Tampa City Council
Thursday, January 26, 2006
5:30 p.m. Session
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
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
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
17:46:41 [Sounding gavel]
17:46:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
17:46:43 The chair will yield to Ms. Linda Saul-Sena.
17:46:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
17:46:48 It's my pleasure tonight to introduce Gail White, very
17:46:57 involved with worthwhile organizations and I thank you
17:46:59 for being here tonight.
17:47:00 Let us all stand for her words and remain standing for
17:47:03 the pledge of allegiance.
17:47:07 >>> Thank you, Linda.
17:47:08 It's an honor for me to be asked to offer the
17:47:10 invocation for your meeting tonight.
17:47:13 Linda and I have known each other since before she was
17:47:16 She and her dear mother blessed memory and I were in
17:47:21 exercise class at the North Boulevard rec center back
17:47:24 in the '80s.
17:47:27 My husband Paul and our son Paul Jr. and I moved to
17:47:30 Tampa in 1982, when my employer opened their
17:47:36 administrative offices here.
17:47:37 When we came there was only one tall building
17:47:41 Our son started school at Tampa prep and we soon found
17:47:44 out what a welcoming community Tampa was.
17:47:47 My husband was asked to serve on Tampa prep and I was
17:47:50 hired as the first development director.
17:47:53 We had the pleasure of helping to build what is today
17:47:55 a first class prep school in this city.
17:47:58 We found that the same spirit allowed to us help us
17:48:02 build the Lowry Park zoo help start the Florida
17:48:05 Aquarium and now help create academy prep school, and
17:48:09 all scholarship middle school for kids in the inner
17:48:11 city. The Tampa community invited us to serve on the
17:48:14 boards of the community foundation and WEDU, and the
17:48:18 Franciscan center.
17:48:19 If you raise your hand in Tampa, you're involved.
17:48:23 The communities we lived in before coming to Tampa,
17:48:26 Chicago, where we were born and raised, everyone's
17:48:29 dream city, San Francisco, and the struggling Toledo,
17:48:34 Ohio, already had most things you expect in a city --
17:48:37 established quality schools, both public and private,
17:48:40 zoos, aquariums, museums, and performing arts centers.
17:48:45 These institutions had already been built by others.
17:48:48 We feel so blessed to have been part of helping Tampa
17:48:52 develop these precious assets as well.
17:48:55 And there was something else we experienced in
17:48:57 Tampa -- religious fervor. Whether it was the many
17:49:02 Christian denominations or Jewish or one of the many
17:49:06 spiritual expressions, people in Tampa are involved in
17:49:08 their faith.
17:49:10 Because of this special Tampa quality, we have been
17:49:12 more involved in our church.
17:49:14 We are members of ecumenical prayer groups, and I have
17:49:17 served on the board of the center for Catholic Jewish
17:49:20 studies for several years.
17:49:21 The center's mission states: In a world of increasing
17:49:25 religious intolerance, misinformation, and
17:49:28 misunderstanding, the center, its boards and friends,
17:49:33 commit themselves with passionate urgency to build
17:49:37 mutual respect, understanding, and appreciation
17:49:40 between Jews and Catholics.
17:49:43 And so, revered council members, on behalf of my
17:49:46 family and the citizens of Tampa, and the
17:49:49 organizations that serve them, I would like to thank
17:49:52 you for committing your time and making the effort to
17:49:55 help make Tampa the wonderful city it is.
17:49:58 I humbly ask you all to join me in prayer.
17:50:04 Creator of the universe, how amazing is this world in
17:50:09 which we live!
17:50:11 We thank you for the gift of life and for the
17:50:14 opportunity to live in Tampa, Florida.
17:50:18 As members of the City Council, we understand what an
17:50:21 awesome responsibility we have to make decisions which
17:50:26 are wise, welcoming, fair, and kind.
17:50:31 We understand our limitations, and therefore ask for
17:50:35 your help that all that we say, decide, and do, be
17:50:42 what is best for the people we serve.
17:50:45 Give us merciful and loving hearts, keen minds open to
17:50:50 new ideas, without putting aside sound values.
17:50:56 Give us a spirit of gratitude, and grant us the
17:50:59 courage of our convictions, without forgetting that
17:51:04 our task is to be the voice for all the people of our
17:51:09 Help to us strive to make Tampa the best place for
17:51:13 everyone to live.
17:51:15 This is our prayer.
17:51:21 (Pledge of Allegiance).
17:51:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
17:51:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: (No response.)
17:51:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
17:51:41 >>SHAWN HARRISON: (No response.)
17:51:44 >>KEVIN WHITE: (No response.)
17:51:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:51:50 Mr. Shawn is attending a meeting.
17:51:53 Mr. John Dingfelder will not be here tonight.
17:51:57 We will hold number one and come back until we get
17:52:00 another council member.
17:52:01 We need a super majority of votes.
17:52:03 So we are going to go to item number 2.
17:52:05 We need to open the public hearing.
17:52:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So moved.
17:52:07 >> Second.
17:52:08 (Motion carried).
17:52:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby.
17:52:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, council.
17:52:16 Tonight's hearings are all quasi-judicial proceedings.
17:52:20 So I would ask that all written communications
17:52:22 relative to today's hearings that have been available
17:52:27 to the public be received and filed at this time.
17:52:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public going to
17:52:31 speak on item 1 or 2?
17:52:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before do you that could you make a
17:52:35 motion to receive and file.
17:52:38 >> So moved.
17:52:38 >> Second.
17:52:38 (Motion carried).
17:52:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Number 2, just a reminder if any
17:52:42 member of City Council has any ex parte verbal
17:52:45 communication was any petitioner, his or her
17:52:47 representative or any members of the public in
17:52:48 connection with any of tonight's hearings, that that
17:52:50 member should disclose the identity of the person with
17:52:54 whom that verbal communication occurred and the
17:52:56 substance of that verbal communication.
17:52:58 And now with regard to swearing in witnesses.
17:53:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Those who want to speak on item 1 and
17:53:03 2, would you please stand and raise your right hand?
17:53:07 >>THE CLERK: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole
17:53:12 truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?
17:53:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to open the public hearing.
17:53:22 >> So moved.
17:53:22 >> Second.
17:53:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to open the public
17:53:24 (Motion carried).
17:53:28 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Manager historic preservation here
17:53:30 on item number 2 which is the first reading for the
17:53:33 addition of St. Peter Claver school to the local
17:53:37 landmark group of the African-American heritage sites.
17:53:40 I do have a PowerPoint presentation for you.
17:53:47 Are you seeing that on your screens?
17:53:51 We don't have it.
17:53:53 We are not seeing it on our screens.
17:53:56 >>GWEN MILLER: You need to put the PowerPoint on for
17:53:58 the public to see, please.
17:54:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: On the overhead monitors.
17:54:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Fernandez, that button.
17:54:42 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: I've got it.
17:54:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The gremlins are at it again.
17:54:56 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: The subject property is St. Peter
17:55:10 Claver Catholic school.
17:55:13 You see a picture of it on your screen.
17:55:16 The property is located at 1401-if he corner of
17:55:22 governor street and Scott street.
17:55:23 The side of the property faces west.
17:55:26 You can see the 1929 Sanborn insurance map, the
17:55:30 subject property just towards the lower center.
17:55:32 You can see it's essentially two-story brick building
17:55:37 with a hip roof.
17:55:39 This is a photo taken in 1929 showing the school.
17:55:42 The school has virtually remained the same in
17:55:45 appearance since this photo was taken.
17:55:47 The structure was built in 1929.
17:55:48 This photo was taken just shortly after its
17:55:52 St. Peter Claver is regarded as the oldest private
17:55:56 African-American school in the City of Tampa, has a
17:55:58 long history of serving the community in which it
17:56:04 The school has experienced dramatic changes during the
17:56:07 20th century, original located in an area known as
17:56:09 the scrub.
17:56:14 Later that area was demolished and another area known
17:56:17 as Central Park Village was constructed around it.
17:56:20 And this has changed.
17:56:23 St. Peter Claver managed to continue excellence in
17:56:26 education to its students.
17:56:28 Among the graduates are Blanche armwood, an active
17:56:32 African-American leader in the City of Tampa and the
17:56:34 first African-American woman to graduate from an
17:56:36 accredited law school.
17:56:38 The historic value of St. Peter Claver is not confined
17:56:42 to the physical building.
17:56:46 Since its inception, the school has excelled in the
17:56:50 midst of economic and social challenges to provide the
17:56:53 surrounding community with educational excellence and
17:56:55 spiritual guidance.
17:56:57 These are two plaques, one of Abraham Lincoln, one of
17:57:00 booker T. Washington on the building.
17:57:03 The school has played an integral role in the
17:57:06 education and cultural heritage of many
17:57:08 African-Americans in the City of Tampa, the history of
17:57:11 Central Avenue, and the entire community.
17:57:15 The St. Peter Claver school is significant under
17:57:18 criterion A which deals with religion, education,
17:57:21 ethnic heritage, and social history.
17:57:25 The Historic Preservation Commission recommends the
17:57:29 designation of the St. Peter Claver school as a City
17:57:31 of Tampa local landmark.
17:57:34 That concludes my presentation.
17:57:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
17:57:37 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
17:57:39 on item 2?
17:57:40 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff here to
17:57:45 report to you that the Planning Commission heard this
17:57:47 proposed landmark designation on December 12th,
17:57:51 2005, and after its review found it tint with the
17:57:54 goals and objectives of the future land use and the
17:57:56 historic resources elements of the Tampa comprehensive
17:57:59 Thank you.
17:58:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone in the public like to
17:58:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close the public hearing.
17:58:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:58:07 (Motion carried).
17:58:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I remember when there was a great
17:58:12 deal of discussion during the time we were looking at
17:58:14 the 2012 Olympics and perhaps this site would be
17:58:18 affected by it, the creation of the stadium in the
17:58:21 And there was a lot of thought given to the fact that
17:58:24 this school had really represented a stable, safe
17:58:28 place for the neighborhood in the midst of a lot of
17:58:31 social turmoil.
17:58:33 And so while we are acting to preserve the physical
17:58:36 building, that what it represents to the community
17:58:40 goes far beyond this building.
17:58:42 So I know that the community supports this.
17:58:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Move the resolution?
17:58:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
17:58:54 Move an ordinance in the city of Tampa, Florida
17:58:56 designating the St. Peter Claver school located at
17:58:59 1401 north governor street and more particularly
17:59:02 described in section 4 hereof as the local landmark
17:59:05 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
17:59:08 providing for severability, providing an effective
17:59:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
17:59:13 (Motion carried).
17:59:16 We have to go in recess until 6:00.
17:59:34 (City Council recess)
18:08:40 >>GWEN MILLER: City Council is called back to order.
18:08:44 Roll call.
18:08:46 [Roll Call]
18:08:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Is Marty Boyle here?
18:08:51 Will you come up?
18:08:53 Tell us what we are going to take off the agenda.
18:08:55 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, while we were
18:08:59 organizing, for everyone who is here for item 1, Mr.
18:09:02 White said he's about five or ten minutes away.
18:09:04 So hopefully we'll be able to do that soon.
18:09:08 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
18:09:20 First I need to come before you and clear up an item
18:09:23 that you heard this morning.
18:09:24 I came to you, spoke to you about Z 05-165.
18:09:30 And I asked you to -- if you could reschedule to the
18:09:34 the April 9th meeting and you approved it.
18:09:36 Looking at my calendar when I got back to my desk I
18:09:40 April 9th is a Sunday.
18:09:41 I meant to say April 13th, 6 p.m.
18:09:44 >>ROSE FERLITA: We approved it for April 9th.
18:09:51 >>MARTY BOYLE: My apologies.
18:09:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to rescind that motion.
18:09:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:09:59 >> Second.
18:09:59 (Motion carried).
18:10:00 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to continue to the 13th.
18:10:07 >>MARTY BOYLE: 6 p.m.
18:10:08 (Motion carried).
18:10:11 >>MARTY BOYLE: The first item, number 3, it has
18:10:17 actually already been rescheduled to February
18:10:20 23rd, '06.
18:10:23 It is the DRI in conjunction with item number 11, Z
18:10:31 05-179, which is also -- has also been previously
18:10:36 rescheduled by council to February 23rd, 2006, at
18:10:41 6 p.m.
18:10:42 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, move 3 and 11 to 2-23,
18:10:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do they have to be opened?
18:10:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to open.
18:10:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Number 3 has to be removed from the
18:10:58 >>MORRIS MASSEY: Number 3 was misnoticed and council
18:11:01 already set the public hearing for number 3.
18:11:02 But number 11 because it was a scheduled public
18:11:04 hearing it was properly noticed, you need to open that
18:11:07 and continue it to the 23rd.
18:11:08 They need to be heard together.
18:11:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to open item 11.
18:11:11 (Motion carried).
18:11:14 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to continue to 2-23.
18:11:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 11.
18:11:20 We have a motion and second.
18:11:20 (Motion carried).
18:11:22 6 p.m.
18:11:24 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 4.
18:11:28 V 05-60. Petitioner is asking for a continuance. The
18:11:31 petitioner has been working with the Parks and
18:11:32 Recreation Department to find the best spot for their
18:11:39 The parks and rec if it were to go in where it was
18:11:43 proposed would remove a significant oak hammock.
18:11:46 They have been working diligently to try to clear that
18:11:49 They feel like they have a solution.
18:11:51 And so the petitioner is asking for a continuance.
18:11:55 The next date available would be March 9th, 2006,
18:12:00 at 6:00 p.m.
18:12:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Need a motion.
18:12:05 Is anyone here to speak on item number 4 for a
18:12:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue to March 9th.
18:12:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:12:14 (Motion carried).
18:12:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 6 p.m.
18:12:16 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 6.
18:12:20 Z 05-94.
18:12:21 The petitioner is asking asking for a continuance.
18:12:25 They have paid their amendment fee.
18:12:27 The next available date is also March 9th, 06 at 6
18:12:32 There is a letter filed from Ann Pollack.
18:12:36 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to continue.
18:12:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience want to speak to
18:12:39 number 6 on the continuance?
18:12:41 Anyone in the public want to speak on number 6?
18:12:43 We have a motion to continue to March 9th.
18:12:46 (Motion carried).
18:12:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 6 p.m.
18:12:48 >>GWEN MILLER: 6 p.m.
18:12:49 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 8.
18:12:55 Z 05-140.
18:12:58 The petitioner misnoticed.
18:13:00 They have paid the amendment fee and are requesting to
18:13:02 reschedule to the next available date, which next
18:13:05 available date is March 23rd, 06 at 6 p.m.
18:13:10 That gives them enough time.
18:13:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It cannot be heard.
18:13:16 It's misnoticed.
18:13:18 They have to renotice for the public hearing.
18:13:19 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
18:13:24 March 23rd, 6 p.m.
18:13:26 [Motion Carried]
18:13:26 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 10 cannot be heard.
18:13:34 There was a misnotice.
18:13:36 Actually on their notice, just to give you a little
18:13:39 side note, they put the date of January 26th of 05
18:13:44 instead of 06 and that caused a misnotice.
18:13:48 It is a PD request.
18:13:49 And it is an existing bank with an existing
18:13:53 And what the PD request is for is to move their sign,
18:13:57 and it's actually making the sign smaller, and they
18:14:00 are moving it.
18:14:02 There are no staff objections, and there haven't been
18:14:06 any opposition to that we know of.
18:14:08 Petitioner is requesting a possible daytime meeting.
18:14:14 They will have to make notice so the next available
18:14:14 date if council decides is March 2nd of '06, or
18:14:20 March 9th.
18:14:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Question.
18:14:25 First of all, I don't know what the daytime meeting is
18:14:28 I can item you that lately the daytime meetings have
18:14:30 been quite extensive.
18:14:31 And secondly is one of the reasons that you may not
18:14:34 have objectors tonight is because it is misnoticed.
18:14:37 So I would caution council about setting a day meeting
18:14:41 in this matter.
18:14:43 Unless council so chooses.
18:14:45 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's a very good point, Mr. Shelby.
18:14:47 On that basis I won't support a daytime.
18:14:49 >>GWEN MILLER: What date then, Marty, at nighttime?
18:14:53 >>> Since it is a new hearing the next available date
18:14:55 would be April 27th.
18:14:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
18:15:00 >>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
18:15:00 >>GWEN MILLER: At 6 p.m.
18:15:02 [Motion Carried]
18:15:03 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 11.
18:15:07 Did we clear that?
18:15:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:15:10 >>MARTY BOYLE: Thank you.
18:15:10 Item number 13.
18:15:12 Z 06-02.
18:15:14 It was misnoticed.
18:15:16 They did not get their notice out in time.
18:15:19 They have not paid the amendment fee yet.
18:15:22 We just counselled them on that.
18:15:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So it has to be removed from the
18:15:27 agenda, number 12?
18:15:28 >>MARTY BOYLE: I'm sorry, number 13.
18:15:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Has to be removed from the agenda.
18:15:35 >> Motion to allow the petitioner to file an amended
18:15:39 >> So moved.
18:15:40 >> Second.
18:15:40 (Motion carried).
18:15:45 >>MARTY BOYLE: Item number 16.
18:15:47 Z 06-27.
18:15:50 They also misnoticed.
18:15:51 The petitioner is here to speak on this subject, if
18:15:55 you want.
18:15:56 They haven't paid the amendment fee to go forward.
18:16:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you need to say
18:16:05 So what date do you have available, Marty?
18:16:08 >>MARTY BOYLE: The next available date would be also
18:16:10 April 27th, 06 at 6 p.m.
18:16:16 >> So moved.
18:16:16 >> Second.
18:16:16 (Motion carried).
18:16:17 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
18:16:21 Number 1.
18:16:24 We need to open number 1.
18:16:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have a question, if I can.
18:16:29 Is there a public hearing that's set for tonight where
18:16:33 there is changes within the 13-day rule?
18:16:38 >>MARTY BOYLE: Yes.
18:16:39 Do you want me to bring that up now?
18:16:43 Let me just get my file, please.
18:16:51 It is item number 5, Z 05-04.
18:16:55 Council, first of all, Z 05'-04, on your staff report
18:17:28 at the top there are some changes. The hearing date
18:17:31 should read 1-26-06.
18:17:35 The date of the report should read 1-20-06.
18:17:38 And the date of the site plan should read 1-13-06.
18:17:46 There have been graphical changes that are needed for
18:17:51 the site plan to move forward since it doesn't have
18:17:55 the objections that we have.
18:17:56 There are some agencies that did, as of a week and a
18:17:58 half ago, to be fair to the petitioner, came in a week
18:18:01 and a half ago with some new comments, the fire
18:18:05 department, and came in with new comments that would
18:18:08 cause graphical changes.
18:18:09 There is also an issue with the location of the grand
18:18:13 And also with the dumpster location.
18:18:17 The petitioner is requesting a waiver of the 13-day
18:18:21 rule for the graphical change.
18:18:24 They would ask with council's approval if the public
18:18:28 hearing could move forward, and then -- because there
18:18:32 are people here that have been waiting to speak.
18:18:37 And if they could make the changes and come back in
18:18:39 two weeks for the first reading.
18:18:42 I would let petitioner speak to that.
18:18:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Shelby, the question is we have
18:18:53 a rule.
18:18:54 Are we allowed to waive it?
18:19:01 >> Truett, 101 south Franklin Street.
18:19:05 The last week and a half we had kind of a different
18:19:08 reading on the grand oak.
18:19:09 It's in the right-of-way.
18:19:10 And actually we decided to keep the tree.
18:19:17 What further exacerbated it is the fire department in
18:19:21 the last week decided to issue comments for the first
18:19:23 We have addressed all those.
18:19:25 But they do require graphical changes.
18:19:27 We have the entire neighborhood association that's
18:19:29 here in support of the project as well as the client
18:19:32 from Atlanta, and J. Taggart, the owner of the
18:19:36 So we would like to go forward with public hearing,
18:19:40 come back to you in two weeks with graphical changes
18:19:43 knowing that we will include the grand oak as well as
18:19:46 adhere to the fire department's requirements of.
18:19:50 So we would ask for the waiver of your rule and
18:19:53 proceed with public hearing but be back in two weeks
18:19:55 with the first reading.
18:19:58 >>ROSE FERLITA: I make that motion because that would
18:20:01 be less inconvenience to the neighborhood.
18:20:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:20:04 (Motion carried).
18:20:05 Mr. Shelby.
18:20:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask you to go back to number
18:20:13 one and that is not quasi-judicial.
18:20:15 It does require super majority vote.
18:20:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Before we go further, clarification on
18:20:21 number 10.
18:20:22 What date did we say in that?
18:20:24 I have a wrong date, I believe.
18:20:25 >>MARTY BOYLE: On item number 10?
18:20:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, ma'am.
18:20:34 April 22nd?
18:20:35 >>MARTY BOYLE: Yes, April 27th.
18:20:40 >> Number one.
18:20:41 Need to open item number 1.
18:20:43 >> So moved.
18:20:43 >> Second.
18:20:43 (Motion carried)
18:20:50 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
18:20:57 This item before you was heard August the 8th of
18:21:03 And it was denied in the public hearing process at
18:21:06 that time.
18:21:08 City Council -- I'm sorry, September 8th, 2005.
