00:03
And I apologize. 21:00:05
The elevation that I put up is black and white, and it 21:00:06
does not have any landscape treatment to it. 21:00:08
But I can assure you that I told Melanie Higgins that 21:00:12
we would plant very appropriate trees along the 21:00:17
MacDill corridor under the power lines; on the 21:00:19
record that we will do that, and we will landscape very 21:00:22
heavily along MacDill. 21:00:26
The idea was to create a streetscape with a garden 21:00:27
effect, and that's why there are no doors along 21:00:30
MacDill. 21:00:33
The access is internal. 21:00:34
And I really don't have any -- I'm not wedded to any 21:00:35
particular style of architecture. 21:00:42

I didn't hear from Mr. Stokes. 21:00:43
I don't know how to address his comments or I would try 21:00:45
to meet with him and work through this a little sooner. 21:00:48
But I will say that the two buildings we are dealing 21:00:50
with are only 1800 square feet. 21:00:52
The footprint of the homes that could be constructed 21:00:55
there are twice that size, at least. 21:00:58
And the residential that's along the MacDill 21:01:00
corridor, I'll pull the map again, is -- I wasn't 21:01:02
trying to not show what was happening. 21:01:09
But I tried to give you the relevance of being along 21:01:11
MacDill with what is on the commercial corridor 21:01:14
there. 21:01:17
And we felt that professional office would suit nicely, 21:01:18
low profile building, one story, not two stories, and 21:01:23
again, we're not really -- it's the project to the 21:01:29
south of us comes in for multiple family that will be 21:01:31
another PD before you. 21:01:37
And I don't know what the neighborhood association will 21:01:38
have to do with that. 21:01:40
But we did go through the steps to meet with them to 21:01:41
determine, and they indicated to me that professional 21:01:44
office is lacking in that part of MacDill and we 21:01:50
envision an accounting firm, or an engineer, something 21:01:53
in low intensity traffic, that will occupy the other 21:01:57

one, because I will be in one of the buildings myself. 21:02:00
And I really don't have much to add. 21:02:04
We think we are consistent, and we will definitely very 21:02:06
heavily landscape that and make an attractive building. 21:02:10
I don't know what else to add. 21:02:13
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions for council members? 21:02:15
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that Mr. Stokes' biggest 21:02:18
concern is the aesthetics of your project. 21:02:22
And frankly, what you shared with us was very 21:02:24
nonmemorable. 21:02:27
I think what you need to do is just spend a little 21:02:28
money and hire a good architect to come up with an 21:02:30
attractive facade that will match the increasingly 21:02:33
well-thought-through, well-designed character of the 21:02:39
surrounding area. 21:02:42
Because I don't have a problem with your use really. 21:02:43
I think it's the way that it looks that's the issue. 21:02:46
>>> Really, that's the part that we don't have as 21:02:50
much -- we want to do what everybody is happy to do. 21:02:52
>> Hire somebody good. 21:02:56
>>> Sure. 21:02:57
Mediterranean, the list project is Mediterranean. 21:02:58
>> No. 21:03:01
No. 21:03:01
Bo McEwen. 21:03:08

>>> Bo McEwen? 21:03:11
Traditional, right? 21:03:13
Okay. 21:03:16
How would you like me to address this? 21:03:17
Do you want me to bring you back an elevation before 21:03:19
second reading? 21:03:21
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think you should work with a good 21:03:23
designer and work with your neighbor. 21:03:25
>>> Okay. 21:03:28
>>ROSE FERLITA: I think the petitioner is very 21:03:32
agreeable to doing something different, and clearly 21:03:35
stated, he would probably have had this done if 21:03:38
somebody explained their dislike or displeasure. 21:03:42
I don't know about the rest of the council but I'm more 21:03:45
than willing to go ahead and approve this and then have 21:03:47
him come back with a design between now and second 21:03:50
reading. 21:03:52
You know, it's appropriately placed in CG corridor. 21:03:55
And I certainly don't see any lack of willingness to do 21:03:59
something that's better for Mr. Stokes. 21:04:03
>>KEVIN WHITE: Second the motion to close. 21:04:04
(Motion carried). 21:04:08
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance rezoning property in 21:04:14
the general vicinity of 5813 South MacDill Avenue in 21:04:18
the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly 21:04:21

described in section 1 from zoning district 21:04:23
classifications PD single family to PD office providing 21:04:25
an effective date. 21:04:29
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 21:04:30
Question on the motion? 21:04:32
Mr. Dingfelder? 21:04:32
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Brian, RSB construction, sound 21:04:33
like it might be your initials. 21:04:38
>>> Yes, sir. 21:04:40
>> So this is your project. 21:04:40
You're in front of us and you're going to own the 21:04:41
project? 21:04:43
>>> My brother-in-law is the general contractor. 21:04:44
RSB construction is a contractor. 21:04:46
But it just happens to be my initials. 21:04:48
But, yes, I will be the owner and occupy the buildings. 21:04:50
>> It's for that reason, Mr. Stokes' comments are 21:04:54
consistent with how I feel and Ms. Saul-Sena. 21:04:59
The renderings weren't that impressive. 21:05:02
But I do believe since you're going to be there, you 21:05:04
know, that I'll take a leap of faith and assume that 21:05:06
you're going to do a better job, and work with Mr. 21:05:11
Stokes and show him what you're going to do. 21:05:14
So with that I'll support the motion. 21:05:16
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 21:05:17

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you two four-inch trees? 21:05:20
>>> Two, four-inch. 21:05:24
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Four inches instead of three inches. 21:05:27
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, is that something you agree to, 21:05:40
to have that changed? 21:05:42
>>> Sure. The replacement trees, we met with Greg. 21:05:44
It's in the tree table already, the replacement values. 21:05:47
We'll do the larger trees. 21:05:50
Just Ballast Point wants me to use appropriate trees 21:05:52
under the power lines. 21:05:54
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You and Greg figure that out. 21:05:55
>>> Sure. 21:06:00
We'll do that. 21:06:00
>>ROSE FERLITA: This is not to discount the 21:06:01
petitioner's -- other petitioners' behavior but I want 21:06:04
to tell you you're a very nice petitioner. 21:06:08
You're almost as accommodate as Mr. Garcia and he's 21:06:10
always accommodating so you're in good company. 21:06:13
>>> Thanks very much. 21:06:16
Do you guys -- shall I bring the elevation back after I 21:06:16
meet with Mr. Stokes to second reading? 21:06:21
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Share it with us. 21:06:25
>>> Just bring to the second reading. 21:06:27
Okay. 21:06:28
Thank you, guys. 21:06:28

>>MARTIN SHELBY: Is there a vote on that? 21:06:29
I'm sorry. 21:06:31
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye. 21:06:32
Opposed, Nay. 21:06:34
[Motion Carried] 21:06:36
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open number 17. 21:06:37
>> Second. 21:06:42
(Motion carried) 21:06:43
>>MARTY BOYLE: Land development. 21:06:43
Item number 17, Z 05-147. 21:07:14
Look at the zoning map. 21:07:21
You will see the lots in question. 21:07:24
It is located at Paxton Avenue, just south of Ballast 21:07:26
Point. 21:07:31
And north of Pearl. 21:07:32
This is Euclidean. 21:07:39
There is no site plan. 21:07:40
The request is to two from residential single-family 21:07:43
RS-60 to RS-50 designation. 21:07:47
This is a picture of the proposed site. 21:07:53
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it the house or in front of it? 21:07:56
>>> The house. 21:08:04
This is the view looking east on Paxton. 21:08:04
The view looking west on Paxton. 21:08:08
And this is just the rear lot of the property. 21:08:12

The property is properly at 3115 west Paxton. 21:08:27
Like I say, it's requesting -- it's a Euclidean. 21:08:31
There will not be a site plan. 21:08:35
The site consists of two 50-foot platted lots, lot 19 21:08:36
and 20, block 2, MacDill heights. 21:08:41
We feel that -- staff has no objections to this 21:08:46
rezoning. 21:08:51
If you look on the Elmo, block 2 is located right here, 21:08:53
and this is the subject site. 21:09:00
Within block 2, there's 20 total zoning lots, 18 or 90% 21:09:03
of those lots have been developed with a 50%, or 21:09:11
nonconforming. 21:09:17
Lots 6 and 3 to the north of the site contain 43 total 21:09:22
building lots. 21:09:25
27 or 62% of those blocks have been developed with a 21:09:27
50-foot width. 21:09:31
Blocks 5, 4 and 1 located to the west and to the south 21:09:33
have 43% of those lots have been developed with a 21:09:41
50-foot width. 21:09:45
And that's our comments. 21:09:50
>>CHAIRMAN: Planning Commission? 21:09:51
Planning Commission? 21:09:55
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just when we say Tony is accommodating 21:10:01
he blows it. 21:10:04
>>TONY GARCIA: Accommodating and a little partying. 21:10:04