18:21:12 City Council reconsidered their action on September
18:21:15 15th and asked that the petitioner go through and
18:21:23 evaluate the hurricane evacuation analysis.
18:21:27 To be done because of this amendment.
18:21:30 Which they have done.
18:21:32 We did work with them at that time through this
18:21:36 Just for context sake.
18:21:39 This amendment is located on Courtney Campbell
18:21:49 I forgot to tell what you you are looking at.
18:21:51 It's 6.57 acres of property.
18:21:54 It's on the south side of Rocky Point island.
18:21:56 The request is to change the land use from community
18:21:59 mixed use 35 to urban mixed use 60.
18:22:03 And the Planning Commission in August did forward to
18:22:08 you a recommendation of the consistency with the
18:22:12 comprehensive plan.
18:22:13 As part of your motion, September 15th, you did
18:22:17 ask that the city staff review whatever the petitioner
18:22:21 did bring forward.
18:22:24 Randy Goers is here to address those issues with you.
18:22:28 And I must also add that the hurricane -- the hazard
18:22:32 mitigation building services division of Hillsborough
18:22:35 County has been involved in this entire analysis as
18:22:39 well, and has also supported the findings of the
18:22:47 I think Randy would like to speak to you on the city's
18:22:54 >>RANDY GOERS: Strategic planning and technology.
18:22:58 The petitioner prepared a report on the questions that
18:23:02 were raised at your last meeting, and it was
18:23:05 circulated to city staff.
18:23:06 We had a meeting briefly on Tuesday with
18:23:09 transportation division, emergency management office,
18:23:13 The county has a mitigation office was invited but
18:23:17 were unable to make it.
18:23:18 They were participating via e-mail.
18:23:20 Also the Planning Commission staff were in attendance.
18:23:23 The discussion at that meeting, the report was
18:23:26 There were no objections by any of the city staff on
18:23:30 the information as provided.
18:23:32 We have some of city staff here, transportation I
18:23:35 think is here that would respond to any specific
18:23:40 There's nothing that was cause for any objection.
18:23:45 The petitioner, based on the recommendation of the
18:23:48 hazard mitigation office to provide a mitigation
18:23:51 offset for the hurricane shelter impact and that was
18:23:53 one of the issues that they had.
18:23:55 Thank you.
18:23:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
18:23:58 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
18:24:00 on item number 1?
18:24:07 >>> Stephen southwell, 501 East Kennedy Boulevard on
18:24:11 behalf of the petitioner.
18:24:13 A few folks here with me I would like to introduce
18:24:16 with the applicant.
18:24:18 I have Bill Bishop.
18:24:20 Ann Marie Linton and from my firm I have Rhea Law with
18:24:25 me and Don Lewis.
18:24:27 He performed the analysis that quantified the
18:24:30 hurricane evacuation impact.
18:24:32 That was the only issue that was raised when we were
18:24:35 here before.
18:24:36 And we promised to do some analysis on impact and
18:24:40 tried to show that was a minimal impact, which it is.
18:24:42 And I would like now to ask Don Lewis to come up and
18:24:45 briefly explain how we got to that conclusion and what
18:24:48 he did.
18:24:55 >>> Don Lewis, vice-president of PBS&J.
18:24:59 I'll keep my comments brief because I know you have a
18:25:01 lot of business to do.
18:25:02 We were hired by the applicant to do a hurricane
18:25:06 evacuation impact analysis, and we did a very
18:25:08 conservative, worse-case analysis looking at what
18:25:11 would be the impact on the adjacent evacuation route
18:25:13 which is a very important one to the area.
18:25:17 We used the Department of Community Affairs, basically
18:25:22 their rule or benchmark for determining whether it was
18:25:25 significant impact or not.
18:25:27 Their rule is, the amount of vehicles that are
18:25:30 contributing to the evacuation are greater than 25% of
18:25:33 the maximum capacity roadway, it's deemed to have a
18:25:36 significant impact.
18:25:37 We went through the process, using the assumptions,
18:25:43 hazardous assumptions and socioeconomic data from the
18:25:47 recent planning council's hurricane regional study,
18:25:50 and we found that the additional units will not have a
18:25:54 significant impact on the evacuation network.
18:25:57 And we have provided our analysis to the city, and
18:26:00 also have talked at length with the county emergency
18:26:03 management people as well.
18:26:09 >>> In addition, as Mr. Goers had indicated, we have
18:26:13 voluntarily agreed to participate in the hurricane
18:26:16 shelter mitigation offset program.
18:26:19 So they will be participating in that, offsetting any
18:26:22 adverse impact created to the shelter system.
18:26:27 We feel this plan amendment is consistent with both
18:26:31 the coastal management element, due to the things we
18:26:34 just talked about, and it supports a lot of the
18:26:37 policies that the city has embraced, urban in-fill
18:26:40 redevelopment, is an existing 257-room hotel that's
18:26:43 been there for quite awhile, and hopefully this
18:26:45 opportunity will allow something better to be brought
18:26:49 forward that is more pedestrian friendly, take
18:26:55 advantage of transportation opportunities and better
18:26:57 for the city as a gateway coming in from Pinellas
18:26:59 So if there are any questions for me or anybody else
18:27:01 we would be happy to handle those.
18:27:03 If not.
18:27:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: When we spoke a few days ago, I
18:27:08 asked you about the
18:27:11 Ability of, as you redeveloped this property, to look
18:27:13 at making it as connective as possible with the
18:27:17 Courtney Campbell scenic corridor for the greenway
18:27:22 trail as well as perhaps looking into providing a bus
18:27:28 I think you all will be coming back with a rezoning.
18:27:30 But currently, we are trying to encourage more
18:27:33 mobility other than cars.
18:27:36 And we don't have anything like that on your property.
18:27:39 So if you could look into those two things as this
18:27:41 project proceeds.
18:27:42 We would really appreciate it.
18:27:45 >>> The scenic corridor is an as set forth property
18:27:49 and there is a bus route that comes through and stops
18:27:52 at Rocky Point, comes from Clearwater to downtown
18:27:54 So the opportunity to tie into that as well.
18:27:57 So we appreciate the comments.
18:27:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I want to thank you all for providing
18:28:04 us with more information as to the evacuation route
18:28:10 that was one of my biggest concerns with this.
18:28:13 And I was perfectly satisfied with your answers on
18:28:16 this, and make sure that everybody is going to be
18:28:19 safe, in getting out, and by using the other highways
18:28:25 that are connected to the Courtney Campbell causeway
18:28:29 made me feel a lot better that there was a route there
18:28:34 they're that people can get out.
18:28:35 So I want to thank you all for doing that, and so I
18:28:40 will support this.
18:28:41 Thank you.
18:28:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:28:44 would like to speak on item 1?
18:28:46 >> Move to close.
18:28:47 >> Second.
18:28:47 (Motion carried).
18:28:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that there is
18:28:53 on page 17 of the Planning Commission report where
18:28:55 they talk about no plan improvements, actually there
18:29:00 That's not the applicant.
18:29:01 It's for Planning Commission.
18:29:02 I would like to move an ordinance amending the Tampa
18:29:04 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
18:29:06 land use map for property located at 7700 west
18:29:10 Courtney Campbell causeway, from community mixed
18:29:13 use-35 to urban mixed use 60, providing for repeal of
18:29:17 all ordinances in conflict, providing for
18:29:19 severability, providing an effective date.
18:29:21 >> Second.
18:29:22 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion an second.
18:29:23 (Motion carried).
18:29:27 At this time, anyone that's going to speak on item 6
18:29:30 through 15, will you please stand and raise your right
18:29:50 I forgot 5.
18:29:52 If you are going to speak on 5.
18:29:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So it's clear number 5 through 16.
18:30:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:30:03 (Oath administered by Clerk).
18:30:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, I hate to do this
18:30:13 because we haven't gone high tech yet, but I have
18:30:16 gotten feedback and I have heard that my red hat last
18:30:18 week was very successful.
18:30:20 I am going to ask the people in the audience who are
18:30:23 present to please move the meetings along very
18:30:27 I know there's a lot of people present.
18:30:28 I'm going to ask that you remember to state that you
18:30:35 have been sworn when you give your name.
18:30:37 I put a little sign up there.
18:30:38 If you see me wearing or waiving waving the red hat
18:30:42 that will be a reminder so I don't have to interrupt.
18:30:45 And it's a very nice hat so I will continue to do i.
18:30:47 Thank you.
18:30:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 5.
18:30:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue.
18:31:21 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
18:31:22 I have been sworn.
18:31:24 Thank you for the red hat.
18:31:27 Council, this is Z 05-04.
18:31:30 We spoke about it before.
18:31:33 There are objections as noted.
18:31:36 There are no waivers with this application.
18:31:39 The petitioner proposes to rezone the property located
18:31:41 at 2907 west Bay to Bay Boulevard to a planned
18:31:46 In order to construct a 27-story residential tower and
18:31:50 associated parking garages.
18:31:52 The petitioner is proposing 84 units which will vary
18:31:56 in size from 1750 square feet to 3400 square feet.
18:32:00 There's an amenity level that is proposed and contains
18:32:05 a billiards room, guest suites, social hall and pool
18:32:09 The parking on the street that currently backs into
18:32:12 Isabel street will be removed and landscaping and
18:32:15 sidewalk are proposed. The garage will be accessed
18:32:17 off of Barcelona Avenue, and there will be a pickup
18:32:20 and drop off on Isabella street.
18:32:23 If you look at the zoning map you will see the
18:32:27 It is zoned currently PD.
18:32:31 This is Bayshore.
18:32:32 This is the Crosstown expressway.
18:32:35 And this is Isabella.
18:32:37 Barcelona is located to the north.
18:32:46 The aerial shows the existing office building.
18:32:51 This is currently a parking lot and this is the
18:32:54 location of the tower.
18:32:56 And the parking will be in the rear.
18:33:04 Reasons for objections, section 27-326, under
18:33:09 dimensional regulations.
18:33:14 Setbacks and the height were incompatible with the
18:33:17 adjacent neighborhood. The predominant character of
18:33:19 the adjacent buildings is one to three story
18:33:24 buildings. The Presbyterians tower is located to the
18:33:24 north of this site.
18:33:26 And it is located on Isabella.
18:33:29 It's set back from its property line 50 feet and it's
18:33:33 mitigated by mature landscaping. The petitioner is
18:33:36 proposing a building that will set back from the
18:33:38 property line 25 feet.
18:33:41 In determining flexibility in setbacks staff must
18:33:44 review the following standards, section 27-324,
18:33:49 alternative residential developments.
18:33:51 The adjacent parcels contain a mixed use from office
18:33:55 single family attached residential multifamily
18:33:58 residential, the Presbyterians towers. The setbacks
18:34:01 for all these uses are at least 20 feet and greater on
18:34:03 the streetscape with the exception of the three-story
18:34:06 portion of the office building on subject property.
18:34:09 However, the tallest of these buildings, Presbyterians
18:34:12 towers, setbacks from the property line 50 feet.
18:34:16 Originally transportation had objections.
18:34:18 Petitioner has come in and placed notes on the site
18:34:21 plans to remove all of transportation's objections.
18:34:27 The fire objection as we noted before, if you will
18:34:32 look at the site plan it shows a semicircular drive.
18:34:36 The fire department is requesting that they re-- they
18:34:40 removed all their objections except for that. They
18:34:42 are requesting they go from 15 feet to 20 feet.
18:34:45 That's a graphical change.
18:34:47 Solid waste is asking the dumpster be relocated.
18:34:52 That it would be graphical change.
18:34:55 Then parks and rec, there is a grand tree on-site.
18:34:58 It is not shown on the site plan.
18:35:00 That is staff's objections.
18:35:02 They are asking parks and rec is asking for it to be
18:35:07 The tree needs to be shown on the site plan along with
18:35:09 the protective radius.
18:35:17 And that is the end of our presentation.
18:35:19 Any questions?
18:35:21 Alvarez always.
18:35:23 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I have a question.
18:35:25 What's the tallest building in that area?
18:35:27 >>> The closest is the Presbyterians towers.
18:35:31 >> How tall is that?
18:35:32 >>MARTY BOYLE: And I believe it is five stories.
18:35:40 FROM THE FLOOR: 15.
18:35:42 >>MARTY BOYLE: 15 stories.
18:35:44 Thank you.
18:35:49 >> What is it, 15, 7, 5, what is it?
18:35:52 >>> I don't have it in my notes but I believe it's 15
18:35:55 feet -- 15 stories.
18:35:56 I'm so sorry.
18:36:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a couple of questions about
18:36:10 the concerns you raised about the tree, and the width
18:36:14 of the driveway.
18:36:15 I would assume that that would push the driveway
18:36:18 further to the south.
18:36:21 And I wondered if transportation had reviewed -- if
18:36:25 that's okay.
18:36:25 >>MARTY BOYLE: When we get the graphical changes, we
18:36:29 will send it back to transportation, solid waste,
18:36:32 parks and rec.
18:36:33 We will review.
18:36:35 >> What if we say this is okay if it fits, but then it
18:36:40 doesn't fit?
18:36:41 >>> I don't know that -- you wouldn't be approving it
18:36:48 This is the case that we are asking to go ahead with
18:36:49 the public hearing, and with graphical changes, to
18:36:53 give us the graphical changes.
18:36:54 We'll have time to look at it and come back to first
18:36:57 reading again.
18:37:06 >>> Truett Gardner.
18:37:07 I have been sworn.
18:37:07 If you like I can further elaborate on the questions
18:37:10 you just asked.
18:37:11 Ooh even though we can't submit the new site plan for
18:37:15 your official review, we did redo the site plan
18:37:19 showing the radius of the tree, its location, as well
18:37:22 as the other kind two of things happened at the same
18:37:26 One was the tree. The other was the fire department.
18:37:29 Circular drive as originally shown at 15 feet.
18:37:32 Fire wanted it at 20.
18:37:34 So we wanted to make sure we could do both the tree,
18:37:37 the tree save as well as increase the drive by five
18:37:40 And we have a new site plan.
18:37:47 It's not that one.
18:37:51 If I could hand it to you so you could see the radius
18:37:53 of the tree, as well as the 20-foot drive.
18:37:58 And we have spoken with Dave Riley about it at the
18:38:03 fire department and it seems like we are squared away
18:38:05 on both of those issues.
18:38:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
18:38:14 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:38:15 I have been sworn in.
18:38:22 This is the community mixed use 35.
18:38:25 Here is the site.
18:38:27 The Crosstown expressway.
18:38:28 Bay to Bay Boulevard.
18:38:29 And Bayshore.
18:38:33 The other land uses in the surrounding area as you can
18:38:36 see are low in character, heavy commercial 24,
18:38:38 residential 20, residential 35.
18:38:46 What currently exists on the subject site with
18:38:51 construction is an existing parking lot that
18:38:53 compliments the existing uses over here on this
18:38:56 As you see, as it abuts to Bay to Bay Boulevard.
18:39:01 Presbyterians towers is located directly to the north.
18:39:03 It is, I believe, around 17 stories high.
18:39:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: How far away is that?
18:39:10 I know you are saying to the north.
18:39:12 >>> You can see on the illustration here it's about a
18:39:15 block away north from the site.
18:39:18 Again, this structure will be approximately 10 stories
18:39:23 higher with a maximum elevation been requested of the
18:39:25 applicant of 300 feet.
18:39:29 With the significance of the site, it would front a
18:39:31 residential street, which is Isabella, all the
18:39:35 residential high-rises along the Bayshore area.
18:39:38 Most of them are all, as you know, oriented to
18:39:41 Bayshore Boulevard as it is right now.
18:39:43 I pulled up a couple of towers.
18:39:45 And one of the tallest towers is only 24 stories high.
18:39:52 So what you have here is a very interesting situation,
18:39:55 that you have an existing PD which currently allows
18:39:57 for 100,000 square feet of commercial use.
18:40:01 But you have here, what's being proposed is a less
18:40:08 intensive use, will be only 84 units, but you have a
18:40:11 significant mass that is set back, and theoretically
18:40:16 could set a precedent for other type of developments
18:40:18 of this sort.
18:40:19 As you see it.
18:40:20 Because it is off of Bayshore.
18:40:22 It would be something to take into consideration.
18:40:26 And it is significantly higher.
18:40:28 If I go over the existing uses that are around the
18:40:30 area, of course, the synagogue which is in close
18:40:38 proximity that we did a rezoning for at the northeast,
18:40:43 there are some low density town homes directly east of
18:40:45 the site.
18:40:46 And there are some low density uses, residential in
18:40:49 character directly to the north of the site, that lie
18:40:52 in between Presbyterians towers and the subject site.
18:40:55 And of course a small park right here right on this
18:40:58 corner of Bay to Bay and Bayshore Boulevard.
18:41:02 Planning Commission staff feels the request based on
18:41:05 this location is out of character with the existing
18:41:07 scale and mass of the surrounding uses and finds the
18:41:10 proposed request inconsistent with the provisions of
18:41:11 the Tampa comprehensive plan and objects to the
18:41:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:41:20 >>> Truett Gardner, 101 south Frankland street --
18:41:24 Franklin Street.
18:41:24 I have been sworn.
18:41:25 A couple of housekeeping items on the staff reports.
18:41:29 If you look at the matrix of the objections, with the
18:41:33 exception of Land Development Coordination and the
18:41:35 Planning Commission, the other three, transportation,
18:41:38 solid waste, and parks and recreation, have all,
18:41:43 through our conversations, as well as fire, even
18:41:46 though they are not showing it as an objection here,
18:41:48 have been dealt with and satisfied.
18:41:50 Which leaves those two.
18:41:53 Then on Marty's comments, there was one, the height of
18:41:59 the building is actually 26 stories.
18:42:01 She said 27.
18:42:02 Just wanted to make that clear.
18:42:04 And then on the setback issue which is one of their
18:42:07 principal reasons for the objection, I think it would
18:42:10 help if he elaborated why our setbacks are what they
18:42:17 Of course, this is one of the existing offices where
18:42:22 Patricks is.
18:42:24 This is the other office. This will be the parking
18:42:26 structure that will serve those two.
18:42:28 We felt that it would be more appropriate to put that
18:42:31 in the back abutting the Crosstown expressway as
18:42:35 opposed to that V that as a prominent structure on
18:42:39 So that forced the building up.
18:42:41 We made the building as thin as possible to cut down
18:42:46 on the mass, and the height which we feel is
18:42:52 Given the existing zoning.
18:42:56 Landscaped it.
18:42:57 But the main reason for the setback was because of the
18:43:01 parking structure in the rear.
18:43:02 We would have liked to have had the ability to put it
18:43:05 further back.
18:43:09 The site just didn't allow for it.
18:43:13 That being said, I want to introduce SATISH capital
18:43:24 out of Atlanta who is the developer, actually been
18:43:27 working on this since October of 2004.
18:43:29 There was a prior developer, but had some other
18:43:33 So SATICH and his group came in and glad to be here
18:43:40 tonight and be an addition.
18:43:41 Joe Taggart, the owner of the property, is here in
18:43:45 And in a unique position tonight with a building on
18:43:51 Bayshore and the full support of the neighborhood
18:43:53 association, as well as most of the neighbors.
18:43:56 SATISH and I worked tirelessly with Vicki and Karen
18:44:02 Crawford and ask them for all their efforts.
18:44:04 We have had many meetings and conversations with them,
18:44:06 and even went to the full board of the Bayshore
18:44:08 Gardens neighborhood association and got their vote on
18:44:12 the project, which was unanimous, I believe, with the
18:44:16 exception of two.
18:44:19 So with that, we are bringing forward this project.
18:44:28 The current zoning is perhaps the most overriding
18:44:32 issue here.
18:44:34 I know Tony mentioned 100,000 square feet.
18:44:37 It's actually 145,000 square feet of office uses.
18:44:41 So with that being said the standard that we had going
18:44:43 forward, the owners felt that a residential use would
18:44:46 be much more appropriate, and put it on the market for
18:44:51 The building has actually been approved, permits
18:44:54 received for the office, but we wanted to make an
18:44:56 effort with the residential, just thinking that that
18:44:59 would be a more beneficial use to the neighborhood.
18:45:03 The neighborhood agreed.
18:45:03 And as a result that's why we are here tonight.
18:45:07 Along with that comes the precedent issue that Tony
18:45:12 also raised, and I think you would be hard pressed to
18:45:16 find anywhere on Bayshore or off of Bayshore a site
18:45:19 that's zoned for nearly 150,000 square feet of office
18:45:25 use and the intensity that goes with that and the
18:45:27 parking that's required and so I think this is a
18:45:31 unique situation, and would not set a precedent given
18:45:35 the existing PD that's there.
18:45:38 And we went up and down Bayshore, and looking at
18:45:43 Most of them, the majority that are left are
18:45:46 single-family homes.
18:45:47 So I think we are starting from a different position
18:45:49 of rezoning a single-family home into a tower versus
18:45:53 150,000 square square foot office into a tower.
18:45:56 And with that comes what we believe are the benefits
18:46:00 of this project versus an office, and the benefits of
18:46:04 this project in general.
18:46:06 First is the density issue.
18:46:10 Again we are converting 150,000 square feet of office
18:46:13 to 84 condominium units.
18:46:15 Second is the traffic that's generated.
18:46:17 We ran numbers on that.
18:46:19 The use that we are proposing would be a 7% reduction
18:46:23 in traffic, less cut-through traffic is another.
18:46:28 We worked again tirelessly with the neighborhood and
18:46:31 came up with some good plans, one of which, there's a
18:46:40 major problem that we heard from the neighbors where
18:46:43 there's a high volume of cut-through traffic going
18:46:46 down Isabella, basically the short-cut onto Bayshore.
18:46:51 And the solution that we came up with, which
18:46:54 transportation agreed to, was we're going to install a
18:46:57 four-way stop sign at the intersection of Isabella and
18:47:01 Barcelona, as well as crosswalks, going across
18:47:04 Barcelona and across Isabella, which will hopefully
18:47:09 slow down and mitigate some of that traffic.
18:47:17 In addition, from a pedestrian standpoint, we are
18:47:19 going to provide for the first time, sidewalks with
18:47:30 landscaping running all the way down Isabel A.we are
18:47:33 going to do crosswalks also at Isabella and Bay to
18:47:37 And in addition to that we agreed to pedestrian
18:47:41 improvements at Bayshore and Bay to Bay.
18:48:01 Before I turn things over to SHATISH to present the
18:48:05 building we think it's a better fit for the
18:48:07 neighborhood. The neighborhood is here in support of
18:48:09 the project.
18:48:09 We are very grateful for that.
18:48:11 And we look forward to working with you on this
18:48:16 With that, I turn things over to SHATISH.
18:48:21 >>> SHATISH loadie and I have been sworn in.
18:48:27 As Truett mentioned we worked for probably the last
18:48:31 ten months with the neighborhood association to
18:48:33 develop a plan and develop a scheme that would in the
18:48:36 end be an improvement to the neighborhood.
18:48:39 And as an outcome of that discussion, a lot of
18:48:43 improvements have been committed to by us, as it
18:48:49 relates to relates to Isabel, a improving traffic flow
18:48:53 within the neighborhoods, and also trying to provide
18:48:56 for a building that would be much less intrusive than
18:49:01 the office building that's currently approved.
18:49:07 The office building that is currently approved, if you
18:49:09 can imagine on this site plan, is effectively an
18:49:13 eight-story building that encompasses the entire
18:49:18 And in working with our architects, the concept that
18:49:21 we came up with, which was to create a much thinner
18:49:25 profile building that would be less obtrusive on the
18:49:30 neighborhood and trying to maintain a scale of two to
18:49:32 three stories.
18:49:33 So to that end the base of this building here is four
18:49:38 stories, and parking back here is two and a half
18:49:42 stories, and then rising out of that base is a very
18:49:46 thin structure.
18:49:48 This building has only four units -- four homes per
18:49:52 floor, and so is a very small footprint building in
18:49:55 relation to many of the buildings that have been
18:49:58 developed on Bayshore.
18:50:03 As far as the concern about the height of the
18:50:05 building, we actually did do studies on the height of
18:50:09 the building, and how it would impact the
18:50:17 And if I can pass this around, this is a rendering
18:50:23 that has a before picture from the park to the
18:50:29 building and then after picture, with the building
18:50:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Would you pass that around?
18:50:38 It's kind of hard to see.
18:50:39 >>> Yes.
18:50:40 As I mentioned, the project has 84 homes.
18:50:59 And we have worked out all the landscaping details
18:51:04 with the adjacent parcel owner and with the
18:51:09 Again we are correcting a number of deficiencies
18:51:12 within the neighborhood, some nonconforming uses such
18:51:16 as the parking, the patches that is currently on
18:51:20 Isabella, and we have also undertaken a study to
18:51:26 create a left-turn only lane from Isabella onto Bay to
18:51:30 Bay to try and improve some of the traffic flow.
18:51:35 So overall, I think the outcome of this project is
18:51:40 something that the neighborhood is supportive because
18:51:43 they see it as a good alternative to what is currently
18:51:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
18:51:54 The premise of your presentation is the 100,000,
18:52:00 150,000 square feet of office, which I looked up as
18:52:03 approved in 1986.
18:52:05 And council members, we have Tom Vann Lee Duncan,
18:52:08 Kathryn Bourgeois for that decision which I think is
18:52:15 completely appropriate.
18:52:16 150,000 feet of office at this place, it is completely
18:52:19 out of scale and inappropriate.
18:52:21 So what you're saying to us is that what you're
18:52:23 proposing is better than that.
18:52:25 Well, that is just dreadful.
18:52:26 What you're proposing is very nice, but it strikes me
18:52:29 as way too much for the site.
18:52:32 And for the context of the neighborhood in which
18:52:35 you're proposing to locate it.
18:52:36 And rather than couching everything that you say as a
18:52:42 comparison to this 150,000 square feet, I think you
18:52:45 need to explain it in terms of its own merits.
18:52:48 And you all keep saying the neighborhood supports it.
18:52:50 But I think that they have been cowed into saying that
18:52:55 this is the lesser of two inappropriate solutions.
18:53:00 But the question I have for you is, what about
18:53:04 Because this is a very tough street to get out of.
18:53:07 I'm very familiar with it.
18:53:09 How are you proposing that people get out of there in
18:53:12 the morning?
18:53:13 >>> Sure.
18:53:14 On the transportation issue, actually, our project
18:53:17 will improve the transportation over what it currently
18:53:22 Currently, you have intersections at Bay to Bay and
18:53:26 MacDill that have service levels that are below
18:53:31 You have got an intersection at Bay to Bay and
18:53:36 Isabella that's a failing intersection.
18:53:39 And as part of our agreement was the neighborhood, we
18:53:41 are funding improvements to off-site.
18:53:46 We are funding the improvements on Isabella.
18:53:50 We are funding the curb improvements, the stop signs,
18:53:55 et cetera, to redirect the traffic that currently
18:53:58 exists from that office building away from the
18:54:02 We are also funding the construction of traffic
18:54:06 improvements to discourage the cut-through traffic
18:54:09 that exists.
18:54:10 So while it's true that our condominium will create
18:54:14 additional traffic, the net result based on the
18:54:17 traffic study in terms of traffic impact on the
18:54:20 neighborhood is a net improvement, because of the
18:54:23 traffic improvements that we are making that will
18:54:26 direct the traffic away from the neighborhood.
18:54:29 >> And where is it being directed?
18:54:32 >>> To Bay to Bay.
18:54:33 As opposed to going back into the neighborhood as
18:54:37 And also the intersections at Bay to Bay and Isabella,
18:54:41 Bay to Bay and MacDill, are being improved.
18:54:47 >> Thank you. The truth is, right now, they are at a
18:54:50 dead halt of people trying to get out of there.
18:54:53 Adding another lane doesn't -- it's still going to be
18:54:56 a bottleneck when they try to get onto Bay to Bay
18:54:59 which is an absolute dead halt.
18:55:02 I drive this a lot.
18:55:03 And I'm just concerned that what your proposal is
18:55:05 doing is adding additional traffic.
18:55:07 I appreciate the fact that you're proposing to put
18:55:10 some money into solutions.
18:55:11 But your money, I think, is less valuable than the
18:55:14 number of new trips that you're going to be generating
18:55:17 that are going to impact these already less than "F"
18:55:24 intersections and those are my concerns.
18:55:26 The -- are you transportation --
18:55:31 >>> Based on the improvements that transportation
18:55:32 requested that we do, once those improvements are
18:55:36 made, the traffic study demonstrates that even with
18:55:40 the additional traffic of the condominium building,
18:55:42 the traffic will improve over what it currently is.
18:55:46 So those improvements more than offset the increase in
18:55:51 traffic coming from the condominium building.
18:55:53 So it's kind of an interesting situation, right now,
18:55:58 unless there's another source of funds to improve
18:56:01 those intersections they will stay at the level of
18:56:03 service that they are at, which is below failure.
18:56:06 With our project, and us funding those improvements,
18:56:10 even with the additional traffic at the condominium
18:56:12 building, the service level at those critical
18:56:15 intersections will improve over what it currently is.
18:56:18 Even with the extra traffic.
18:56:20 Remember, we are talking about 84 condominium units.
18:56:22 So it's not a significant increase in traffic as
18:56:26 opposed to, say, an office use.
18:56:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, my problem is the height of
18:56:37 I think 26 stories is a little excessive.
18:56:40 I'd like to hear from the neighbors, if you said they
18:56:44 are here to approve of this project.
18:56:46 But I'd like to hear from them.
18:56:48 Because I think that it's just too tall for this area.
18:56:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Have you finished your presentation?
18:56:58 >>> Unless there's any other questions for me.
18:56:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions?
18:57:02 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
18:57:04 on item number 5?
18:57:06 Come on and speak.
18:57:14 >>> Good evening.
18:57:14 My name is Robert Scolly.
18:57:21 I have been sworn in.
18:57:21 I would like to give you this.
18:57:46 I live at 2521 Vaughan drive.
18:57:50 And first of all, the e-mail I got from the
18:57:56 neighborhood association president doesn't coincide
18:57:59 with our neighborhood support on this project.
18:58:03 We have a serious traffic issue, and we have had some
18:58:07 serious incidents on our street.
18:58:11 One of these papers outlines a recent traffic study
18:58:15 between Isabella and Carolina going down palm drive.
18:58:23 There are 11005 cars traveling down the street in a
18:58:29 time between about 7:30 in the morning and 6:00 at
18:58:32 That's six cars every minute.
18:58:35 The intersection of Bay to Bay and Isabella is an
18:58:40 absolute nightmare to get onto.
18:58:43 I do not see how these gentlemen can say that they are
18:58:45 going to reduce traffic flow unless they block the
18:58:48 street off.
18:58:50 With traffic flow when you have 80-some units, you
18:58:53 have the servicing of those units, you have an
18:58:55 enormous amount of increase which we estimate traffic
18:58:58 department estimated palm drive over 2 -- that is a
18:59:06 single-lane street.
18:59:07 Bayshore Boulevard is only a matter of 100 feet or so
18:59:13 That's a four-lane street.
18:59:16 So if you read this carefully, you will see that our
18:59:19 neighborhood does have a serious concern with this
18:59:22 And I beg to differ, but no one is speaking on their
18:59:27 behalf on our behalf here.
18:59:29 As far as the vote in favor of this project, taking a
18:59:37 legal vote at the Tampa women's club where they
18:59:39 propose they will build either a large commercial
18:59:43 building or these high-rises.
18:59:45 Well, if you read the Tampa tribune a couple days ago,
18:59:48 there's 1.2 million square feet of vacant office space
18:59:52 downtown Tampa.
18:59:54 It wouldn't be very prudent to add to that.
18:59:57 So the neighborhood has a serious concern over this.
19:00:00 And we are asking the city to step into this and
19:00:03 rectify a serious problem before it gets even worse.
19:00:07 I was scheduled to fly to L.A. this afternoon, and I
19:00:11 canceled my flight because my neighborhood, my new
19:00:15 neighborhood has children, little kids.
19:00:18 If they run out in the front yard, and get on that
19:00:22 street where that curb is on palm drive, with that
19:00:24 much traffic coming through at that high rate of
19:00:26 speed, they are going to lose a child.
19:00:30 So that's my contention as a neighbor who lived on
19:00:34 that street for 30 years.
19:00:35 We didn't have the time to put together a total
19:00:40 unanimous, at least I believe a total unanimous of all
19:00:42 the neighbors on palm drive, objection to this
19:00:45 project, unless they can relieve or reduce the type of
19:00:50 traffic flow that's going to happen with this project.
19:00:53 I got my e-mail last night through Vicki at 5:46 p.m
19:00:57 That's not a lot of notice for to us get us as a
19:01:00 neighborhood to get together and get down there.
19:01:04 So respectfully, I would like to have you share your
19:01:10 concerns for our neighborhood.
19:01:11 (Bell sounds).
19:01:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up.
19:01:13 Thank you.
19:01:19 >>> Karen Crawford.
19:01:20 I have been sworn.
19:01:21 1406 South Moody Avenue.
19:01:23 I'm before you this evening as a recording secretary
19:01:26 of Bayshore Gardens neighborhood association to give
19:01:29 you the history of how we got to this point.
19:01:32 First of all, the Hoffmann choice is no choice at all.
19:01:37 Once again we come before you concerned about a
19:01:39 20-year-old PD that was never developed and does not
19:01:42 meet current city setback landscaping, transportation
19:01:45 and parking codes.
19:01:46 We continue as a neighborhood to be negatively
19:01:49 impacted by the erosion of the Euclidean zoning and
19:01:52 the administrative tweaking of PDs.
19:01:55 In 1986, another council, without neighborhood notice
19:02:00 or input, approved a PD allowing this 100,000 square
19:02:05 foot office building.
19:02:06 In 2002, again with no neighborhood involvement or
19:02:11 mitigation the PD was modified administratively to
19:02:13 reduce green space and setbacks.
19:02:15 And that's how we got to where we are today.
19:02:18 I think our problem is with the process more than the
19:02:21 people involved, because we have different people
19:02:23 involved today.
19:02:25 In July 2005 the neighborhood was approached to
19:02:27 consider a substantial change to that PD that would
19:02:30 require rezoning.
19:02:32 Bayshore Gardens now is facing an unusual dilemma
19:02:35 facing between an obtrusive 100 their square foot
19:02:40 office complex or a 08 unit high-rise. The Bayshore
19:02:44 Gardens Board of Directors met with Joe tag ard, the
19:02:48 present resources owner of the property and the one
19:02:50 that had the approved PD for the office complex, and
19:02:54 SATISH representing southeast capital and the
19:02:57 petitioner before you tonight.
19:02:58 The board decided that in this case the only thing to
19:03:01 do was to take the issue before the membership to
19:03:04 determine their preference.
19:03:05 So on October 25th, 2005, in a the Bayshore
19:03:13 gardenship membership meeting we asked both develop
19:03:16 towers come to the meeting, they did, and both parties
19:03:19 presented their projects.
19:03:22 After a question-and-answer session a vote was taken
19:03:22 by the 40-plus members in attendance and all but two
19:03:25 votes preferred the 84-unit residential high-rise over
19:03:28 the office building.
19:03:30 Significant mitigation is necessary for both projects.
19:03:33 However, mitigation can only be considered with the
19:03:36 new PD.
19:03:37 We have what we have on the old one.
19:03:39 We would encourage you to impose any conditions in
19:03:42 addition to the ones the developer has graciously
19:03:45 agreed to, and they have made many concessions, that
19:03:47 will lessen the impacts of this project on Bayshore
19:03:49 Gardens and the surrounding neighborhood.
19:03:54 Thank you.
19:03:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Crawford, what do you think about
19:03:57 the height of this project?
19:04:00 Do you feel like it's intrusive or what?
19:04:06 >>> I just would like to just say that I support the
19:04:08 neighborhood's position on how they voted.
19:04:10 Yes, it is a tall building.
19:04:15 Their idea of trying to reduce the mass and make it
19:04:19 taller is a trade-off of a big bulky building sitting
19:04:24 right on the street.
19:04:24 And I think, you know, people see it differently.
19:04:26 I don't really have an opinion on it.
19:04:28 It's just two different ideas of how they develop
19:04:32 You can either make it short and squatty and wide and
19:04:35 fat, and we have seen those kind of projects.
19:04:37 Or you can make it taller and have more green space
19:04:41 and area around it to keep it off the street.
19:04:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
19:04:46 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
19:04:54 >>> Good evening.
19:04:55 My name is Marilyn weekly.
19:04:58 I live at 2619 north Bayshore Boulevard.
19:05:01 I was at the meeting at the Bayshore Gardens
19:05:03 association meeting where this vote was taken.
19:05:06 And I'm frankly surprised at how many times the
19:05:10 presenters talked about how the neighborhood was in
19:05:14 full support of this project.
19:05:17 The neighborhood was given a choice.
19:05:20 Do you slit your throat or do you shoot yourself in
19:05:22 the head?
19:05:24 You know, this is not -- this is not a choice.
19:05:27 One or the other project was going to be shoved down
19:05:31 our throats.
19:05:31 So the only thing that we could after several hours of
19:05:35 talking about this come up with is, well, if one or
19:05:38 the other is going to happen, then the one that is
19:05:41 going to at least contribute something to improving
19:05:44 our traffic situation, that is out of control at this
19:05:48 point in time, would be the only one that we could
19:05:52 vote for.
19:05:52 But neither one of these choices are our choices.
19:05:56 This is the neighborhood, that to quote the Tampa
19:06:00 Tribune editorial of I guess a week ago, Bayshore
19:06:04 Boulevard is dying, and a concrete cliff is rising in
19:06:09 its place.
19:06:11 And if this condo fever continues, the single-family
19:06:16 homes that exist on Bayshore and in the neighborhoods
19:06:19 around Bayshore, will never see the light of day,
19:06:23 because the sun will never be permitted to shine on a
19:06:28 Now, the developers rights.
19:06:31 There's the person that is selling the property, the
19:06:33 owner's right as to what is to be done.
19:06:36 But there's also considerations that I think need to
19:06:39 be made about the neighborhood, the impact on life on
19:06:43 the quality of life in this neighborhood.
19:06:47 And the impact that it makes on the City of Tampa.
19:06:50 Because we're not talking about developers coming in
19:06:52 and making money for the City of Tampa for the next
19:06:54 four years or ten years.
19:06:55 But if we obliterate the neighborhoods in South Tampa
19:06:59 by allowing uncontrolled high-rise, condominium, or
19:07:04 office building structures that are completely out of
19:07:08 place for what we consider a quality of life in South
19:07:12 Tampa, we are ruining a wonderful area of town for
19:07:17 generations to come, and there is no way to turn back.
19:07:21 You all have permitted the flood gates to open to what
19:07:25 should never ever have occurred.
19:07:27 So now it is time to start building a dike and see
19:07:33 what we can do in the form of perhaps a task force, in
19:07:36 the form of perhaps a moratorium, on any more of
19:07:40 this -- this wild, no-conscious type of freedom to any
19:07:46 developer who's got the money.
19:07:48 The neighborhood associations do not have the money to
19:07:51 fight in court.
19:07:53 The developers have all of the money, and all of the
19:07:56 attorneys in place to do whatever needs to be done to
19:07:59 get these and as uneloquently as I can put it, shoved
19:08:05 down the throats of the people that have made South
19:08:07 Tampa what it is.
19:08:09 I appreciate your consideration of the fact that
19:08:13 neither one of these projects fits into our
19:08:17 And I say this on my behalf.
19:08:19 I don't wish to put words in the mouth of anyone else
19:08:22 but it's all of my neighbors, unofficially, who are
19:08:24 saying the same thing.
19:08:26 We have enough.
19:08:27 When did K you do something about it?
19:08:29 (Bell sounds).
19:08:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
19:08:32 >>> Yes.
19:08:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena has a question.
19:08:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, no, sorry, a question of legal.
19:08:40 If there was a previously existing PD but no permitss
19:08:45 have been pulled on it and it were to come up today to
19:08:48 pull permits to build something, would the property
19:08:51 owners be required to meet standards in terms of tree
19:08:56 protections, setbacks, green space, stormwater,
19:09:02 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:09:03 I have been sworn.
19:09:05 I would have to look at that PD to determine how it
19:09:07 was written and then look at the regulations as they
19:09:10 exist at this time.
19:09:11 Up theically the way I understand, the city has
19:09:15 consistently done their PD process.
19:09:18 Everything, all the regulations for that property is
19:09:21 set forth within the PD.
19:09:23 However, since I wasn't here in '86, I don't have as
19:09:26 much familiarity, it's something I would have to take
19:09:28 a look at.
19:09:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
19:09:33 Would you hand that Mike, please, Mr. Gardner?
19:09:44 >>> I have a speaker waiver form.
19:09:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There are three names on the it on
19:09:53 the list.
19:09:54 Please raise your hand.
19:09:55 Linda hammocker, are you here?
19:10:01 And rusty Carpenter.
19:10:03 Thank you.
19:10:04 Three additional minutes.
19:10:07 >>> First I would like to clarify --
19:10:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Your name for the record please.
19:10:11 >>> Vicki pollier, 1311 South Moody Avenue.
19:10:15 I have been sworn in. I'm the president of the
19:10:17 neighborhood association.
19:10:18 And I would first like to clarify that missing council
19:10:21 people will have a chance to hear our testimony before
19:10:25 they vote at the first reading in two weeks.
19:10:28 And I just want to make sure because it's a big deal
19:10:31 for many of us in our neighborhood.
19:10:33 >> Yes.
19:10:34 >>> Thank you.
19:10:34 I also wanted to just clarify that, this date of
19:10:39 January 26th was mentioned in October it was
19:10:42 mentioned, in two news letters, an e-mail I sent in
19:10:48 January and a reminder e-mail that I sent yesterday.
19:10:50 That wasn't the first time our neighborhood heard of
19:10:52 that state.
19:10:55 You find us here before you, and unbelievably very
19:11:00 unique, very painful situation that I would not wish
19:11:02 on any neighborhood.
19:11:03 It's been something that's been somewhat divisive
19:11:09 between our neighborhood but we feel like we have made
19:11:11 the best choice for our neighborhood.
19:11:12 And we had to look at the whole picture.