21:10:07
Just a couple of points, I think. 21:10:09
Really was the crux of the issue here. 21:10:14
CMU 35. 21:10:17
Residential 10 going to the west. 21:10:18
She probably said it all as far as the height, 21:10:23
percentage of nonconforming uses in the area. 21:10:25
This will be a new addition and contribute to the 21:10:28
housing stock in the area. 21:10:29
Planning Commission staff has no objection and finds it 21:10:33
consistent with the comp plan. 21:10:33
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 21:10:35
Petitioner? 21:10:37
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is anybody here to speak on this 21:10:37
other than Mrs. Hogue? 21:10:44
Thank you. 21:10:49
>>CHAIRMAN: Put your name on the record please. 21:10:49
>> Cynthia Hogue, 3114 Paxton Avenue, across the street 21:10:54
from this. 21:10:58
And I have been sworn in. 21:10:59
As you can all see, on this particular house is World 21:11:03
War II hut from Drew Park that housed the airmen and it 21:11:08
was shifted -- it's almost pasture pen now. 21:11:16
We have kept it rented for all these years since 1974 21:11:23
when we bought it. 21:11:26

But we just need to -- we're just too old to keep it 21:11:27
going. 21:11:32
We'd like to get the property split into the two 21:11:33
50-foot lots, as all the rest of the block is, and on 21:11:38
the next street is so that we can hopefully get a 21:11:41
developer to tear it down and build some nice homes 21:11:46
there. But we did have some questions, when we sent 21:11:53
out to the surrounding neighbors, I got many calls, 21:11:55
because a lot of them said, you're not going to put 21:12:01
high-rise condos in there. 21:12:04
And I said, no, single-family dwelling. 21:12:06
Okay. 21:12:09
So that will likely maybe suffice for everybody. 21:12:09
All right. 21:12:14
Thank you. 21:12:14
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you. 21:12:16
Next. 21:12:16
If anybody else wants to speak on this let's go ahead 21:12:18
and line up and get ready. 21:12:20
Yes, sir. 21:12:29
>> My name is John stones. 21:12:30
I have been sworn in. I live at 3212 west Paxton 21:12:32
Avenue about one block west of the property. 21:12:35
I'm the vice-president of the Gandy civic association. 21:12:37
The objections are mainly two fold. 21:12:40

That block as is well-known, this is prone to terrific 21:12:43
flooding. 21:12:49
Their home was tragically flooded last year. The 21:12:50
concern in the neighborhood is we will be doubling the 21:12:53
amount of impervious surface. 21:12:55
On that block already. 21:12:57
And I understand that tied to this will be a request 21:12:58
for removal of a magnificent oak tree there. 21:13:01
Oaks are very good -- very good water sheds, and our 21:13:04
concern is if there's going to be a legacy -- actually 21:13:10
two legacies, splitting up the characteristics of South 21:13:13
Tampa. 21:13:16
I'm. 21:13:18
I didn't buy it to have little teeny cracker box lots. 21:13:21
But the big issue is astonishing flooding and we all 21:13:26
know the two lots are going to be raised up and we'll 21:13:29
be doubling the impervious surface. 21:13:32
So we would like to see this one nice new house on one 21:13:34
lot like you see all over South Tampa. 21:13:38
Nobody is objecting to any of those properties in our 21:13:40
neighborhood. 21:13:43
And it's happening all over. 21:13:44
Take a little bunky house like mine, knock it down, 21:13:45
leave the lot size the same and make a nice big house 21:13:49
and make a lot of money. 21:13:51

And then it's a win-win situation. 21:13:53
Thank you for listening. 21:13:55
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Let me ask a question. 21:13:56
Do you live in the same block, or do you live on the 21:13:59
western side of 6th street? 21:14:03
>>> One block west. 21:14:06
On the south side of Paxton. 21:14:07
>> Thank you. 21:14:09
>>> And I've witnessed the extensive flooding from my 21:14:10
front driveway a number of times. 21:14:12
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you. 21:14:18
Next. 21:14:19
>>> Thank you. 21:14:22
I'm Margaret BOHAN. 21:14:22
I'd like to read this because I've never been down here 21:14:25
before. 21:14:28
I'm Margaret BOHAN and I have been sworn in. 21:14:28
I live at 3205 Paxton Avenue for 55 years. 21:14:31
My husband and I built our house as we could from 21:14:37
payday to payday during which he spent a lot of his 21:14:40
time overseas TDY. 21:14:45
At first we lived without walls and doors going to 21:14:47
MacDill Avenue on a dirt road for our mail, also. 21:14:51
No one can tell me how our street was flooded because 21:14:57
my garage was knee deep in our last storm. 21:15:02