19:11:18 Bayshore Gardens is being squeezed in by Soho, by
19:11:21 Bayshore, by all of these developments.
19:11:24 Traffic count that was previously mentioned, I had
19:11:27 planned on mentioning it today.
19:11:29 1500 cars.
19:11:37 It's 1501 cars between palm -- Isabella and Carolina,
19:11:43 which is a narrow road with no sidewalks, a Hartline
19:11:48 route, and we have a problem.
19:11:52 We got to in unfortunate situation because we were
19:11:57 told that in 2002, Gloria Moreda reapproved it and I
19:12:06 have a copy of her letter.
19:12:08 So we were told unequivocally that we would have the
19:12:11 choice between a massive 150,000 square foot office
19:12:18 building, with eight stories, and five times the
19:12:24 traffic generated, between that and our other choice
19:12:28 of 84-unit condominium where the developer is giving
19:12:33 us a tremendous amount of money to the city to improve
19:12:38 long standing problems that nobody else can -- is
19:12:42 willing to pay for.
19:12:44 You know, turn lanes on Isabel, a it might help the
19:12:47 traffic flow.
19:12:48 Stop signs at Barcelona and Isabella will help stop
19:12:51 and slow down the traffic before it gets to Palm.
19:12:56 It will also deter the cut-through traffic that Ms.
19:13:00 Boden was referring to on palm.
19:13:02 We also asked to -- pork chopping the office parking
19:13:08 exit, so all of the current office employees will have
19:13:13 to turn only right.
19:13:15 They will not be able to turn into our neighborhood,
19:13:17 which they currently can do, and do do.
19:13:20 So I do think, in some ways, even though there is an
19:13:24 increase in traffic, they are helping to mitigate.
19:13:28 Also, improvements at Bayshore and Bay to Bay will
19:13:31 significantly, I hope, decrease the cut-through
19:13:34 traffic, which we are referring to.
19:13:38 The big issue for everybody, land development, the
19:13:41 Planning Commission, and everyone, including the
19:13:44 neighborhood, is the height.
19:13:45 No one wants this to be a precedent-setting building.
19:13:49 And that is something that we are very concerned
19:13:52 However, we have to say again that we are talking
19:13:54 about 84 residential units.
19:14:00 This is 2.4-acre empty lot.
19:14:03 It's going to be developed into something.
19:14:05 Whether it is this very dense-approved office building
19:14:10 that we were told, quote-unquote, if this condo is not
19:14:15 approved I am going to pull the permits and build this
19:14:19 office building.
19:14:20 And we get nothing.
19:14:20 We get no sidewalks, we get nothing out of this office
19:14:24 We get 1500 more cars in our neighborhood by this
19:14:27 office building.
19:14:30 Given that choice, which was a very limited choice as
19:14:35 Karen referred to it, we as a neighborhood, the
19:14:38 majority, decided that we would rather have 84
19:14:42 neighbors who live in our neighborhood, who care about
19:14:45 our neighborhood, who won't be driving to and from
19:14:48 work as fast as they can, who will be invested in the
19:14:52 neighborhood, versus 150,000 square foot office
19:14:56 building and the problems that raises.
19:14:59 We hope that you understand very carefully that this
19:15:01 was not an easy decision.
19:15:03 It was not an easy predicament to be put in.
19:15:06 And it's not something that I wish on anybody.
19:15:11 And I don't know if this is how this comes about.
19:15:13 But I hope you can answer -- feel free to answer any
19:15:20 questions you have.
19:15:21 We don't want this to set a precedent.
19:15:23 And we don't like going against staff.
19:15:28 Staff -- we respect their opinions.
19:15:31 But in this case the majority prefer 84 residential
19:15:35 units than 150,000 square foot office building.
19:15:39 Thank you.
19:15:42 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Looking at this site plan here, I
19:15:48 noticed that the site that they are talking about has
19:15:52 already been -- it's all offices and there are a lot
19:15:55 of cars in the parking lots and so on.
19:15:58 So how is the residential around there?
19:16:08 >> Immediately south there's one single-family home,
19:16:10 and Presbyterians towers.
19:16:13 There's some residential units directly across the
19:16:16 street on Isabella.
19:16:19 You have to go two blocks away till you get to the
19:16:23 more dense residential.
19:16:24 But I think we are cutting off everything at Bay to
19:16:27 Bay, because that's where the association neighborhood
19:16:31 line is but just north of Bay to Bay there's Monte
19:16:35 Carlo towers, a huge building, there's Citivest
19:16:39 towers, I can't remember the name of it, a huge
19:16:41 building, and Citivest is looking at freedom park, for
19:16:46 another huge.
19:16:47 So there is a lot of residential development at
19:16:50 different heights in the vicinity.
19:16:52 Not just in our immediate neighborhood.
19:16:54 Does that answer your question, Ms. Alvarez?
19:16:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, yes, thank you.
19:16:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question, not for you but
19:17:01 again for staff.
19:17:02 In a sense, this isn't just this rezoning that we're
19:17:07 It sounds top me like the neighborhood and council is
19:17:10 being asked to waive this proposed PD versus the
19:17:12 previous one.
19:17:13 And something doesn't feel right to me and I'll share
19:17:16 with you what it is.
19:17:17 Everybody has been saying, well, what's approved is
19:17:19 this PD for like 150 square feet of office.
19:17:23 But doesn't any building have to meet our current
19:17:27 stormwater rules, our current transportation rules,
19:17:30 our current setback rules, our current grand tree
19:17:36 So, in other words, even though this previous PD might
19:17:39 have been approved, they would not be allowed to pull
19:17:42 permits unless they Dominican Republic the things for
19:17:44 the neighborhood that this petitioner is being asked
19:17:46 to do, which is to respect the grand tree, to spend
19:17:49 money on transportation improvements, to do these
19:17:52 other things.
19:17:53 And I think that the question that was given to this
19:17:58 neighborhood, they have to understand what the
19:18:00 existing PD would be allowed to do.
19:18:02 And I wonder if you would come up with any more
19:18:06 But it seems to me that everybody has to play by --
19:18:10 you're not allowed to build something new that's
19:18:14 outdated before you pull your permits for it.
19:18:17 In terms of meeting our current standards that are not
19:18:20 waivable like stormwater, like transportation, like
19:18:24 parks and rec and protecting the grand tree.
19:18:27 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:18:28 I was able to talk to Thom for a moment about it.
19:18:31 And I think probably the best way to approach that,
19:18:33 and since thatth has to come back anyway, is to
19:18:36 allow to us take a look at that issue, compare the old
19:18:40 PD, the old regulations versus the new regulations and
19:18:43 give you a more comprehensive answer because it may
19:18:45 well be there are certain regulations that they are
19:18:48 currently required to comply with and there may be
19:18:50 other regulations they are not.
19:18:51 So without having all of that information --
19:18:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But that's really germane to this
19:18:58 whole conversation because the neighborhood is being
19:18:59 asked to compare what's currently before us as a new
19:19:02 PD with an old PD that the staff may not be
19:19:06 And they may have to do some of the improvement ifs
19:19:08 this one is on the scene.
19:19:10 >>> And this PD, I understand that might be the
19:19:13 reasoning behind why maybe the neighborhood
19:19:16 association has made the determination that they would
19:19:19 go ahead and issue support for this project, but still
19:19:24 do a different project in light of the current area,
19:19:28 the current information that you have, current traffic
19:19:30 analysis, et cetera.
19:19:32 And that is also one of the reasons why this needs to
19:19:35 come back to you, because staff has not had the
19:19:40 opportunity to weigh in on this particular site plan.
19:19:43 So the Hobbson choice may be a reason for people to
19:19:47 say that they are in support of it.
19:19:48 But that isn't the only thing in which you should be
19:19:51 looking at.
19:19:53 In making your decision.
19:19:54 I will also say we'll go ahead and come back when this
19:19:57 comes back in front of you, either staff or the legal
19:20:00 department, will respond to this other question.
19:20:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The question is, if this were, you
19:20:07 know, a relatively blank slate would the staff still
19:20:11 have formed the opinions that they did?
19:20:12 Or were their opinions formed based on the existing
19:20:18 >>JULIA COLE: I think--well, and that's one of the
19:20:22 problems in moving forward today because they are not
19:20:22 able to even respond to what's in front of you because
19:20:25 they haven't had a chance to look at it.
19:20:27 But I any that is a question they will have to respond
19:20:30 When they do look at it they have to take into
19:20:32 consideration what is currently allowed on the site.
19:20:34 However, it does also need to be worked out in terms
19:20:37 of what's currently out there, how things are
19:20:41 currently developed, and the current situation.
19:20:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else that would like to
19:20:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did she have more time?
19:20:48 I think I interrupted her.
19:20:52 >>> Vicki: Just to close out.
19:20:55 We weighed our decision on what we were told.
19:20:57 And through all of your staff, I have talked to
19:21:01 everybody I could talk to about this.
19:21:03 And that's how we base this decision.
19:21:06 We prefer residential unit, it's as simple as that.
19:21:12 And other than that, I don't know what to say except
19:21:15 we based this decision on what we were told by land
19:21:18 use and planning and everything else.
19:21:20 Thank you.
19:21:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:21:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there anybody else?
19:21:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Marty, I noticed here on the report
19:21:37 that the stormwater signed off, had no objection.
19:21:41 Can you tell me where the notes are that they have to
19:21:44 comply with stormwater regulations?
19:21:46 I didn't see it here unless I'm missing it.
19:21:56 >>MARTY BOYLE: It's a good question.
19:22:27 >>MARTY BOYLE: I'm looking at the notes.
19:22:29 There isn't a note.
19:22:30 However, we didn't get the comments were that they
19:22:34 were objecting to -- there was no comments that they
19:22:38 were objecting.
19:22:40 They were complying.
19:22:41 Well, they certainly --
19:22:47 >>GWEN MILLER: These are old.
19:22:50 >>MARTY BOYLE: The plan you have in front of you
19:22:52 should be at the top dated 1-13-06 handwritten.
19:22:56 It says petition number.
19:23:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I don't see anything on there about
19:23:03 >>MARTY BOYLE: I'll certainly take council's wishes
19:23:06 and the petitioner will agree to put a note on there
19:23:08 stating that they will comply.
19:23:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:23:29 >>> SHATISH: I think you have gotten an accurate
19:23:34 picture of what this situation is, and to put in the
19:23:36 perspective, you know, Joe Taggart who owned the
19:23:40 property, it is a fact that he was prepared to go
19:23:42 forward with an office building, and had begun
19:23:46 marketing, and in fact his marketing person is here,
19:23:50 and got the thought that maybe there's an opportunity
19:23:53 to do residential here that might be a better fit for
19:23:56 the neighborhood.
19:23:58 Quite frankly, that's how I got involved in the
19:24:00 I don't do office buildings.
19:24:01 All I do is multifamily.
19:24:04 And so with that invitation, Joe invited me to come
19:24:09 and look at the property, and I began a dialogue with
19:24:11 the neighborhood on that basis of coming into the
19:24:15 neighborhood and trying to do something that would
19:24:17 address many of the concerns.
19:24:20 I think a lot of the objections that you heard tonight
19:24:24 from the neighborhood relate to conditions that exist
19:24:28 either with my project or without my project.
19:24:32 You know, a lot of the concerns relate to traffic, and
19:24:34 the traffic problems that are there, the cut-through
19:24:37 traffic, the bus traffic, and those things --
19:24:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: height.
19:24:45 >>> They are there.
19:24:45 And our project was meant to come to the neighborhood
19:24:49 and try to fix as many of those problems as we could.
19:24:53 And also to bring a better alternative to the
19:24:56 neighborhood than what was currently planned at the
19:25:00 And we understand the concern about setting a
19:25:03 precedent. As someone mentioned earlier, when you
19:25:07 actually look at that intersection to see what the
19:25:09 density is around there, it actually is a fairly dense
19:25:16 There are seven town homes across the street and one
19:25:19 single family home next door.
19:25:23 Other than that it is all commercial use.
19:25:25 We feel our building will provide a very good
19:25:27 transition and a buffer to the single-family
19:25:29 neighborhood as opposed to any other type of use.
19:25:34 Vicki correctly identified that a surface parking lot
19:25:37 in that location cannot stay forever, and so something
19:25:42 is going to have to happen there at some point. And
19:25:45 to put 84 homeowners who have invested a lot of
19:25:48 money -- and believe me, they will invest a lot of
19:25:51 money when they buy a home there -- and that
19:25:54 commitment to the neighborhood, the reduction in
19:25:56 traffic, and establishing Isabella, and Barcelona as
19:26:01 the end of where the high density development will go,
19:26:05 I think overall that that's a good outcome for the
19:26:08 neighborhood in the long-term.
19:26:11 Thank you.
19:26:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to continue for how long?
19:26:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait.
19:26:17 My strong feeling is that what you're proposing is
19:26:20 much better than the office.
19:26:21 However, this isn't discussion, this is just -- we get
19:26:25 to talk.
19:26:25 But I think that what you're proposing is too much.
19:26:30 I think that what you're proposing, if it were like 12
19:26:40 stories, would be acceptable to the neighborhood, it
19:26:40 would still make the improvements, charge more for
19:26:40 each unit, just don't go up so high.
19:26:40 That's my concern.
19:26:41 And I think that what was presented to the
19:26:45 neighborhood was a really painful choice.
19:26:47 I think that Vicki Pollier was very candid with us.
19:26:52 I want between this week and next week when you come
19:26:55 back, I really want you to look hard at your numbers,
19:26:58 see how fabulous you can make these units, how much
19:27:00 more you can charge for them, and how much lower you
19:27:02 can go.
19:27:03 Because the Planning Commission clearly stated that
19:27:06 your proposed use is not compatible with the
19:27:08 surrounding neighborhood.
19:27:10 We totally appreciate the improvements you make on the
19:27:13 streets, the sidewalks, the fact you are Keening the
19:27:15 grand tree which you are required to do.
19:27:18 I just think it needs to be less high.
19:27:19 So before you continue, I wanted to you hear that.
19:27:22 And I think you heard from the neighbors.
19:27:24 And I think you understand their concerns.
19:27:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I agree with Ms. Saul-Sena, except for
19:27:31 one thing.
19:27:32 I think maybe 15 stories would be better because of
19:27:36 the Presbyterians towers being 15 stories.
19:27:39 >>GWEN MILLER: 17.
19:27:40 >>> Or 17 stories.
19:27:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the height of the
19:27:44 Presbyterians towers?
19:27:47 >>MARY ALVAREZ: 17 stories.
19:27:48 >>MARTY BOYLE: Let me apologize.
19:27:51 I heard two different things.
19:27:52 15 or 17 stories.
19:27:57 >> What is the height?
19:27:58 >>GWEN MILLER: 17 stories.
19:27:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That's what Mr. Garcia said.
19:28:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The question I really have is the
19:28:05 Because I understand -- there's a difference between
19:28:08 stories and height.
19:28:09 And in the old hen days they made things with lower
19:28:13 Now they are making more luxurious units with higher
19:28:22 stories and share with the petitioner and that's kind
19:28:24 of the scale.
19:28:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Don't they normally use ten foot?
19:28:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It depends.
19:28:31 That was 10 or 15 years ago.
19:28:34 The overall height.
19:28:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That was my comment that I thought,
19:28:41 too, that it's too tall for this neighborhood.
19:28:45 And again, we don't want to set a precedent for
19:28:47 somebody who come in and want to build, and allow a 26
19:28:53 story building, the next person wants to build a
19:28:56 So I think Ms. Saul-Sena had the right idea.
19:29:02 Go back and check your numbers again, and see if you
19:29:04 can come back with something a little bit smaller.
19:29:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to continue.
19:29:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
19:29:12 >>GWEN MILLER: How long?
19:29:15 >>MARTY BOYLE: I'm looking at night meetings.
19:29:19 Everything is, under council rules for February
19:29:23 9th, February 23rd, it is full.
19:29:26 Looking at night meetings, we have no spot open until,
19:29:33 for new cases, until April 27th for first
19:29:39 I don't know if a daytime meeting would be
19:29:41 >>MARY ALVAREZ: March 23rd is not a good time?
19:29:48 All we are showing is one land zoning.
19:29:50 >>MARTY BOYLE: Under council rules there are ten new
19:29:53 cases slated.
19:29:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: How many continuances?
19:29:58 >>> There are three slots open for continuances.
19:30:00 I'm sorry, we scheduled. Some.
19:30:02 >>GWEN MILLER: This is a continuance.
19:30:04 Do we have any continuances?
19:30:08 >>MARTY BOYLE: We can continue if it's first reading?
19:30:10 So March 23rd.
19:30:17 >>GWEN MILLER: What about February?
19:30:18 >>MARTY BOYLE: March 5th would be a daytime.
19:30:24 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
19:30:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How about February 23rd?
19:30:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We got too many.
19:30:39 These are land rezonings.
19:30:42 >>GWEN MILLER: What about February?
19:30:46 >>> Truett: February would be fine.
19:30:48 >>GWEN MILLER: The 23rd.
19:30:50 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez voting no.
19:30:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 7.
19:31:01 (Motion carried).
19:32:16 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
19:32:17 I have been sworn.
19:32:17 Item number 7, Z 05-145.
19:32:23 This is a rezoning.
19:32:26 Petitioner is proposing to rezone the property at 1105
19:32:29 east Twiggs Street to a CD-3 Channel District.
19:32:33 Petitioner proposes to construct a mixed use
19:32:36 development consisting of 314 single-family units,
19:32:42 19 -- 415 square feet of office, and 1611 square feet
19:32:49 of clubhouse for the residents' use only.
19:32:51 The site is located in the Channel District along with
19:32:56 northwestern, at the southeast corner of Twiggs Street
19:33:00 and Meridian, and it is north of Kennedy.
19:33:03 The maximum proposed height is 240 feet.
19:33:06 The total F.A.R. is 4.0 and it is a -- excuse me, a
19:33:13 2.26-acre site.
19:33:15 The number of parking spaces provided is 545 spaces
19:33:19 and there are 372 spaces that are required.
19:33:29 If you look at the Elmo, it clearly shows the site.
19:33:34 It is currently CD-1.
19:33:38 And they are proposing CD-3.
19:33:40 To the south is CD-3.
19:33:42 To the north CD-2.
19:33:44 This is Meridian, Twiggs, and you have Kennedy to the
19:33:55 The aerial shows the site, I believe adult use, this
19:34:01 is an engineering firm, and I'm not sure, a warehouse
19:34:07 type use here.
19:34:12 There are waivers requested.
19:34:14 The first waiver is to increase allowable floor area
19:34:17 from 3.5 to 4 per additional amenities provided.
19:34:23 Also, you don't see it in your staff report, but there
19:34:26 has been a waiver added to the site plan to satisfy
19:34:30 transportation, and the waiver is to allow maneuvering
19:34:34 into the right-of-way for loading vehicles.
19:34:39 Like I previously said, the petitioner is requesting
19:34:41 to increase allowable F.A.R. as part of its request.
19:34:46 4.0 F.A.R. is being requested within the mixed use 100
19:34:55 land use category.
19:34:56 However because the site is located within the CDBG
19:34:59 peripheral, City Council may grant an increase in
19:35:03 If the petitioner provides additional on-site
19:35:05 amenities in the form of bonus provisions as defined
19:35:09 in the Tampa comprehensive plan, the amenities
19:35:12 provided by the developer as follows: Petitioner will
19:35:15 contribute $100 that you to the City of Tampa for use
19:35:17 in connection with improvements to the intersection of
19:35:19 Twiggs and Meridian Avenue.
19:35:22 The petitioner is providing 31,440 square feet of open
19:35:29 green space to include a station and bike.
19:35:36 If you look at the site plan you will see the green
19:35:40 It is to be maintained by the property owners.
19:35:46 Dedicate 10 feet of property adjacent to Twiggs Street
19:35:50 right-of-way to the City of Tampa at no cost for the
19:35:53 undergrounding of utilities.
19:35:54 You can see note 14 on the site plan for that.
19:35:56 The petitioner will construct a trail in conjunction
19:35:58 with the Twiggs Street trail within the public
19:36:01 right-of-way at a width of 10 feet him along Twiggs
19:36:06 Petitioner agrees to allow the installation of signage
19:36:08 in conjunction with Twiggs Street trail within the
19:36:12 dedicated right-of-way.
19:36:14 Under staff findings, the objections by design review,
19:36:18 they wanted to see color renderings and wanted to see
19:36:24 ground level perspective.
19:36:25 Transportation had an objection that is not listed on
19:36:28 your staff report.
19:36:30 It's that they requested the petitioner add a note to
19:36:32 the site plan stating that they need to ask for a
19:36:37 waiver, and also stating, number 14, you don't have it
19:36:42 in front of you.
19:36:44 The petitioner has agreed to add this note.
19:36:46 It states that the applicant shall, upon written
19:36:49 request by City of Tampa, dedicate and convey to City
19:36:53 of Tampa at no cost or expense the northernmost ten
19:36:55 feet of the subject property located adjacent to and
19:36:57 contiguous with existing right-of-way for Twiggs by
19:37:01 the City of Tampa to expand Twiggs Street, subject
19:37:03 only to the following condition: In the event that
19:37:05 such expansion of Twiggs Street shall require
19:37:08 relocation of existing above-ground electrical utility
19:37:11 service poles and transmission lines along the
19:37:13 northern portion of subject property, and such
19:37:15 electrical utility service poles and transmission
19:37:18 lines remain above ground, the same shall not be moved
19:37:21 or relocated any closer than 23 feet from the proposed
19:37:25 building to be constructed upon the property.
19:37:28 That note is to be added.
19:37:30 The petitioner agreed.
19:37:31 It satisfies transportation's objections.
19:37:35 Under findings of fact, under central business
19:37:38 district peripheral, objective 8-A, it provides for
19:37:44 mixed use, residential projects in appropriate
19:37:46 locations, within the divine peripheral central
19:37:51 business district.
19:37:52 And 8-8.1 permits consideration of density not to
19:37:59 exceed 100% increase over the existing land use
19:38:02 designation as outlined in the element for central
19:38:06 business district peripheral projects.
19:38:08 Policy A8.2 talks about speaking of the project
19:38:15 seeking of the use of the CBD peripheral bonus
19:38:20 provisions must ensure compatibility with intensity of
19:38:24 existing development, both within and outside
19:38:26 peripheral boundaries by transitioning of the project.
19:38:29 The approached structure is located north of Kennedy
19:38:32 in the northern peripheral of CBD and is consistent
19:38:35 with the densities and heights associated with CBD
19:38:38 The Grand Central projects to the south was granted
19:38:41 165 feet of maximum height and the seaport project on
19:38:45 12th to the southeast was granted a 300-foot
19:38:48 maximum height.
19:38:49 The petitioner has worked with the transportation
19:38:52 department as contributing 100,000 to the intersection
19:38:56 improvement at Twiggs and Meridian.
19:38:58 Under policy A-8.4, it talks about projects using
19:39:03 central business district shall provide amenities, and
19:39:08 that there is a point system associated with that.
19:39:10 We need to make note, a point system has not been
19:39:14 However, has been considered up to 4.3 plus or minus
19:39:19 for provisions of the amenities in the area.
19:39:24 With that, that's the end -- if F there's any
19:39:27 questions I would be glad to answer.
19:39:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
19:39:30 Don't we have -- I know we have requirements that the
19:39:34 proposal be pedestrian-friendly.
19:39:36 And we have talked about -- Twiggs is a major street
19:39:40 in the Channel District.
19:39:41 And from the site plan, I didn't see any pedestrian
19:39:46 access on Twiggs.
19:39:47 Aren't people supposed to create pedestrian access on
19:39:51 all the sides of the project?
19:39:54 Boyle bowel are you speaking to -- you know, there is
19:39:56 the trail.
19:39:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, I'm talk that somebody can walk
19:40:00 in or walk out of the building.
19:40:01 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:40:12 I have been sworn in.
19:40:13 The subject property is located, as Ms. Boyle stated,
19:40:18 right off of Twiggs Street, and Meridian.
19:40:21 It is one block, two blocks north of Kennedy
19:40:25 Land use designation is RMU 100. The request as she
19:40:29 stated is for N excess of 300 units, over 19,000
19:40:32 square feet of commercial use.
19:40:34 You do have a normal F.A.R. of 3.5, RMU category.
19:40:39 This is within the CBD periphery boundary. The
19:40:42 request is being made to 4.0.
19:40:44 Ms. Boyle has also listed to you the number of
19:40:46 amenities that have been provided over and above the
19:40:49 excess which equates to a 4.0 F.A.R. in addition to
19:40:53 among the additions that they are proposing, a .72
19:40:58 acre of proposed green space for an additional
19:41:01 pedestrian amenities, which I believe the applicant
19:41:03 will be addressing to you in detail within his
19:41:09 The site is located within the Ybor channel mixed use
19:41:13 center to the activity center of the central business
19:41:16 Of course it is in close proximity to a number of
19:41:20 regional attractors, the St. Pete Times Forum, the
19:41:22 port of Tampa, aquarium.
19:41:26 It is adjacent to one of the major thoroughfares in
19:41:28 the Channel District which is Meridian and is also in
19:41:31 close proximity and is located on the northern edge of
19:41:35 the Channel District area.
19:41:38 Request T request of 4.0 is underneath the maximum
19:41:43 bonus that which is about 4.3 so it is underneath
19:41:49 that, and does not set any additional standards, from
19:41:53 the F.A.R. bonus standpoint.
19:41:55 But I think also it's interesting as far as the
19:42:01 context of this existing area, there are no existing
19:42:08 residential projects adjacent to the proposed site.
19:42:11 There are some in proximity in various stages of
19:42:15 construction but there are no established projects as
19:42:18 of yet.
19:42:18 So this would again add to potential development in
19:42:25 this particular section of the Channel District.
19:42:27 Planning Commission staff, council proposal is
19:42:32 consistent with.
19:42:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
19:42:40 >>> Good evening.
19:42:40 My name is Brian Sykes with the firm of 100 south
19:42:45 Ashley street, yes, I have been sworn in.
19:42:49 It's not often you get to deal with a project doing
19:42:55 the tongue twister Twiggs Street trail which I did
19:43:00 once but this is a project that fits within the intent
19:43:02 of the city Tampa comprehensive plan.
19:43:05 And the purpose of the future land use and
19:43:07 comprehensive plan states that less than 12% of Tampa
19:43:09 land area is classified as vacant, and that Tampa's
19:43:12 future will be driven by the redevelopment more than
19:43:15 new development.
19:43:16 This is a prime project.
19:43:18 The current use of the site is at the corner of Twiggs
19:43:21 and Meridian is an office building, bayside
19:43:25 On the opposite corner at Madison and Meridian is an
19:43:27 adult use.
19:43:29 The remainder of the site is essentially vacant having
19:43:32 been former industrial warehouse type of uses.
19:43:36 Adjacent and to the south is a project called Grand
19:43:39 Central at Kennedy.
19:43:41 The project is related and somewhat of a sister
19:43:44 project to this project you have before you, the
19:43:46 Martin, and two of the principals in the Martin LLC
19:43:49 are the same principals in Grand Central and Kennedy,
19:43:51 and that is Ken Stalten Berg and Mr. Brombeck.
19:43:56 Mr. Stalten Berg will be speaking on the project in a
19:44:00 few minutes. The project does require two waivers.
19:44:01 First as noted in transportation staff, a waiver to
19:44:04 allow vehicles accessing the loading space to maneuver
19:44:08 in the right-of-way from Madison street.
19:44:09 Madison street is a lesser traveled street than Twiggs
19:44:12 Street which is part of the reason why we oriented the
19:44:14 back of operations towards Madison street.
19:44:17 It does not present any transportation issues or any
19:44:20 transportation -- does not present any transportation
19:44:25 The second waiver that we are asking for this evening
19:44:27 is with respect to the F.A.R., asking for
19:44:29 approximately a 15% increase in F.A.R. from 3.5 to
19:44:34 As staff has noted in its report and discussed, this
19:44:37 is appropriate under the comprehensive plan, given the
19:44:39 amenities that the developer is proposing to provide
19:44:42 in connection with this project, and the improvements
19:44:45 that the developer is proposing to provide.
19:44:47 With respect to the scope of the project and size of
19:44:49 the project, from a height perspective, the building
19:44:52 is supposed to be 240 feet in height.
19:44:54 The adjacent Grand Central Kennedy sister project is
19:44:58 165 feet in height.
19:44:59 This project is to the north of that, and it is on the
19:45:02 periphery of not only Channelside district but also
19:45:04 the central business district and provides nice
19:45:07 transition from the lower uses, the lower dense
19:45:12 advertise, of the Channelside district into the
19:45:12 central business district.
19:45:14 I'm going to let the pictures speak more than words
19:45:16 and introduce Richardson Daly, the designer on the
19:45:21 project, and he's going to go through a little bit
19:45:24 about the design. Technical difficulties.
19:45:42 There we go.
19:45:53 >>> Richard ZINGALI.
19:45:56 I have been sworn in.
19:45:57 Thank you.
19:46:01 We are going to show a film that I think you have all
19:46:03 seen once before.
19:46:05 This is the area of the Channelside district.
19:46:11 It demonstrates how the building is integrated into
19:46:14 the neighborhood.
19:46:15 We are starting out moving north on Meridian, and we
19:46:20 are approaching Kennedy Boulevard.
19:46:22 We are passing the Grand Central project.
19:46:24 We are coming along the west side of the project.
19:46:30 The development has been closely monitored to respond
19:46:33 and respect the proposed Channelside S.A.P.
19:46:36 The configuration is responsive to the neighborhood's
19:46:40 context as currently under construction.
19:46:44 The architecture designs are to utilize the day
19:46:50 sunlight strategically considering that shade is not
19:46:53 necessarily a bad thing.
19:46:55 The orientations have been derived to preserve
19:46:59 neighborhood view ports as well as project views of
19:47:02 the city and court.
19:47:04 This is sunsetted that is currently approaching noon,
19:47:08 and now moving more to the afternoon, and will end at
19:47:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's very cool.
19:47:19 >>> We can also show you the sun -- the times are
19:47:26 lifted in the lower left-hand corner.
19:47:28 That's site plan we are going to move to next which is
19:47:31 going to help us explain how the building is
19:47:35 integrated on the ground.
19:47:38 We have to move to a different file.
19:47:57 This is a conceptual landscape site plan that
19:48:00 demonstrates how the Mortan building is oriented into
19:48:04 the immediate area.
19:48:07 To the left you have Meridian Avenue.
19:48:09 On the top of the frame you have Twiggs.
19:48:13 We have Madison street to the south.
19:48:15 And then what you see to the right-hand side is the
19:48:18 open area that has been described as .72 acres.
19:48:23 The Meridian street integration has been designed
19:48:28 closely with Phil Graham's landscape plan and paving.
19:48:34 The building has also been pulled quite a bit back so
19:48:37 that we can provide areas and remove those slightly
19:48:43 from the face of the building so we can provide
19:48:45 gathering spaces for what will be commercial uses on
19:48:47 that face.
19:48:49 On the north edge we have Twiggs Street.
19:48:51 And then we have provided for the Twiggs Street trail,
19:48:57 sidewalks, greenery, again all working with not only
19:49:00 Phil Graham's plan and material vocabulary but also
19:49:04 working with the recommendations and the strategic
19:49:07 action plan of that secondary area so that shell and
19:49:15 con creates used in sidewalks.
19:49:16 Our north and sidewalk edges are pretty much our
19:49:18 service and garage entrance and exists.
19:49:22 However, we have wrapped the east and west faces, the
19:49:26 residential component, that occurs on upper floors.
19:49:30 And on the lower floors we have wrapped the commercial
19:49:33 You see that because we have some building per spick
19:49:36 tiffs coming up to help mitigate some of those service
19:49:40 The east basin we have the park and open space and
19:49:44 there's some design features that are conceptual in
19:49:47 the upper right-hand corner which are a water feature
19:49:51 that occurs right at where the buildings portal will
19:49:54 be with some paving and it's a gathering space.
19:50:00 On this edge we have asked for the ability to do
19:50:03 townhouses on the ground floor, sending them out for
19:50:10 commercial space and that's in note 13 in the PD.
19:50:13 And the thought there was that's a much more personal
19:50:15 relationship to the grade level with porches and
19:50:18 stairs, and see that in elevation.
19:50:21 Some of the features are the open space primarily,
19:50:24 will have definitely some topography as suggested in
19:50:28 those terrace steps in the upper right-hand corner.
19:50:31 It provides pedestrian access between Twiggs and not
19:50:35 only for the residents but also for the neighborhood
19:50:39 in general.
19:50:43 Let's move on to some photographs or actually some
19:50:45 renderings of what the building will look like.
19:50:48 This is from the northeast corner.
19:50:50 And we are looking at the actual open area as it
19:50:54 appears on the face of the building.
19:50:56 From this perspective you see on the ground floor
19:50:59 residential units, the entry portal into the building,
19:51:02 the landscape plan that's been recommended by Phil
19:51:08 Graham, and the buildings massing, which essentially
19:51:13 is composed of the glass box, relative gloss box, not
19:51:18 entirely, with a more solid box.
19:51:20 We have variation, in the window patterns, created
19:51:24 some interest from the street and from the park.
19:51:27 As we move around to the -- and these are some blowups
19:51:32 so you can see the water feature.
19:51:33 We have a sculpture placed there in the center of
19:51:36 And it's going to be a very inviting space for the
19:51:42 I think it's a wonderful place for the neighborhood.
19:51:45 Moving to the northwest corner, we have got the
19:51:51 residential units, the lower units to the right that
19:51:56 are facing Meridian.
19:51:59 Commercial space on the ground floor.
19:52:00 But you can see that edge is still populated with
19:52:02 landscape, awnings, canopies, and signage that help
19:52:07 break up how that will feel from the street, and be a
19:52:10 pleasant pedestrian experience, and certainly
19:52:12 secondary, but certainly a lot of consideration has
19:52:15 been made toward that end.
19:52:17 As we look at that more closely, we can see some of
19:52:21 those details.
19:52:23 Moving onto the southeast corner of the building, this
19:52:28 is a good location to look at how we tried to deal
19:52:31 with the parking, 545 spaces.
19:52:36 The most economical way certainly as to provide it as
19:52:39 open as possible which is to your left, and I would
19:52:41 imagine pretty obvious.
19:52:43 On the corner of the building, we punched openings
19:52:47 similar to what's happening up above, and to the right
19:52:49 as we get back into the park space, we have introduced
19:52:52 a number of vertical fins, if you will, that help
19:53:00 break up the faces of the parking.
19:53:02 And move ahead then to the southwest corner which is
19:53:07 looking back at the residential units, and which are
19:53:11 above the commercial space that is on Meridian.
19:53:15 You can see they are pulled from the base of the
19:53:19 building that allow people to gather behind them in
19:53:22 the face of the building and also create a plaza edge
19:53:24 for Meridian, again buildings pulled significantly
19:53:28 back from Meridian to give it some breath so it's not
19:53:32 resting right on the edge.
19:53:34 Throws a close-up of that.
19:53:36 So that essentially concludes my portion of the
19:53:40 I am going to hand it over to Ken Staltenberg, our
19:53:53 >>> Ken: We're certainly happy to be here today.
19:53:55 We are very excited about this project.
19:53:56 We think the Martin at Meridian, what this project is
19:53:59 going to be called, is a compliment to what we are
19:54:02 presently doing at Grand Central.
19:54:04 We spent a lot of time log at where to place the
19:54:06 building, and the different scale components so it is
19:54:09 an asset to the people who are going to live in the
19:54:12 Channel District, and other surrounding properties,
19:54:18 such as the synergy property to the north so we really
19:54:21 looked at how we can integrate that property into what
19:54:24 is going to be a very exciting neighborhood, a good
19:54:28 place to live, and wanted to have it be consistent
19:54:30 with the Channel District action plan.
19:54:32 I know you haven't voted to adopt it yet but we tried
19:54:34 to look at what the mission statement is, and design
19:54:37 this building so that it is fitting in with what's
19:54:40 there in the future.
19:54:41 But there's a number of things with this building
19:54:44 which are not groundbreaking which I just wanted to
19:54:46 touch on.
19:54:47 Given the state of limbo of how tall things can be and
19:54:51 how dense things should be in the Channel District, we
19:54:54 tried to look at what you have said before.
19:54:56 That's been the key.
19:54:57 And that's why you find that the density of the
19:54:59 building is 4.0.
19:55:01 It's a little bit more dense than what's currently
19:55:03 permitted but it's not more dense than what you have
19:55:05 approved before for similar projects right in the
19:55:07 Channel District.
19:55:08 The height of the building.
19:55:09 If you look at the height of Grand Central at 14
19:55:11 stories, and the height of one of the buildings in the
19:55:15 synergy property at 30 stories, we are 22.
19:55:17 We split the difference so it does fit in.
19:55:21 We think that this building would be totally
19:55:25 consistent if you were to adopt the new Channel
19:55:27 District action plan as far as how dense and how high
19:55:29 everything can be.
19:55:30 This building would be totally consistent with that
19:55:33 new vision.
19:55:34 I now haven't voted on it yet and we can't work out
19:55:39 all of it but we tried to have this where it would fit
19:55:43 What the Martin does is it provides approximately
19:55:46 three quarter acre park open space which is sorely
19:55:50 needed in that district.
19:55:50 We think it's really important that groan space is
19:55:53 Quite frankly that's why the building is a little
19:55:55 higher than Grand Central so when could take that
19:55:57 space and turn it into a green area not just for the
19:55:59 people at the Martin but also everybody in the
19:56:06 We have obviously extended the greenway, and we are
19:56:09 backing ten feet off Twiggs Street.
19:56:11 We are also contributing $100,000 in excess of our
19:56:14 standard traffic impact fees to expand Twiggs and fix
19:56:20 the situation there which right now, while it's not an
19:56:25 ideal situation there is going to be a lot more
19:56:27 traffic down there.
19:56:29 A lot of people are using Twiggs so it is very busy
19:56:32 right now.
19:56:34 The other thing that it does, which is I think very
19:56:36 important for the neighborhood, is it gets rid of that
19:56:41 stupid XXX guy.
19:56:42 It is a tragedy, when we drive down the beautiful
19:56:45 Meridian Gateway Rway and see that big XXX sign.
19:56:49 We went out, dealt with the guy and bought him out and
19:56:51 it wasn't easy.
19:56:53 And say what you want about Keith, he's not stupid.
19:56:56 He's a smart guy.
19:57:00 He knew exactly what he had.
19:57:00 And we had to figure out how to make it work and step
19:57:01 to the plate really quick with some pretty big bucks.
19:57:03 We did that.
19:57:05 Thirdly, I understand that you guys get a lot of
19:57:08 petitions for rezoning.
19:57:09 Right now there's about 30 to 35 projects either in
19:57:14 the Channel District or downtown core, the periphery.
19:57:17 Unfortunately, only about six of those are under
19:57:20 construction right now, one of which is Grand Central
19:57:22 at Kennedy.
19:57:23 When you look at these things and pep come before you,
19:57:26 you have to ask yourself, can you pull it off?
19:57:28 Well, we are pulling it off right next door.
19:57:30 And Grand Central at Kennedy was a very complex
19:57:33 We have office space, and we have a lot of
19:57:35 residential, and retail space.
19:57:38 So this is a simpler program and it is a smarter
19:57:42 We have purchased all of the land.
19:57:43 We currently have closed alone that essentially did
19:57:48 the the same at Grand Central.
19:57:49 We spoke with our bankers which would you know them as
19:57:54 AB and M and they are very interested in doing this.
19:57:58 So while we can never forecast things in the future, I
19:58:01 think our chances of pulling it off as good if not
19:58:04 better than folks that come before you, and I can
19:58:07 understand how there might be some reticence or
19:58:10 frustration where you guys generally want to see these
19:58:13 areas blossom, and it probably frustrates you when
19:58:17 people come before you to rezone things and they end
19:58:20 up flipping the dirt or can't pull it off.
19:58:22 We are are certainly excited to make this happen.
19:58:31 So I think if you look at the uses, what's going on
19:58:33 there now, and what we are proposing, this is
19:58:38 certainly a win-win for the Channel District, and it's
19:58:42 not making -- setting new precedent as far as height
19:58:46 or density or the other things you have already looked
19:58:49 at projects and approved.
19:58:50 We took that into consideration when designing this.
19:58:53 And what I would say, we frankly love the Channel
19:58:58 We have been down in the Channel District for some
19:59:00 We plan to hold onto our retail at Grand Central.
19:59:03 And this property is going to help that be successful.
19:59:08 For the Channel District to be successful we have
19:59:10 three projects under construction now.
19:59:12 I would love within the next three to five years to
19:59:14 see another six.
19:59:15 That's when we really get to that, where it becomes a
19:59:19 workable neighborhood.
19:59:22 I think sometimes you read a lot about the Channel
19:59:24 And there's a sense that it's over the hump, it's
19:59:29 already there, everything is hungy dory.
19:59:33 There are important areas but the Channel District
19:59:36 This project is going to help it get there.
19:59:37 And I humbly ask your support.
19:59:40 We are happy to answer any questions you or council
19:59:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
19:59:47 >>> Yes.
19:59:47 Ken Staltenberg, I have been sworn.
19:59:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Are there any member members of the
19:59:54 public that would like to be speak on item number 7?
20:00:16 >>> I have been sworn in. Janell Hanson.
20:00:18 We thank you for what is now our home.
20:00:20 Tonight we both heard a concept proposal.
20:00:22 We as residents of Channelside did not have the
20:00:24 benefit of reviewing this proposal with our neighbors
20:00:27 in our neighborhood.
20:00:28 A neighborhood not of develop oars, a neighborhood of
20:00:32 And when I say that, I mean actual residents in
20:00:35 The Wilson Miller study is in progress -- in process
20:00:40 for Channelside.
20:00:40 It is critical for our neighborhood in relation to
20:00:44 developments being proposed and considered that Wilson
20:00:47 Miller turn out their study.
20:00:49 Our neighborhood has invested two consecutive years,
20:00:52 100% of our TIF funds for this study.
20:00:55 This study is expected to be presented to the CRA and
20:00:58 our neighborhood next month.