And I live at 3205 Paxton Avenue, just in the next 21:15:06
block to where they want to build. 21:15:10
And that block is under water. 21:15:14
I have pictures to show you. 21:15:16
I'm against zoning from 60 to 50. 21:15:19
More houses make more water. 21:15:23
What happened to the rule, if you tear down a house, 21:15:24
you can only build one back? 21:15:28
I'm not able to pump water out because there is nowhere 21:15:31
to pump it to go. 21:15:35
The more you pump out the more it comes in the front 21:15:37
way. 21:15:40
Our street for two blocks was impassable. 21:15:42
Also 6th street. 21:15:48
When we first moved there, we had water in our garage. 21:15:49
We built the yard up. 21:15:53
My husband poured four more inches in the garage, and 21:15:54
the driveway, to make it up even to where we would not 21:15:59
have water inside. 21:16:03
It doesn't mean much to some people, but to me it means 21:16:09
a lot, if you are a widow and left alone. 21:16:13
I pay taxes and drainage. 21:16:17
It seems we could get better drainage. 21:16:20
The traffic is really terrible there. 21:16:23
That was only three houses being built on my street. 21:16:25

We were the third one. 21:16:30
My husband was in the service 22 years. 21:16:33
I don't plan on selling my house to someone to build a 21:16:35
two-story house there. 21:16:40
That is home. 21:16:42
And I want to keep it our neighborhood as nice as we 21:16:44
can, to look like it did. 21:16:48
Our traffic is bad, and hopefully it will be later. 21:16:56
I have some pictures. 21:16:59
I'm not sure I know how to put these in here. 21:17:01
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Perfect. 21:17:03
>>> He wants to build two houses. 21:17:06
I'm two houses on this side. 21:17:11
21:17:12
That's the way the backyard looked on the next street 21:17:20
over on Cherokee. 21:17:22
That's my house when it was knee deep. 21:17:24
That's my house. 21:17:34
That's looking down Paxton Avenue. 21:17:39
It looks like a river. 21:17:41
And I want to thank you for having me. 21:17:49
And I intend to stay there until I die. 21:17:51
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. 21:17:53
Mr. Dingfelder. 21:17:57
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Come up for rebuttal. 21:17:58

I just want to say one thing. 21:18:04
Go ahead and do your rebuttal. 21:18:09
>>> I think they need to be advised of what we have 21:18:16
worked with. 21:18:19
I, my wife, worked -- I'm sorry, I'm Charles Hogue, 21:18:20
3114 Paxton. 21:18:27
I own that property there on both sides of the street. 21:18:28
I was sworn in. 21:18:32
Okay, sorry. 21:18:34
But, no, we only work to get the flooding fixed on 21:18:35
Paxton as everybody knows. 21:18:43
I think they are going to be personally coming down 21:18:45
here. 21:18:47
Now this property -- all this whole block, this 50-foot 21:18:48
lots. 21:18:54
I'm the only person that has a 100-foot lot on that 21:18:55
street. 21:18:58
And the property is getting so expensive there that I 21:18:59
can no longer afford to rent there. 21:19:02
So in order for me to sell the property to a develop 21:19:06
theory would build nice houses like they are building 21:19:10
on Cherokee, Himes, and so on and so forth, I have to 21:19:12
split it into two pieces. 21:19:17
This will add to the tax rolls. 21:19:19
It will add to everything. 21:19:21