20:01:00 We as residents are looking forward to reviewing the
20:01:02 Wilson Miller study and having the opportunity with
20:01:04 the CRA to develop this study and to the plan that
20:01:09 secures the vision for our neighborhood and
20:01:13 We request the city postpone deciding on this proposal
20:01:16 tonight until Wilson Miller study is released to all
20:01:19 of us.
20:01:20 We requested the developer the Martin incorporate and
20:01:23 respects the architectural feet yourself of the
20:01:25 five-story development directly across the street
20:01:29 covering the entire length of the north side of
20:01:32 And you will see that on the map that was presented.
20:01:36 The north side of Twigg, that blue marking, that is a
20:01:39 development already approved.
20:01:40 And they have already put forth plans to go forward
20:01:45 with it.
20:01:46 The permits have been submitted.
20:01:47 The development on the entire north of Twiggs Street
20:01:51 does incorporate the vision of Channelside that is our
20:01:54 neighborhood and our home.
20:02:01 So if you could please just wait for the report, wait
20:02:04 for the vision, and postpone deciding on this until
20:02:08 that comes out, it would be well appreciated by the
20:02:11 entire neighborhood.
20:02:11 We thank you.
20:02:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:02:15 Would anyone else like to speak?
20:02:19 >>KEVIN WHITE: Does anybody know when the Wilson
20:02:21 Miller report is due to come out?
20:02:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, what we did today at our CRA
20:02:28 meeting was ask that the model of the Channel District
20:02:32 be submitted as part of the Wilson Miller study, so
20:02:36 that we could better visualize what these different
20:02:39 F.A.R.'s mean, what different heights mean in context.
20:02:43 That's why one of the reasons I feel that would be
20:02:46 such an important tool.
20:02:48 So in answer to your question, Mr. White, six to eight
20:02:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, you may come up for
20:02:55 >>> Ken Staltenberg, I have been sworn in.
20:03:00 We presented this at the Channel District council
20:03:03 meeting last week, and everyone was invited.
20:03:05 So we did present it to the neighborhood in the normal
20:03:08 course of going to the Channel District meeting.
20:03:10 So we did do that.
20:03:12 I believe Ms. White went to the meeting.
20:03:16 I wanted to clarify, we did present it.
20:03:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is a very attractive plan.
20:03:25 I mean, the public open space is beautiful.
20:03:28 The architecture is nice. The question that I really
20:03:30 have is the scale and the height.
20:03:32 And I really -- I would benefit from seeing a model
20:03:38 that shows me how this proposal fits in in the context
20:03:43 of what's around it.
20:03:44 Because, of course, the developer to present their
20:03:49 petition is talking about the things that it's
20:03:51 compatible with.
20:03:51 But the difference, for example, between 160 feet and
20:03:56 240 feet, that's a pretty big difference.
20:03:59 And the resident just referenced the building which I
20:04:05 assume is like 50 or 60 feet that's immediately across
20:04:07 the street along Twigg.
20:04:09 And the beautiful 3-D graphics that we saw didn't
20:04:14 really show us other buildings as much as it showed us
20:04:17 this building.
20:04:19 I would just feel much more comfortable continuing
20:04:21 this until we get the -- we have the benefit of the
20:04:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: I certainly agree with Ms. Saul-Sena.
20:04:29 Otherwise, our CRA request this morning would be
20:04:35 We want that, and then we are going to vote without
20:04:37 In addition to which, whether there was some attempt
20:04:41 to communicate with the neighborhood or there wasn't.
20:04:44 And you're saying no, and that's fine.
20:04:47 Because at the same time, there will be the
20:04:49 opportunity of hold back on making our decision, have
20:04:52 the developer get in touch with -- get in touch with
20:04:55 you or get in touch with you again, whatever the case
20:05:00 I'm certainly on the same side as Ms. Saul-Sena.
20:05:03 I'm not ready to go forward with this one this
20:05:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to propose that we
20:05:09 continue this till the end of February.
20:05:12 >>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
20:05:14 With the hope or with the advice that the developer
20:05:16 make an attempt to sit down and talk to the
20:05:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to know what the
20:05:22 petitioner's position is with regard to that.
20:05:26 Obviously we have a four-member council today.
20:05:28 >>ROSE FERLITA: We are not going to get a vote today.
20:05:32 That's obviously what the position is going to be.
20:05:34 >>KEVIN WHITE: Is that based upon the report getting
20:05:37 If that's the case we have to take it to March.
20:05:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The end of March.
20:05:41 >>JULIA COLE: And petitioner is discussing that at
20:05:44 this point.
20:05:49 >>MARTY BOYLE: It appears under council rules that
20:05:51 February 23rd night meeting is full.
20:05:53 >>KEVIN WHITE: It will be March.
20:05:57 >>MARTY BOYLE: March has room for one continuance.
20:06:00 March 9th.
20:06:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
20:06:03 Make a motion.
20:06:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to continue this to March
20:06:07 9th, 6 p.m.
20:06:10 >> Second.
20:06:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think petitioner wants to say
20:06:16 >>JULIA COLE: I think we do need to hear from
20:06:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I think petitioner has a right to
20:06:20 have an up or down vote if petitioner wishes tonight.
20:06:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, come to the podium.
20:06:33 >>> Ken: I'm thinking about that.
20:06:35 That puts me in a pretty tough spot.
20:06:38 We invested a good bit of money.
20:06:40 And we have a loan in place that we can't go forward
20:06:45 We were originally supposed to be here in October and
20:06:47 delayed it until now.
20:06:49 One of the reasons was so this hopefully this issue
20:06:52 with the plan would be resolved.
20:06:56 And it's still not resolved.
20:06:58 And I have to we those things and say, hey, what
20:07:00 happens if it's not resolved in March or April or May?
20:07:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I share with you that the
20:07:07 action that council took this morning sitting as a CRA
20:07:09 is we asked Mr. Chen to agree to spend $13,000 to get
20:07:13 this model made.
20:07:14 Mr. Chen acted very expeditiously, called purchasing,
20:07:18 got a P.O., called the USF school of architect who is
20:07:22 building it.
20:07:22 So it's going to be under construction.
20:07:24 And they told us six weeks.
20:07:27 And I totally respect what you have done in the
20:07:30 Channel District thus far.
20:07:31 It's really high quality.
20:07:32 It's great.
20:07:33 But this is a big deal.
20:07:35 And although I hate to drag it out, I feel like you
20:07:40 didn't come forward with a plan of the whole Channel
20:07:44 You weren't required to.
20:07:45 But it's very -- I mean, this is a big deal.
20:07:50 It's 22 stories.
20:07:50 You're asking for a waiver on your F.A.R., for us to
20:07:54 really understand what's being proposed.
20:07:56 We needed more information than what you're bringing
20:07:59 And I don't think it would be responsible for us prior
20:08:02 to adopting a Channel District plan to approve a very
20:08:06 significant project.
20:08:08 It would be kind of back yards.
20:08:12 That's why I am requesting it.
20:08:15 >>> Ken: Okay.
20:08:16 What happens if come March there's no decision been
20:08:20 made on that?
20:08:22 I would be sitting here in March and you asking me to
20:08:24 wait till June?
20:08:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't think it will take that
20:08:28 They said this could build this in six weeks.
20:08:31 I'm sure you will be calling them and encouraging them
20:08:33 to build the model.
20:08:34 I'm sure Wilson Miller will come to us at the first
20:08:37 CRA meeting in March.
20:08:38 It's not our intent to delay you.
20:08:40 It's our intent to have additional information on
20:08:42 which to make a good decision.
20:08:44 >>> I understand that.
20:08:45 I'm just saying --
20:08:47 >>> Richard: Can I ask a question?
20:08:49 Richard, I have been sworn.
20:08:54 Can you help me understand the difference between the
20:08:56 physical model and the 3-dimensional model?
20:09:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
20:09:01 Some of us are less professionally able to picture
20:09:06 everything from something that swirls around in three
20:09:10 seconds on a screen than something we can walk around
20:09:12 and see and say this is here, this is here.
20:09:16 It's an educational tool for council to make some very
20:09:19 significant decisions.
20:09:21 This is a very big deal.
20:09:23 Yesterday, I think it was yesterday, we had a meeting
20:09:26 on chapter 27, where we were requiring all new
20:09:29 proposals downtown to have models.
20:09:34 >>> Fizz can Cal?
20:09:36 >> Physical models.
20:09:37 It's really important to our understanding.
20:09:39 Because when we make decisions and they are built and
20:09:42 there for 75 years we want to make good decisions.
20:09:49 >>JULIA COLE: If I can just clarify something.
20:09:53 Julia Cole, legal department.
20:09:54 What is coming forward in six weeks is a model which
20:09:57 would provide council additional information regarding
20:10:00 this particular project and how it would look, and
20:10:05 with other projects.
20:10:06 That's something that's going to be adopted because
20:10:08 calling it adopted has a different connotation that's
20:10:10 that it's almost a regulation type form.
20:10:12 And I also wanted to state for the record that
20:10:17 petitioner certainly has the right to say we'll go
20:10:19 ahead and continue this project so that you can have
20:10:21 this additional information.
20:10:24 However, petitioner -- if petitioner wants to have a
20:10:27 vote up or down today, they have that right.
20:10:29 So I just wanted to make that clear for the record.
20:10:30 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, you're right.
20:10:33 Thank you, Ms. Cole, because I believe the petitioner
20:10:35 said he's thinking about it.
20:10:36 So he has the option to think about it.
20:10:38 He has the option to do whatever he wants.
20:10:40 I'm kind of sitting here finding, Linda, very politely
20:10:43 and maybe more politely than some of us, explaining
20:10:46 why we are waiting to will at that model.
20:10:48 We are comparing their development, somebody else's,
20:10:51 but not with somebody else that's not compatible with
20:10:53 his, and maybe something else that's not as high.
20:10:56 I for one am not comfortable going forward.
20:10:59 That model will help me.
20:11:01 Whether or not the developer says he has talked to the
20:11:03 neighborhood or not, I see heads nodding no.
20:11:06 And I don't feel that this -- I almost find this
20:11:10 council in a posture that says, gosh, we are so sorry
20:11:14 but we need this.
20:11:15 We don't need to be sorry.
20:11:16 We don't need to be sorry because whatever we vote on
20:11:19 in the Channel District is going to affect a lot of
20:11:21 people that are there.
20:11:22 And that's not to discount, sir, what you have done.
20:11:24 I think personally you and I have had a conversation
20:11:27 in the past, and I have complemented you on your
20:11:30 However, right now when you come back to the podium
20:11:32 and you said, I need to think about it, well you don't
20:11:36 need to think about it.
20:11:36 If you want it up or down tonight do it.
20:11:39 But all we are saying is we in an effort to make very
20:11:42 conscientious decisions for the people that represent
20:11:44 us in terms of the neighborhood, the development, and
20:11:46 how they Marge in a very complementary fashion, A, I
20:11:50 need more time, B, I want to see what we just improved
20:11:53 to invest 13,000 in, and C, the neighborhood is saying
20:11:56 they need to talk to you again.
20:11:57 I don't know what the harm is in saying let's wait.
20:12:00 But if you feel the need and the necessity to do it up
20:12:02 or down tonight, please do so.
20:12:05 I think Ms. Cole just emphasized that you have that
20:12:08 So I would like to see you make your decision, without
20:12:10 any stress from this side.
20:12:12 It's your choice.
20:12:14 >>> We'll take the continuance.
20:12:15 >>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
20:12:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: At 6:00?
20:12:23 >>MARTY BOYLE: There is an open March 9th, 6 p.m.
20:12:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved to continue this to March
20:12:28 9th, 6 p.m.
20:12:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
20:12:31 [Motion Carried]
20:12:36 >>> Ken: Thank you.
20:12:38 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 9.
20:12:41 >> So moved.
20:12:41 >> Second.
20:12:42 (Motion carried).
20:12:42 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
20:13:35 I have been sworn.
20:13:36 Before you is another Channel District rezoning
20:13:41 The request is to go from a CD-1 to a CD-3.
20:13:48 The petitioner proposes to rezone the property at 910
20:13:53 through 940 Channelside Drive, and 105 through 117
20:13:58 north 12th street.
20:14:05 Should I wait a minute?
20:14:09 This is phase 2 portion of a rezoning.
20:14:12 Phase 1 of the subject site has previously been
20:14:16 rezoned two times by City Council through petitions Z
20:14:20 03-124 and Z 05-25.
20:14:26 The following is a detailed account of a granted
20:14:30 entitlement foramen advertise provided.
20:14:32 First let me let you look at the zoning map.
20:14:43 Phase 1 is located in this area.
20:14:45 You have Channelside.
20:14:49 And Whiting.
20:14:51 You will see Meridian.
20:14:52 They are proceeding -- this area is CD-1 and CD-3.
20:14:59 Previously in phase 1, this was rezoned to CD-3.
20:15:08 They are asking for waivers.
20:15:09 The waivers are to allow trucks to maneuver in the
20:15:13 right-of-way, to access loading bays.
20:15:15 To allow tandem parking spaces for residential
20:15:18 parking, and to increase the allowable floor area
20:15:22 ratio from 3.5 to 6.13.
20:15:27 I would like to give you a T following detailed
20:15:30 account of the granite and notes and amenities
20:15:34 provided previously.
20:15:36 V03-124 was phase 1.
20:15:39 Phase 2 did not exist at the time.
20:15:42 They were granted 230 units with a F.A.R. of 4.172.
20:15:49 They provided the bonus amenities, enhanced exterior
20:15:55 lighting in public areas, provided a covered walkway
20:15:58 with vehicular pass-through, colorful paintings and
20:16:03 benches and ground level, a lush court yard, pet park,
20:16:07 and meditation garden at upper levels.
20:16:11 View corridors were provided by reducing the height of
20:16:14 building to 50 feet at two corners.
20:16:17 There are rooftop amenities, a two-story high mural
20:16:22 commissioned in the notes along the Washington street
20:16:25 frontage, a matching water feature was also slated to
20:16:29 be installed in the same area.
20:16:31 Under Z 05-25, allowable units with 245 units, that
20:16:38 was the 230 units previously approved and added 15.
20:16:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is a little confusion.
20:16:49 >>MARTY BOYLE: I'm sorry.
20:16:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's not you, it's the pictures.
20:16:54 Phase 1 was the southern half of the block?
20:16:57 >>> Correct.
20:16:57 >> Phase 2 was both the northern and the southern
20:17:01 Or just the northern half?
20:17:03 >>> The rezoning petition brings in both phase 1 and
20:17:05 phase 2.
20:17:06 >> But phase 1 was like 200-something units and phase
20:17:10 2 is just a little piece of 15 units, right?
20:17:13 >>> Phase 1 got approval for 230 units.
20:17:16 They then later came back and asked for 15 additional
20:17:20 >> So phase 1 was what F.A.R.?
20:17:23 >>> 4.172.
20:17:25 >> Phase 2 was what?
20:17:27 >>> The new F.A.R., they are asking for is 6.13.
20:17:31 >> Is that on both, if it were continuing --
20:17:34 considering just where the towers are going to be,
20:17:38 wouldn't it be much more?
20:17:40 >>> 6.130 F.A.R. is one phase and phase two. It would
20:17:48 be more, approximately 13 floor area ratio. Briefly
20:17:50 going over the history of phase 1, they had 230 units.
20:17:50 That got approval with 4.17 F.A.R. They came back and
20:17:50 asked for 15 more units and upped the F.A.R. to 4.2
20:17:50 under phase 1.
20:18:07 There were no additional amenities provided.
20:18:09 That was approved.
20:18:11 They are now coming before us with phase 2, which
20:18:14 incorporates the whole site.
20:18:16 And they are asking for 190 residential units, retail
20:18:22 space of 5460 square feet, 3,990 square feet of
20:18:28 storage space, the F.A.R. is 6.13 aggregate for both
20:18:36 249 feet maximum building height.
20:18:38 And 268 parking spaces are being provided.
20:18:43 206 were required.
20:18:45 The petitioner is requesting an additional increase in
20:18:49 F.A.R. as part of this rezoning request.
20:18:52 City Council granted the previous increase in F.A.R.,
20:18:55 Because the petitioner provided additional on-site
20:18:58 amenities, as defined in the Tampa comprehensive plan,
20:19:03 we originally noted in our staff report that this plan
20:19:06 doesn't show any additional bonus a Nen advertise.
20:19:08 However, Tuesday, we were given an e-mail from the
20:19:12 petitioner noting that they had forgotten to include
20:19:16 the amenities that they had planned for phase 2, and
20:19:20 we were provided a copy of those.
20:19:22 They are not included in our staff report.
20:19:24 We really haven't had much chance to review them.
20:19:28 But I can let you know what they are proposing as
20:19:30 amenities to increase their F.A.R.
20:19:33 They are proposing to commission two murals to be
20:19:39 paint add long Washington state street and Channelside
20:19:41 frontage of phase 2 building.
20:19:43 The murals will be no less than one story high.
20:19:47 The decorative wall water feature at the corner of
20:19:51 Channelside and Washington street, phase 1 also has a
20:19:55 water feature.
20:19:56 The developer shall install lighted outdoor sculpture
20:19:59 feature approximately 10 stories high at the corner of
20:20:01 Channelside and Washington street.
20:20:03 And a rooftop lantern above.
20:20:06 The developer shall install paver marked pedestrian
20:20:08 crossing to the trolley stop with a pedestrian signal,
20:20:12 in conjunction with the existing traffic signal at the
20:20:15 intersection of Washington street and Channelside.
20:20:18 The developer shall relocate all overhead utilities at
20:20:21 the project area underground.
20:20:24 We made a note just quickly reviewing this that there
20:20:29 is a code provision, section 27.455 CA that requires
20:20:34 that by code.
20:20:36 That's really not -- we don't feel that's an added
20:20:39 bonus amenity.
20:20:41 But based on the additional F.A.R. and the height,
20:20:45 land development has objections.
20:20:50 And we are asking that City Council consider the
20:20:52 following just like we did previous, we have to
20:20:55 consider objective 8-A, .1, .2, in which it talks
20:21:01 about the peripheral bonus points, and we noted this
20:21:05 structure is located in the central of the Channel
20:21:07 District along Channelside Drive as opposed to the one
20:21:10 we just saw as in the peripheral on the northern
20:21:13 It is immediately surrounded with lower density
20:21:15 buildings that stand between 53 feet and 120 feet in
20:21:20 Attached to your staff report, there is a map of the
20:21:23 Channelside district.
20:21:26 Hopefully you have that with yours.
20:21:28 If not I can pass one around.
20:21:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Would you pass them around?
20:21:33 >>MARTY BOYLE: Sure.
20:21:34 Also we made note about the point system, that there
20:21:37 isn't actually a point system.
20:21:39 Ultimately the question is for council, does the added
20:21:44 amenities for the item, that they were deciding to add
20:21:51 28, 29, 30 -- I'm sorry, 26, 27, 2, 30.
20:21:58 Do those amenities equate to the additional F.A.R.?
20:22:03 Probably if you look at square footagewise, it's
20:22:05 approximately 212,000 square feet over the whole site.
20:22:14 And let's see, I'm sorry.
20:22:18 Transportation removed their objection.
20:22:22 They got with the petitioner, and they had a note on
20:22:25 there about the architectural site plan showing the
20:22:28 driveway on Washington street, and the system with the
20:22:31 proposed site plan.
20:22:32 They got with them and clarified that.
20:22:36 Under design review the objection is that they need to
20:22:38 see color renderings, that the F.A.R. at 6.13 is
20:22:43 excessive and that the height of 249 feet of the
20:22:45 structure is of concern.
20:22:50 And that's the end of our report.
20:22:53 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Marty, on the second page of the --
20:22:59 where you have 6.13 F.A.R. aggregate for both phases
20:23:04 and then you have 2 F.A.R. equals 14.059.
20:23:09 What does that mean?
20:23:12 >>MARTY BOYLE: They came with this rezoning request
20:23:15 that is before you right now.
20:23:17 They pulled in the acreage of phase 1.
20:23:20 And so the F.A.R. then is spread out over the whole
20:23:31 whole site.
20:23:32 If you were to just only look at phase 2, and the
20:23:37 ratio for that, it would amount to 14.
20:23:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That's excessive, isn't it?
20:23:44 >>> That's staff's objection.
20:23:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
20:23:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff?
20:23:50 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
20:24:00 I have been sworn in.
20:24:04 I would like to add a little more to what Ms. Boyle
20:24:08 has already added in her report.
20:24:10 This is located in the central area of the Channel
20:24:12 District area as you can see right off the corner of
20:24:16 Washington and Channelside Drive.
20:24:19 Historically, she has told but, this is one of the
20:24:23 initiatives that came into Channelside.
20:24:26 And F.A.R. in excess of the allowable F.A.R., the
20:24:36 Subsequently they came in prior to the -- 103.5.
20:24:40 Subsequently they came in as she stated to
20:24:43 approximately a 4.2 which now they have the highest
20:24:47 F.A.R. in the Channel District.
20:24:57 We'll show you the aerial of the site.
20:24:59 I think what is significant, you see the existing
20:25:03 There are existing residential projects that are
20:25:05 adjacent to the site currently, two of which are the
20:25:09 Meridian and the Victory Loft apartments.
20:25:14 The existing residential sites are four to eight
20:25:19 stories in height.
20:25:22 I think a maximum of 120 feet.
20:25:27 The request is 6.13 with an increase current allowed
20:25:32 4.2 and increase of approximately 45%.
20:25:35 From their existing F.A.R.
20:25:37 And if you were to look at the ceiling of 3.5, which
20:25:39 is allowed in the RMU, would be an increase of 75%.
20:25:46 Given the location of the site, and the existing uses,
20:25:51 there have been some amenities that have been
20:25:54 addressed that were not unusually addressed on the
20:25:56 latest site plan that you have received from the
20:25:59 applicant that were brought up this past week that she
20:26:04 has outlined for you.
20:26:07 Take into consideration again at this late date, a
20:26:13 recommendation at this point in time, and also must
20:26:17 also let you know that there has, in the body of the
20:26:22 report we were talking about the only place where you
20:26:24 have a point system that's linked to applicable
20:26:27 amenity standards that are outlined in the
20:26:29 comprehensive plan policies.
20:26:31 The only applicable point system that is in the Land
20:26:33 Development Code right now does not even apply to the
20:26:37 site because to do so, the site has to be three acres
20:26:40 or more which this site does not qualify.
20:26:44 So our recommendation when this site initially came to
20:26:46 you was for Land Development Code to try to craft an
20:26:52 actual mechanism that could be used for practical
20:26:55 application, actually having a strict point system, so
20:26:59 that could you set based on the additional amenities
20:27:04 over and above what's required by law to actually put
20:27:07 a number on there, but to arbitrarily come in and say
20:27:11 that 6.9 would be applicable at this time, with a
20:27:14 mechanism to make that defensible, it's premature, and
20:27:20 I believe that we do have that.
20:27:21 That was our position when this originally came in.
20:27:23 So basically your Land Development Code has not
20:27:25 changed in respect to the recommendation that we had
20:27:28 originally made in this project.
20:27:31 So that being said, our position remains unchanged
20:27:33 based on the existing character of the area, which is
20:27:39 existing residential that's in the area, and no
20:27:41 applicable bonus provision in the Land Development
20:27:43 Code that has been -- there has been nonprofit since
20:27:46 this came in, Planning Commission staff still finds
20:27:49 the proposed request inconsistent with the
20:27:51 comprehensive plan and objects to the proposed
20:27:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:27:55 >>> Reah Law with Fowler White.
20:28:04 I am representing the applicant Key Developers, and
20:28:08 Fida Sirdar, who is here.
20:28:11 He's the president of Key Developers.
20:28:13 And we also have -- I'm Rhea Law.
20:28:16 I have been sworn.
20:28:17 Thank you very much.
20:28:19 That is nice.
20:28:22 Notice he didn't even hold it up far.
20:28:25 We have with us a team that has been working on this
20:28:28 And I can answer a lot of the questions that has been
20:28:30 brought to you just over the last few moments.
20:28:35 For the architects, we have an international and a
20:28:38 local team.
20:28:39 And we are going to show you some of the plans here
20:28:47 that we have to deal with.
20:28:50 In any event, this international and local team
20:28:53 consists of Mark Vensky right there, with Studio
20:29:01 Market International, Inc., and David Ponterini
20:29:07 Associates Architects.
20:29:09 For our traffic analyst, we have Mike Yates with Links
20:29:12 and Associates, and of course Andrea Zelman is with
20:29:15 Fowler White, and we have all been working on this
20:29:18 project for a very long time.
20:29:19 And I just want to remind you, this was a project that
20:29:22 you originally approved in September of 2003, and we
20:29:26 brought it before you, it was one of the very first
20:29:29 ones that we started in Channelside.
20:29:31 My client and I went to great length to bring in some
20:29:34 unique design criteria.
20:29:36 I think you all -- well, I know you all were very
20:29:38 excited about it at the time that it was approved.
20:29:42 It had a rooftop amenity that was really quite
20:29:45 stunning and I'm delighted to tell you that it's
20:29:47 actually under construction.
20:29:51 What happened after that first approval was Kim
20:29:55 markham from Channelside came to my client and said to
20:29:59 him, would you be willing to take on an additional
20:30:03 parcel that's the rest of the block, adjacent to your
20:30:08 project, and expand your project into it?
20:30:11 And so he took a look at it, and after addressing
20:30:15 that, he has gone forth in order to do that.
20:30:18 The project that you have before you is a combination
20:30:20 of the two.
20:30:21 It's not one building and a second building but rather
20:30:25 it is a composite of the whole.
20:30:27 And that's why when you look at it, we are talking
20:30:30 about an increase in F.A.R. that would go to 6.1.
20:30:35 I don't think you can look at it as one is 14 or 13
20:30:39 and the other is 4.1, but rather you have to look at
20:30:42 it as a whole because that is how this project has
20:30:45 been conceived, and that's how it would be
20:30:50 It is a unique project.
20:30:52 And I note that some of you have an opportunity to
20:30:54 actually go over and see the place in Channelside.
20:30:58 They actually have a full unit that was constructed
20:31:02 and available for you to look at.
20:31:04 And it is really unique because it is of such high
20:31:08 It's a very unique project.
20:31:11 As is true, in the first time, the guy has gone to
20:31:16 great lengths to make sure he's involved the
20:31:19 And you just saw a great number of people file in
20:31:21 A lot of them are wearing yellow.
20:31:24 Those are people that are here to support this
20:31:25 project, because they believe in what is being
20:31:28 proposed, and they are happy to come out tonight and
20:31:32 talk to you and be happy to give you their perspective
20:31:36 on that.
20:31:37 With that, we originally were going to provide you
20:31:40 with a PowerPoint.
20:31:42 But when we got here before the meeting, we were told
20:31:45 that you have to have chair approval in order to do
20:31:48 that, and we were not aware of that. So we do have
20:31:51 It's on a disk.
20:31:52 However, we can also use the Elmo, and that's your
20:31:55 pleasure, whichever way you would like to have that
20:32:00 >>GWEN MILLER: You can do the Elmo.
20:32:06 >>RHEA LAW: We were not aware of that so I apologize
20:32:09 for that.
20:32:10 We will in fact use the Elmo.
20:32:11 I would like to introduce our architect, David
20:32:13 Pontarini with the firm of Hariri Pontarini, an
20:32:23 international award winning architectural firm that
20:32:25 does work not only in North America but South America
20:32:28 and Europe.
20:32:29 And I'm very proud to tell you that Art Enco just
20:32:36 listed one one -- one of their buildings as one of the
20:32:40 12 best new buildings and we would like to see this
20:32:42 building on the list next year. With that I turn you
20:32:44 over to David.
20:32:47 >> David Pontarini.
20:32:52 I have been sworn.
20:32:57 I'll start the presentation by putting up a map of the
20:33:00 Channelside district that shows the level of
20:33:02 development that is anticipated in the area.
20:33:06 And it an advertise interests, as you are probably all
20:33:08 familiar, 5,520 units in the next coming years.
20:33:14 And what I wanted to start with was just a brief
20:33:17 description of how the different -- that area has
20:33:21 developed and is going through an area what I would
20:33:24 call transition, and it's pretty specific transition.
20:33:28 The first wave of development which you can see
20:33:30 represented by the image in the upper right-hand
20:33:33 corner on my side represents some of the first
20:33:35 industrial warehouse buildings that were converted to
20:33:38 residential uses and artist studios and is kind of
20:33:42 characteristic of that first wave development. The
20:33:44 second wave was as the buildings and the land value
20:33:47 started to increase and started to get larger
20:33:49 buildings, like "the place" which has been mentioned
20:33:54 is six to eight stories in height, transitioning down
20:33:57 into the area.
20:33:58 And what has subsequently started to happen is you
20:34:06 have gotten the third wave, which is consistent with
20:34:09 what you have seen in the previous presentation, which
20:34:11 was the other project that was before you earlier, as
20:34:16 well as a high-rise form of development which has also
20:34:20 started to come in in the form of the towers at
20:34:23 Channelside, which kind of represents an interesting
20:34:26 approach to the area.
20:34:29 And the tall slender elements that sit on a podium or
20:34:32 a base.
20:34:35 When we were asked to look at the second stage, our
20:34:41 approach based on our experiencing the urban in-fill
20:34:44 and intensification in the area like this one, it was
20:34:47 to look at a form of development which kept any
20:34:51 additional density, very tall, very slender in the
20:34:54 form of a point tower.
20:34:55 And the site is located in the northeast quadrant of
20:34:59 the existing block.
20:35:00 So really we are completing the block.
20:35:02 And the strategy has been to use front tower form
20:35:08 because it has impact.
20:35:09 The small slender foreplate casts shadows but the
20:35:14 shadows move more quickly as they are more tall and
20:35:17 slender so the impact is less in surrounding
20:35:22 The other benefit to the tall point tower form is that
20:35:25 you don't get into overlooked issues of building space
20:35:29 nicing each other across borrow -- narrow streets and
20:35:32 units looking into each other.
20:35:33 So we felt that the most appropriate form for this
20:35:36 next stage was the point tower.
20:35:40 And we did look at it very carefully, and we came up
20:35:43 with a configuration in the lower right-hand corner.
20:35:47 The building floor plate that represents a tall
20:35:53 building on on 10% so it has a very minimal impact in
20:35:56 the sense that it's a very small floor plate.
20:36:00 Almost 90% would remain low rise in the form of the
20:36:03 two buildings that are currently under construction as
20:36:06 36% of the site also has terraces and landscaped which
20:36:12 are part of the overall form.
20:36:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Low rise is how tall?
20:36:17 >>> Well, mid rise -- it.
20:36:18 >> Says low rise.
20:36:19 >>> Right.
20:36:19 Low rise would be in the order of six to eight.
20:36:21 And mid rise is typically eight to 15 or eight to 12.
20:36:26 Different cities have different ways of approaching
20:36:32 The next thing that we did as part of this initial
20:36:34 stage was to look at the overall elevation proportion
20:36:37 and massing and these sketches again represent the
20:36:39 original concept.
20:36:40 What subsequently happened, after much consultation
20:36:44 with our client, conversations with members in the
20:36:48 neighborhood and in the community, we pulled back on
20:36:51 the approach of the taller building and we went to a
20:36:54 form which is more consistent, prevalent in the
20:36:59 neighborhood in this kind of third wave development
20:37:01 that I spoke about which is a slot building that is 24
20:37:05 stories in height which is represented by the model on
20:37:08 the right-hand side of the screen, and before you can
20:37:10 see it as the model that's closest to me, and it is
20:37:15 the lower building.
20:37:16 The densities of the two schemes are the same.
20:37:18 The GFA are the same.
20:37:20 The footprint of the building actually is smaller.
20:37:25 In terms of -- I'm sorry, larger in terms of its
20:37:28 relationship to the overall site.
20:37:30 Whereas the point tower occupied 10.5% of the site
20:37:34 this scheme now occupies 15.6% of the site which we
20:37:38 think is still reasonable given that it is a very
20:37:40 large site within the urban context.
20:37:46 Both schemes have the same ground plan configuration,
20:37:56 in that they are bringing retail to the Channelside
20:38:00 street, reinforcing the retail that was developed as
20:38:04 part of phase 1.
20:38:06 So on the lower right-hand corner you can see the
20:38:08 retail that's part of phase 2.
20:38:10 And also the residential lobbies open off the corner
20:38:13 of the intersection at Channelside and Washington.
20:38:19 We have looked also very carefully at the elevation,
20:38:24 and the retail that is being proposed.
20:38:28 And the quality of retail that is consistent with
20:38:31 phase 1 is going to be extend add cross the base of
20:38:34 the building into the bottom of the second stage of
20:38:39 And we are actually carving back that retail at grade
20:38:42 to increase this width of the sidewalk.
20:38:51 The next elevation starts to show the overall look
20:38:55 Of the building with the continuation of the 8-story
20:38:58 base that will run through and define the bottom part
20:39:01 of the second phase of the development.
20:39:05 The parking that will occupy the first seven floors
20:39:08 above the retail will be screened behind a Curt on --
20:39:11 curtain wall.
20:39:15 >>MARY ALVAREZ: How tall is that building?
20:39:18 >>> 24 stories in terms of height.
20:39:21 >> That building?
20:39:21 >>> Sorry. The other one is 32 stories.
20:39:23 But what we have before council right now is a
20:39:25 24-story scheme.
20:39:27 I'm just trying to give you a bit of history in terms
20:39:29 of where we have come from in terms of designs.
20:39:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
20:39:34 >>> So this is the building at 24 stories with the 16
20:39:38 floors of residential sitting on an 8-story base.
20:39:40 The first floor of that 8-story base again is a
20:39:44 continuation of retail.
20:39:45 Parking up above and then residential spaces, units,
20:39:50 located on top.
20:39:52 The Washington street elevation continues at the
20:39:57 retail base, and the residential lobby at the corners
20:40:03 up above, and then the residential 16 stories up above
20:40:07 And it starts to show the idea from the 24 stories
20:40:12 down to the 6 and down to the 8 stories in terms of
20:40:14 transitioning into the neighborhood.
20:40:16 And to the lower right-hand side you can see the first
20:40:20 stage of the development which is currently under
20:40:21 construction, which has retail and artist and
20:40:27 amenities space associated along the base at
20:40:31 This corner elevation starts to get into a bit of a
20:40:37 detailed expression of the retail at the base, and the
20:40:40 idea of animating the whole street edge and bringing
20:40:43 life back to Channelside, and the corner at Washington
20:40:46 and Channelside will have the water feature as part of
20:40:49 the entrance to the building.
20:40:51 But located at the street.
20:40:53 And we paid quite a bit of attention again to the idea
20:40:57 of continuing the cafe, small retail format that's
20:41:01 consistent with the first stage of the development,
20:41:03 and that will continue into the base of the building,
20:41:06 again continuing to animate Channelside during the
20:41:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It appears to me -- and my memory
20:41:15 is highly imperfect -- but it appears to me that the
20:41:19 streetscape is virtually the same as the one that we
20:41:24 have approved at a previous -- for the previous
20:41:27 approved PD that had the F.A.R. which is the highest
20:41:32 in the area, 4.25.
20:41:33 And what you're asking us to do is to consider a much
20:41:37 bigger density, but the pedestrian experience, I don't
20:41:42 see it changing from what has been previously approved
20:41:45 until now.
20:41:47 >>> Well, maybe I should continue through because
20:41:49 there are some elements that relate --
20:41:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe could you point those out.
20:41:54 >>> As we go through.
20:41:55 This image starts to show how we are starting to make
20:41:57 gestures towards transitioning to amenity space that
20:42:01 is increased in terms of the idea of the light
20:42:05 sculpture on the corner.
20:42:06 You're correct in saying that we are really completing
20:42:09 the block at the base, and we found through the
20:42:11 discussions with staff and with city that that was
20:42:13 really something that they were looking for and the
20:42:16 idea of continuing the retail and amenity at the base
20:42:19 is something that's been part of the overall process.
20:42:22 >> That isn't any different than it was before, is it?
20:42:24 >>> It isn't.
20:42:25 But the other thing that we started to, do started to
20:42:27 increase the setbacks relative to the sidewalks to
20:42:30 improve the width of the sidewalk.
20:42:32 >> What is the difference?
20:42:33 >>> It varies now from 14 to 20.
20:42:36 Because it's curving, there are some portions of the
20:42:38 sidewalk that will be 14 feet wide.
20:42:41 There are some portions where you start to curve at
20:42:43 the corner where it increases to 20.
20:42:45 >> What was it previously?
20:42:46 >>> In the previous scheme we were roughly on average,
20:42:49 I think, 10 to 15 in some areas, and at the corners we
20:42:53 did increase it.
20:42:54 But we made significant increases in terms of the
20:43:03 This image starts to show the idea of a light
20:43:05 sculpture, which we have talked about as a public
20:43:07 amenity piece, or as a contribution that the developer
20:43:11 is making in terms of trying to create an element at
20:43:17 the corner that marks this as a significant landmark
20:43:20 building that almost forms a Gateway into the
20:43:22 Channelside district.
20:43:23 And really instead of just presenting a blank parking
20:43:26 facade to the street and to the corner, actually
20:43:29 brings light and sculpture to the corner which ties
20:43:32 into I think a number of initiatives within the city
20:43:35 art program.
20:43:36 We have looked very carefully at precedence throughout
20:43:38 the world for lighting and how to treat the lighting,
20:43:42 in very unique ways to really make this a significant
20:43:45 feature at the corner.
20:43:50 The other thing I want to talk about on a macro level
20:43:53 in terms of city building, a lot of the previous
20:43:55 schemes report more about creating a public realm that
20:43:58 continues the work that was started in the first stage
20:44:01 of the project.
20:44:02 But on a larger macro level in terms of the
20:44:05 development within the city and how it fits into the
20:44:08 context, we see this as a unique site, and that it is
20:44:13 at the juncture or a transit station stop.
20:44:17 I know at this stage, that transit system isn't
20:44:21 heavily used but it certainly is an investment in
20:44:23 infrastructure that I think will benefit the city in
20:44:25 the future, and I think that traditionally what you
20:44:28 find in many cities is that development occur as long
20:44:31 these transit nodes and we feel one of the benefits of
20:44:35 this kind of density at this location is that it will
20:44:37 help support both the retail that we are talking about
20:44:42 that's developing in the neighborhood but also make a
20:44:44 significant contribution to utilization hopefully that
20:44:46 this is a major transit corridor.
20:44:48 And in terms of where you would put density in a city
20:44:51 it's normally at transit nodes and that's kind of the
20:44:54 classic way of investing in infrastructure that you
20:44:58 have already paid for and most cities see as nodes for
20:45:01 growth and development, which is another reason that
20:45:03 we felt the kind of density that's being talked about
20:45:05 here, the scale and the height, is really consistent
20:45:07 with the model of growth within the city.
20:45:15 And when we looked at the transit system that has
20:45:18 grown or has the potential to grow within the downtown
20:45:20 corridor we started to look at a three dimensional
20:45:23 model of the city.
20:45:24 And you can see from this image that the red line
20:45:26 represents the rough extent of the transit system.
20:45:31 I know there is a point where the trolley car changes
20:45:33 now to a bus.
20:45:35 But certainly that transit corridor runs down the
20:45:39 central business district that connects to the
20:45:41 cultural district which is eventually merging within
20:45:43 the city.
20:45:44 It connects to the ho hospitality with the transit
20:45:50 next to the hotel and the convention center at the
20:45:52 It also connects to the Channelside district.
20:45:56 The shops at Channelside.
20:45:59 We saw this again as the idea that the -- the
20:46:05 intensification along the corridor, and that's why we
20:46:07 felt the density was appropriate.
20:46:09 The other thing that the increase in density did for
20:46:11 us was that it permitted us to invest heavily in the
20:46:15 architecture of the building, and certainly that's
20:46:17 something that's going to be used to fund a lot of the
20:46:22 light sculpture components and some of the other
20:46:25 things we talked about.
20:46:26 So we felt that the type of intensification and the
20:46:29 massing that's being proposed is consistent and
20:46:31 appropriate for an urban neighborhood which is
20:46:36 emerging in the Channel District, which is going
20:46:39 through significant transition, and which is right
20:46:42 next door to the central business district.
20:46:44 And really if you look at the map of the drawing, it
20:46:46 is really all part of a downtown peninsula which has
20:46:50 incredible growth potential.
20:46:52 And the this idea that the intensification could occur
20:46:57 along that rim seemed to be really consistent with
20:47:00 traditional models of urban development and in-fill.
20:47:03 The other thing that we looked at was the Channelside
20:47:09 strategic action plan that's coming about.
20:47:11 And this is an image that's taken from that.
20:47:13 The purple represents the height limits.
20:47:16 The taller height limits that are permit add long the
20:47:18 federal lands.
20:47:19 And then it links up and you can see at the top of the
20:47:21 image the central business district beyond.
20:47:26 There is a proposal to drop the height within the
20:47:28 Channel District.
20:47:30 And for us it really didn't make sense, or we didn't
20:47:32 really understand the logic behind this to create a
20:47:35 pot hole in the middle of a very tall infra structure
20:47:38 that seems to be emerging given the fact that we
20:47:41 talked about this idea of transit intensification.
20:47:45 We felt that was appropriate to increase the intensity
20:47:46 at this location.
20:47:52 Also, there were a series of other images part of the
20:47:55 But we also looked at the massing that we are
20:47:58 proposing before you, the 24 stories within the kind
20:48:00 of three dimensional model at the area.
20:48:03 And we started to mass at the left-hand side of the
20:48:07 image the proposed height envelope along the federal
20:48:11 lands which is approximately 350 feet.
20:48:13 And we realized that that still has to be negotiated.
20:48:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just for clarification, I don't
20:48:18 think -- I think that it has to come to us for
20:48:21 approval, and we haven't approved any of that.
20:48:25 So you really shouldn't assume that it's going to be
20:48:26 there at that height, because it has to come to us and
20:48:30 we haven't approved it.
20:48:31 >>> We realize it wasn't approved.
20:48:33 I think what we were just trying to show is within the
20:48:36 context of something that's going to be coming before
20:48:38 you as a proposal.
20:48:40 >> They don't exist.