Because the houses they are building in that area right 21:19:23
now are running between 450 and a half million dollars. 21:19:25
I do thank you for your time. 21:19:30
Mrs. Hogue: I did talk to the one in charge of the 21:19:42
stormwater, just this week. 21:19:45
And new bids have gone out on it. 21:19:47
And he said rather than -- they were hoping to start 21:19:49
the drainage in November. 21:19:54
But he said because of the rebidding, it will probably 21:19:56
be January or February. 21:19:58
But he told me to call him back at the end of -- this 21:20:00
is Mr. Seacrest -- call back at the end of November to 21:20:03
follow up on it because, yes, we were flooded out as 21:20:08
you know. 21:20:11
And we lived right across from this property. 21:20:11
But, yes, they have to add dirt, as they always do, two 21:20:15
or three feet of dirt. 21:20:19
But if the drainage is fixed, which it is going to be 21:20:20
fixed because we're number one on the list, then we 21:20:23
don't have a problem, okay? 21:20:30
And I've lived there since 1959. 21:20:31
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we are all well familiar 21:20:38
with the fact that we elevated the Paxton street 21:20:41
project to be number one on the list. 21:20:44
We did the design and engineering last year and are 21:20:47

doing the construction this year. 21:20:49
I think it's about a million dollars project or 21:20:51
something along these lines. 21:20:53
>>> Alex Awad, stormwater. 21:20:56
We estimated the project to be a half million dollar. 21:20:58
With the prices of things going up we estimated the 21:21:02
price recently at $700,000. The only bid we got, we 21:21:05
had only one company that bid on the project, and it 21:21:10
came in at a million seven. 21:21:12
So we thought we should rebid this thing and maybe get 21:21:15
a better price. 21:21:18
But I do not know come January when we do rebid again, 21:21:18
is it going to be less, or better, worse? 21:21:23
I don't know. 21:21:27
>> Bottom line, it's still the number 1 priority 21:21:27
project? 21:21:30
>>> Yes. 21:21:30
>> My other question is as related to these two 21:21:32
single-family homes that will eventually be built on 21:21:35
that project, what are we going to require of those two 21:21:37
homes to mitigate their own stormwater? 21:21:41
>>> Well, at this point, they'll be required to provide 21:21:44
equivalent storage on-site. 21:21:48
So they will be limited to the footprint of the home, 21:21:49
limited to the square footage of the pad itself, and 21:21:54

then they would have to provide a retention for that 21:22:00
storage at the end of the lot or inside of the lot or 21:22:03
however they want to provide, whatever they have to do. 21:22:07
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question not of Mr. Awad 21:22:11
but for our staff. 21:22:16
I don't understand your methodology. 21:22:16
And if 50% is conforming and 50% is not conforming, how 21:22:20
you arrive -- it seems to me that that's exactly -- how 21:22:25
do you determine that therefore the predominant trend 21:22:30
is toward the smaller lot size? 21:22:34
It's just counterintuitive. 21:22:39
It's 50-50. 21:22:42
How do you determine that one is dominant as a 21:22:46
development pattern? 21:22:46
>>MARTY BOYLE: We looked predominantly at block 2. 21:22:47
On the Elmo. 21:22:53
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Slide it up a little. 21:22:56
>>> Sorry. 21:22:58
On block 2. 21:22:59
And every single lot is this. 21:22:59
And that person is 90%. 21:23:03
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In other words, downtown look at the 21:23:07
house that is face each other, you look at the houses 21:23:11
behind each other? 21:23:14
>>> Well, we took them over all because if you're 21:23:18

looking at the house that is face each other it's like 21:23:21
half and half. 21:23:23
Okay, I just thank you for explaining your methodology. 21:23:27
Mr. Harrison? 21:23:31
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't think I have anything. 21:23:32
>>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members? 21:23:34
Ready to close the public hearing? 21:23:36
>> So moved. 21:23:39
>> Second. 21:23:39
(Motion carried) 21:23:39
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move an ordinance rezoning property 21:23:43
in the original vicinity of 3115 west Paxton Avenue in 21:23:45
the city of Tampa, Florida more particularly described 21:23:48
in section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-60 21:23:50
residential single family to RS-50 residential single 21:23:54
family, providing an effective date. 21:23:56
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second on the question. 21:23:58
Mrs. Saul-Sena. 21:24:03
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm not going to support this and 21:24:03
I'll tell you why. 21:24:07
It seems this neighborhood is pretty evenly divided 21:24:07
between 60-foot and 50-foot houses. 21:24:10
We obviously have a severe flooding problem in the 21:24:14
area. 21:24:16
And it's right now the APZ zone where we have been 21:24:16

asked not to increase the density. 21:24:21
And based on the concerns of some of the adjacent 21:24:22
neighbors, and the fact that we don't seem to be able 21:24:26
to deal with drainage well in this area, I don't see 21:24:29
why we should support something that increases the 21:24:32
density. 21:24:34
So I'm sorry but I'm not going to support this. 21:24:35
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder? 21:24:37
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will support it because as I look 21:24:39
at this particular block, and on Paxton right there, 21:24:42
the 3100 block, is mostly 50-foot lots as testified by 21:24:48
staff. 21:24:52
If you look at the 3200 block, clearly, as the 21:24:53
neighbors who are here, I wouldn't support it because 21:24:56
they are in larger lots of 60 feet and 100 feet. 21:25:00
So I couldn't support it. 21:25:04
But as to the flooding, okay, I don't care what those 21:25:05
bids come back at soon, this project is our number 1 21:25:08
priority in this city as of today and it's going to get 21:25:13
done. 21:25:16
And we are going to find the money. 21:25:16
If the bids come in at a million or whatever, we are 21:25:19
going to find the money because we have a commitment to 21:25:22
the neighborhood and especially Paxton street to fix 21:25:23
this. 21:25:26

So with that said I'll support the motion. 21:25:27
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. 21:25:29
All in favor of the motion say Aye. 21:25:31
Opposed, Nay. 21:25:32
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nay. 21:25:33
>>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena, no. 21:25:34
>>GWEN MILLER: Need to open number 18. 21:25:36
>> So moved. 21:25:38
>> Second. 21:25:39
(Motion carried) 21:25:39
>>ROSE FERLITA: I vote against it as well. 21:25:44
Okay. 21:25:46
>>MARTY BOYLE: Land development. 21:26:01
We are on item number 18. 21:26:03
Z 05-166. 21:26:06
The proposed rezoning is located on Saint Isabel Street 21:26:13
south of Martin Luther King and west of Armenia Avenue. 21:26:21
It is currently zoned RO, residential office. 21:26:26
And they are proposing to go to a planned development. 21:26:29
The property is located at 2508 west St. Isabel street, 21:26:36
and south like I said of Martin Luther King. 21:26:40
The site is .408 acres and it's -- we are proposing a 21:26:43
planned development order to build a medical office. 21:26:49
The site is in close proximity to St. Joe hospital. 21:26:52
The petitioner has taken great length itself -- lengths 21:26:56

to redesign the building. 21:27:01
If you open the site plan and look at it, and I think I 21:27:03
gave you my last copy, but in the rear of the property, 21:27:07
there is a large oak. 21:27:09
And they shifted the building forward and cut out an 21:27:12
area, and they put a wood deck in the back, and they 21:27:17
vaulted over the wall, vaulted over to protect that 21:27:22
tree. 21:27:27
At the time the staff report was written, we did have 21:27:30
objections. 21:27:33
However, we have no objections now. 21:27:33
The petitioner came in, and a plan to satisfy the 21:27:36
transportation note that the sidewalk, to place a note 21:27:42
on the outside plan that the sidewalks will comply with 21:27:44
chapter 22. 21:27:48
They also place add note on the site plan that they 21:27:49
would provide -- they would comply with City of Tampa 21:27:51
technical standards. 21:27:55
We find the site consistent -- I'm neglecting my 21:28:01
duties. 21:28:05
Let me show you quickly. 21:28:05
This is the proposed site looking from St. Isabel 21:28:11
south. 21:28:15
>> Slide it up a little bit. 21:28:19
Thank you. 21:28:20

>>> It's a very dark picture. 21:28:21
The proposed site is right here. 21:28:23
And to the east is another medical office, heavily 21:28:27
treed in between. 21:28:33
This is looking west. 21:28:37
And that is the proposed site. 21:28:42
They are proposing, like I said, a medical office. 21:28:44
And we found that it is compatible with the 21:28:47
comprehensive plan under the major medical facilities. 21:28:52
Under objective 8.4 the city shall support the major 21:28:57
medical facilities for public service as major 21:29:00
employers. 21:29:04
Implementation of the following policies will implement 21:29:05
future land use, element. 21:29:08
Also policy A-4.1, speaks about office development of 21:29:10
in-fill, vacant parcels, redeveloping existing parcels 21:29:17
in areas adjacent to St. Joseph hospital, from a south 21:29:20
right-of-way line of Martin Luther King to the south 21:29:24
property line of those lines from Armenia and 21:29:27
MacDill avenues, and this site is within those 21:29:32
boundaries. 21:29:34
The subject property is adjacent to the RO district on 21:29:35
the east side and PD office on the north. 21:29:39
The site is 400 feet west of Armenia Avenue, which is 21:29:42
an arterial roadway. 21:29:46

They are asking for a waiver. 21:29:48
The waiver is to reduce buffers on the west side from 21:29:52
15 to 3 feet. 21:29:57
And the other waiver is to allow an 8-foot PVC fence in 21:29:59
lieu of a 6-foot wall on the south side. 21:30:04
And we have no objections at this point. 21:30:08
They satisfied transportation and stormwater. 21:30:19
>>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. 21:30:27
I have been sworn in. 21:30:30
Just to reiterate a couple of things that Ms. Boyle has 21:30:32
stated, it is consistent with policy 4.1 which 21:30:35
identifies the area, development as a medical office, 21:30:38
in close proximity to St. Joseph's hospital. 21:30:44
We do have several other medical offices. 21:30:49
These are along the west side of Armenia Avenue, as 21:30:52
well as with several other key rezoning that have come 21:30:55
in in the last several years, from a single-family 21:31:01
residential use. 21:31:04
The light medical office uses predominantly along 21:31:10
Virginia Avenue. 21:31:13
Planning Commission staff has no objections to the 21:31:17
proposed request. 21:31:19
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner? 21:31:20
>>> My name is William Haley Jr., the architect for the 21:31:27
project and representing Tony Padilla, the owner, and 21:31:30

also in the audience tonight. 21:31:38
I know that it's late so I'm going to make this pretty 21:31:39
short. 21:31:42
>>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone in the public that would like 21:31:42
to speak on number 18? 21:31:48
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close. 21:31:51
>> Second. 21:31:52
[Motion Carried] 21:31:54
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance rezoning property in 21:31:54
the general vicinity of 2508 west St. Isabel street 21:32:13
from zoning district classifications RO to PD medical 21:32:17
office providing an effective date. 21:32:24
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second. 21:32:24
(Motion carried) 21:32:26
21:32:26
>>CATHERINE COYLE: We have two things. 21:32:29
I forgot the second one. 21:32:34
The first one is easy. 21:32:38
Item number 11 on the agenda, the motion that we were 21:32:39
requesting was to make the a motion to allow the 21:32:43
petitioner to amend and pay the fee. 21:32:48
Unfortunately the date was set. 21:32:52
If you would rescind the motion on the date. 21:32:53
>> So moved. 21:32:55
>> Second. 21:32:55

(Motion carried). 21:32:56
>>CATHERINE COYLE: The second one. 21:32:56
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we have to make them a motion to pay 21:32:58
the fee? 21:33:03
>> To allow them to pay the fee. 21:33:04
>> So moved. 21:33:06
>> Second. 21:33:06
(Motion carried). 21:33:07
>>CATHERINE COYLE: The second case is Z 05-154. 21:33:07
It's not on the agenda. 21:33:12
This is a slight issue that we are having with this 21:33:14
one. 21:33:17
It came into our office on August 17th. 21:33:18
It was supposed to be scheduled for the November 21:33:20
hearing. 21:33:23
The file was lost in the shuffle. 21:33:24
We lost a couple of people in the right-of-way 21:33:28
division. 21:33:30
They review it, approve our legal descriptions. 21:33:31
We also got four new people on the zoning side. 21:33:34
And then the shuffle of this particular case, it got 21:33:36
misplaced. 21:33:39
He is a TPD employee. 21:33:40
Unfortunately he's one of our own. 21:33:43
We are hoping, we are asking, if it's at all possible 21:33:45

if you are willing to waive your rules to have one 21:33:47
additional case in December. 21:33:50
Otherwise we are going to have to push him into the end 21:33:51
of February. 21:33:53
It's Euclidean. 21:33:54
There's no site plan. 21:33:55
>>KEVIN WHITE: So moved. 21:33:56
>> Second. 21:33:58
(Motion carried). 21:33:58
>>ROSE FERLITA: Probably Officer of the Month or 21:34:00
something. 21:34:07
>>MARTIN SHELBY: What was the date an and time of? 21:34:10
>>> December 8, 6:00. 21:34:12
Z 08-54. 21:34:15
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to receive and file all documents. 21:34:16
>>> Second. 21:34:19
(Motion carried). 21:34:20
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else coming before council? 21:34:20
We stand adjourned. 21:34:22
(City Council meeting adjourned.) 21:34:23
21:35:39