20:48:41 They don't exist.
20:48:41 They haven't been approved.
20:48:42 And it's very speculative.
20:48:45 I just have to say that that's not -- you're putting
20:48:49 it in the context where the context doesn't really
20:48:53 And if we didn't know better, we might think that it
20:48:57 But it doesn't.
20:48:57 So in case somebody is watching this on TV, and
20:49:00 looking at this model and seeing all this high-rise
20:49:02 purple stuff on the other side of the street, let's
20:49:05 make it clear.
20:49:06 It's not there.
20:49:07 And it hasn't been approved.
20:49:08 It hasn't come before us.
20:49:10 So it's not -- in my opinion, isn't appropriate for
20:49:14 you to pretend like it's there or might be there. I
20:49:16 mean anything might be.
20:49:19 >>> Well, we are just using it the same way you would
20:49:21 use a three-D physical model.
20:49:26 >> It doesn't exist.
20:49:27 It hasn't been approved.
20:49:28 >>> I understand.
20:49:29 And the last image then is the proposal shown in the
20:49:34 night that reflects the scale of the development
20:49:36 within the context of the skyline beyond.
20:49:40 And think that would be all.
20:49:51 >>> Rhea Law: I would like to come back and share
20:49:54 with you, I am going to send this around to you, a
20:49:56 list of all the amenities and public benefits
20:49:59 associated with this particular project.
20:50:02 And we talked about some of this.
20:50:05 I would just like to highlight a couple of things.
20:50:07 One, we have subsidized housing for artists that was
20:50:12 approved the first time around.
20:50:14 But we have also workforce housing that I think is
20:50:17 very important.
20:50:18 5% of the units in phase 1 are below the $200,000
20:50:26 So we are trying to provide for workforce needs.
20:50:29 That's one of the initiatives that's been very
20:50:31 important to the city.
20:50:32 And Sirdar has included that in this proposal.
20:50:38 There's a number of transportation improvements.
20:50:40 I won't read through all of these but they include the
20:50:42 Channelside trail, as well as transportation
20:50:46 improvements, specifically.
20:50:48 We did agree to focus on the pedestrian and
20:50:56 There is between 14 and even at one point up to 35
20:50:59 feet for the street walkways, pedestrian walkways, as
20:51:07 far as cultural contributions.
20:51:11 There are a number of murals and other outside art
20:51:16 work as well as water features that are being
20:51:20 And finally, I would like to point out to you that
20:51:24 there's something unusual about this particular
20:51:27 It was a brownfield.
20:51:28 Itself was identified by City Council.
20:51:30 And in order to redevelop a brownfield, number one,
20:51:35 you have to go through an environmental analysis, and
20:51:37 in this case, a rather massive cleanup that was some
20:51:40 655, 000 dollars it took about nine months to do a lot
20:51:45 of negotiations with our environmental agencies,
20:51:51 specifically the department of environmental
20:51:54 And that kind of clean-up is what the city needs in
20:51:58 those areas that have been predominantly industrial.
20:52:01 You have a number of capabilities under the brownfield
20:52:04 statute to make amendments or modifications in your
20:52:09 local codes in order to entice people to come in and
20:52:13 view this kind of clean-up.
20:52:15 For this particular clean-up that has been done and a
20:52:17 big portion of that was associated with the phase 2 or
20:52:21 the additional development that we are talking about
20:52:26 here tonight.
20:52:26 So we would like to ask for your consideration of
20:52:31 One of the things that I would like to share with you
20:52:33 is that we do have a lot of support.
20:52:36 I have here a document that holds the signatures of
20:52:41 about 154 individuals who indicated that they believe
20:52:45 that the place which the project fits the building,
20:52:50 its first phase reset the bar for Channelside and
20:52:54 confident that phase 2 will only be a step forward in
20:52:57 the right direction.
20:52:57 We fully support this project and request your
20:53:00 There's other language that speaks about conceptual
20:53:03 architecture and the amenities, et cetera.
20:53:05 But I would like to place that into the record.
20:53:12 And finally I would point out to you that in addition
20:53:14 to all the other things, this project put extra
20:53:18 working in place above and beyond what was required by
20:53:21 your codes for phase 1, and then again in phase 2.
20:53:28 That's something that you need in Channelside.
20:53:30 You need more parking.
20:53:31 It needs to be convenient so that people can utilize
20:53:35 the adjacent transit area.
20:53:38 So with that, we are happy to answer any questions
20:53:40 that you might have.
20:53:41 Yes, certainly.
20:53:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A couple of questions.
20:53:45 But first of all I I have to point out that the names
20:53:47 that are on here don't have any addresses.
20:53:49 So we honestly don't know where these folks are from.
20:53:53 But my question is this.
20:53:55 I'm looking at the site plan, and I'm looking at where
20:53:58 you might come up with 35 feet.
20:54:00 And the only two places that I can identify from this
20:54:03 would be the two corner set-ins on Washington
20:54:06 street -- Washington street and Whiting Street.
20:54:09 But the thing that would be most useful to me, to be
20:54:12 candid, I really liked what we approved last time.
20:54:16 I think the place is very attractive.
20:54:18 I'm happy with it.
20:54:19 And I don't see the additional -- the city and the
20:54:25 Channel District is getting in return for something
20:54:28 that is a very different scale than we already have.
20:54:35 And so my question to you is, are all the things on
20:54:37 here different from the things that we have already
20:54:40 approved, and that we are part of the original
20:54:43 convincing of us to give you the highest F.A.R. that
20:54:47 exists in the Channel District?
20:54:48 >>> All of the things on that list are all of the
20:54:50 amenities for both phase 1 and phase 2.
20:54:53 But if you will allow me just one moment, I would like
20:54:56 to share with you the additional things associated
20:54:58 with phase 2.
20:54:59 >> Because one of the things that's very confusing for
20:55:02 council members here is we have already approved
20:55:06 We know what it is.
20:55:07 We know what it looks like.
20:55:08 It's a done deal.
20:55:09 And what's coming back to us, it's kind of not
20:55:12 terribly clear what is different in terms of the
20:55:17 community improvements versus what is already part of
20:55:22 what's been promised and taken.
20:55:27 >>> I'm sure the documents somewhat speak to the
20:55:30 original request for him to look at this additional
20:55:33 parcel, and to include it with this project.
20:55:35 It was important to the people of that community that
20:55:39 they deal with someone who we knew would do a quality
20:55:43 project and would put it in context with his existing
20:55:46 project as opposed to some other development that
20:55:50 didn't respect to the kind of quality and the
20:55:53 consistency that had been approved in the first
20:55:57 But if you would like to speak to that.
20:55:59 >>> Sirdar: I have not been sworn in.
20:56:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you raise your right hand?
20:56:07 >>THE CLERK:
20:56:13 (Oath administered by Clerk).
20:56:15 >>> Yes, I do.
20:56:15 I noted first of all issues here.
20:56:20 High tense density obviously on density issues, we
20:56:24 have been debating these up and down.
20:56:26 But I can tell you this.
20:56:28 I have been struggling, not just for this parcel, 2.65
20:56:35 acres to be developed, but I have been pitching the
20:56:39 Channel District.
20:56:43 Some of you actually saw.
20:56:46 That was not necessary, to go to the extent of
20:56:49 spending $2 million just.
20:56:53 It was done actually to inspire confidence of the
20:56:57 future residents, so they could come and get a feel
20:57:03 for the area to live in.
20:57:06 So this is a philosophy, the philosophy that I follow
20:57:09 that we are not going to be successful unless the
20:57:12 neighborhood is successful.
20:57:15 And I want to assure this council, I have gone out of
20:57:20 my ways to communicate for the neighborhood, and the
20:57:26 city, also.
20:57:27 And I have tried to advocate an approach which really
20:57:33 will benefit the Channel District, so the question of
20:57:36 density and height really are to be answered in
20:57:40 context of design and what the project really brings
20:57:45 to the table.
20:57:46 You had asked what amenities we are bringing to the
20:57:51 When you think, unfortunately a lot of people think of
20:57:58 canvas and a brush, that, yes, there are going to be
20:58:01 some paintings which are going to be stuck on the face
20:58:05 of the building and here's my contribution of murals.
20:58:10 In this project, we researched not only in this
20:58:14 country but we have gone across to the other side,
20:58:19 Canada, and we have located a muralist who will come
20:58:23 to this city.
20:58:25 The cost of those two murals on the face of this --
20:58:34 onto this, on the face of this building, are going to
20:58:38 be in the neighborhood of $2 million.
20:58:45 If you really want to do a real mural, not just a
20:58:50 painted on mural, you have to spend between 100 and
20:58:54 $150 a square foot.
20:58:55 And the existing phase, I'm spending a half million
20:58:59 dollars to put a mural on Washington street.
20:59:05 Proposing to use an additional two murals on the face
20:59:10 of this building which will be very subtle.
20:59:11 It will enhance the neighborhood to a standard that is
20:59:19 very respectful of Tampa, and that's one of the
20:59:23 amenities that we are bringing.
20:59:24 Second amenity is as not being regarded as substantial
20:59:37 transportation today, but I promise you over the next
20:59:40 three, four, five years, it is going to --
20:59:48 And we are going to spend half a million dollars
20:59:52 roughly to improve that square.
20:59:56 The whole cross section of Channelside and Washington
20:59:59 street, it's shown here in the -- I don't have it.
21:00:08 There is an entrance here.
21:00:09 But the square is going to be paved and we are going
21:00:12 to create a special linkage, which is right across
21:00:17 from us.
21:00:18 So the question really here, I have for the council,
21:00:21 is I am not just base here, I assure you we have been
21:00:32 in a lot of countries.
21:00:33 And what we bring to the table, irrespective whether
21:00:37 you a professor you deny us, we are trying to say that
21:00:41 if you want to build quality, you have to give us
21:00:46 additional square footage.
21:00:47 Number one.
21:00:49 Number two, say that this doesn't work for your
21:00:55 If you want to build these long slab buildings and
21:00:58 put -- keep them at a height of 80 feet or 100 feet,
21:01:03 that really does not work for the neighborhood.
21:01:06 I'm saying this to you with all my integrity and
21:01:10 What works for the neighborhood is a small portion off
21:01:17 site allowing to go vertical and those vertical towers
21:01:20 to be positioned in such a way that nobody gets
21:01:23 obstructed in terms of views and privacy.
21:01:27 If we continue with this model of seven stories or 15
21:01:31 stories or 24 stories, allow them to be built on the
21:01:37 lot lines, you are going to end up with a neighborhood
21:01:39 which is not going to breathe, and which people are
21:01:43 going to practically look into each of those windows,
21:01:47 and buy into these houses that please do not look at
21:01:53 this development through the -- okay, it is a
21:01:58 developer who is trying to ask for excess square
21:02:02 We are really not square footage oriented developers.
21:02:05 We are developers who like to contribute back to the
21:02:08 community, and I can give you -- an example, we have
21:02:16 cities that have made mistakes of staying low, and
21:02:20 build less intense buildings in the downtown core, and
21:02:25 they have gone back.
21:02:27 Parkland, you will hear this name again and again, has
21:02:33 done a similar thing.
21:02:34 They have gone back where they had low buildings, low
21:02:40 density, that we are proposing, and I'm being very
21:02:49 sincere and honest with you.
21:02:50 I'm not just looking at this.
21:02:56 >> And the -- forgive me, but they are providing, $6
21:03:04 million just for this.
21:03:05 I think it will be a very good idea if somebody like
21:03:10 this development picks up the flag and says we are
21:03:13 going to be a self-sustaining building.
21:03:16 It's not just a slogan.
21:03:17 We have dedicated nearly 4 million, $3.5 million, you
21:03:26 cannot achieve certification.
21:03:32 There is just no building except one in the entire
21:03:34 world, somewhere in New York, which has attained that.
21:03:41 But it your water resources and those are the things
21:03:48 that you don't see here.
21:03:50 So my solution to you is, please remain open minded.
21:03:54 Do not make your thinking in terms of what is around.
21:03:59 What is around, this is a new area.
21:04:01 And I think it will be well served to allow developer
21:04:10 to develop it.
21:04:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: There's a couple of questions that I
21:04:13 First of all, these amenities that you were talking
21:04:16 about, they are not part of the plan right now?
21:04:23 Somebody can answer that.
21:04:30 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I was sworn.
21:04:32 We are kind of getting off course.
21:04:34 I did a couple of days ago send to Marty Boyle five
21:04:38 site plan notes that were not already on the site
21:04:42 There were 25 site plan notes.
21:04:44 And approximately 20 of those represent what we
21:04:47 consider to be amenities.
21:04:49 The five that I added include the undergrounding of
21:04:53 utilities which you are now saying is required by
21:04:55 It wasn't at the time we did phase one so when thought
21:04:58 that was something we were doing voluntarily so if you
21:05:01 take that off there's only four things that were not
21:05:04 actually on the site plan.
21:05:05 However, they were things that we have discussed with.
21:05:10 Mark Huey, we have actually shown some of the members
21:05:12 of this council, showing plans for the original
21:05:16 building that we were going to apply for.
21:05:19 For instance, the lighted sculpture at the corner of
21:05:21 Channelside and Washington is something that was in
21:05:25 the rendering for months now and just inadvertently we
21:05:29 didn't put a note on the site plan.
21:05:32 So these are just four site plan notes this not on
21:05:34 your site plan until they were asking to put them on
21:05:37 But there are approximately, I think, 20 amenities on
21:05:41 your list, that all of them were on the site plan but
21:05:45 for the four and the four all got lighted sculpture at
21:05:48 the corner of Channelside and Washington, the water
21:05:50 feature at the corner of Channelside and Washington,
21:05:52 the paved pedestrian crossing from across Channelside
21:05:57 to the transit stop with a walk signal.
21:06:12 And there was a mural with phase one, and now two
21:06:16 additional murals are being added as part of phase
21:06:19 So those are the four things that your staff didn't
21:06:21 know about until a couple days ago.
21:06:25 Again some other members of city staff did know but
21:06:27 unfortunately we had left them off.
21:06:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So these are have not been reviewed by
21:06:33 the staff?
21:06:34 >>> Not until two days ago.
21:06:35 >> So Ms. Boyle, have you reviewed these amenities?
21:06:42 You said you had no chance to review.
21:06:44 >>MARTY BOYLE: We did receive them and took a cursory
21:06:47 review of them.
21:06:48 However, with Wilson Stair is the design standards,
21:06:53 didn't get a chance to look thoroughly.
21:06:56 So we don't feel comfortable.
21:06:57 I know that you got the list of a men advertise but we
21:06:59 haven't been able to compare that list that you
21:07:02 received with what's on the site plan.
21:07:04 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
21:07:10 The other little heartburn that I have is I think the
21:07:15 F.A.R. is a little bit excessive.
21:07:17 And from what the Planning Commission said was that
21:07:23 the 24 or 25 stories structure is a little bit out of
21:07:29 character with the existing projects that are around
21:07:32 That kind of gives me a little heartburn on that.
21:07:38 There's only four of us here tonight.
21:07:40 I don't know if we really should continue this, or go
21:07:44 It's up to you.
21:07:47 But I'd like to do that but I just want to put you on
21:07:50 notice that there's a possibility that this could be
21:07:55 >>ROSE FERLITA: Well, whale we are waiting for the
21:07:58 public input, I just had a question.
21:08:00 Either Ms. Law or Ms. Zelman.
21:08:05 Who put this list together?
21:08:06 Was it you?
21:08:10 Let me just qualify something up front.
21:08:16 I think you have been very comprehensive in what you
21:08:18 have done.
21:08:19 The petitioner has been nothing but forthcoming with
21:08:23 He was a perfect host when we went through just as you
21:08:26 were a perfect tour guide.
21:08:28 But, you know, we have talked already of issues about
21:08:31 don't look around us, look at what we are doing, and
21:08:33 still regardless of how we do this, we have height
21:08:36 issues and density issues.
21:08:37 And I think that will be taken up later.
21:08:40 But my real concern is this: What is this?
21:08:43 I can go out and get 160 people that live in
21:08:47 unincorporated Hillsborough County, and not put
21:08:50 addresses on it.
21:08:51 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I didn't put that.
21:08:53 I'm sorry.
21:08:54 >> I want to know what this is about.
21:08:56 It's very distracting to me.
21:08:58 Because anytime we make a decision, we weigh on
21:09:00 pertinent and germane information.
21:09:02 Where do these people live?
21:09:03 That's way want to know first of all.
21:09:07 >>> I apologize.
21:09:07 Actually, it was most by buyers in phase 1 Joan.
21:09:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: People out there in the yellow shirts
21:09:22 can raise their hands and say they are residents or
21:09:24 already buyers of your site?
21:09:28 And the remainder of these people are, too.
21:09:31 160 people?
21:09:33 >>> Yes.
21:09:33 We actually have 250-some future residents.
21:09:38 >> Future residents meaning they gave awe deposit
21:09:41 assuming this will go forward?
21:09:43 Does anybody live out there now?
21:09:45 >>> It's a contract actually.
21:09:46 It's not a deposit that they can take back.
21:09:49 It is a contract --
21:09:56 Phase 1.
21:09:58 For phase 1.
21:09:59 Phase 1 is under construction.
21:10:02 The one you saw is under construction right now.
21:10:11 >>ROSE FERLITA: The people that came to buy, if they
21:10:15 want to buy obviously they are in favor of your
21:10:17 That's what this is about.
21:10:18 That's all I need to No. thank you.
21:10:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
21:10:22 would like to speak on item number 9?
21:10:34 >>> Hi.
21:10:35 I'm Jenny white, president of the Channel District
21:10:39 council, and I have been sworn.
21:10:40 And I'm all for this.
21:10:46 I think Sirdar is giving back a lot to the community.
21:10:49 And I would like to speak to Ken Staltenberg, too,
21:10:53 because he too has given a lot of concessions back.
21:10:56 And we have gone back and forth over the past few
21:10:59 I've lived in the Channel District for 13 years.
21:11:02 And people thought that we were crazy to move into a
21:11:05 But we love it.
21:11:06 And we intend to stay there.
21:11:09 And we were the first ones to fix up an old warehouse
21:11:13 and make it into a living place, where people can
21:11:18 come, and we have 33 working studios for artists, and
21:11:23 both Ken and Sirdar have offered spaces for the
21:11:28 They are willing to work with us, to keep the arts and
21:11:30 the neighborhood.
21:11:32 So I'm willing to work with them.
21:11:33 And I see no reason that you can't have different
21:11:37 heights in the neighborhood.
21:11:39 It just kind of makes it more interesting.
21:11:42 If you have got a two-story building next door to a
21:11:45 40-story building.
21:11:46 It makes it more interesting.
21:11:48 It doesn't have to all look alike.
21:11:51 That does bother me.
21:11:53 But I'm an artist.
21:11:54 I want things to look different and to be different
21:12:00 views, and have different flavor.
21:12:01 So I have no problem with 24, 25 stories.
21:12:06 So long as it's people friendly, and it's good
21:12:12 Basically good design.
21:12:14 And that's what I'm kind of looking at you all to make
21:12:17 sure that the developers give back to the community,
21:12:24 and work with us as the Channel District council to
21:12:28 make the community a vibrant district as opposed to
21:12:33 close down at 5:00 or, you know, we can come up with
21:12:36 all sorts of really great ideas.
21:12:39 If I had money I'd be real dangerous.
21:12:43 So thank you.
21:12:44 If you have any questions, you know, they did come to
21:12:46 us about Ken Staltenberg's project and it was
21:12:51 presented, and he just simply didn't ask us to speak
21:12:56 to him before.
21:12:57 And I felt like I had to say something now.
21:13:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that you are
21:13:04 indeed, I think, the longest residing folks in the
21:13:09 Channel District.
21:13:11 And I'm really listening to you because I know how
21:13:14 involved you have been in the central way from the
21:13:19 And so I really appreciate you coming here tonight and
21:13:24 sharing your thoughts.
21:13:26 >>> Well, we really do care.
21:13:28 >> I know.
21:13:28 >>> And we know you care or else I wouldn't have
21:13:31 bothered to come down here.
21:13:33 Thank you.
21:13:42 >>> I'm Henry Lewis.
21:13:43 I have been sworn in.
21:13:44 And I have been in the Channel District at 119 north
21:13:48 eleventh street since 1968.
21:13:50 I am currently a resident also.
21:13:53 And I was also the first developer of a new project in
21:13:56 more than 40 years.
21:13:58 I'm very much for the project.
21:14:02 I believe this is one of the highest quality projects
21:14:04 that we have seen in Tampa.
21:14:06 And he does nothing but quality work.
21:14:09 Many of the projects proposed are under construction
21:14:13 now in Tampa, specifically in Channelside, are pretty
21:14:16 much glorified college dorm rooms.
21:14:20 We need some high quality projects.
21:14:23 I think with the view corridors in mind, with the guys
21:14:29 and a few other developers, Channelside can perhaps
21:14:33 become a great neighborhood.
21:14:39 Thank you.
21:14:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
21:15:01 >>> I have been sworn in.
21:15:02 My name is Janell Hanson, south twelfth street north.
21:15:06 The residents of Channelside share your vision of
21:15:08 Channelside, and we thank you for what is our new
21:15:12 Tonight again we have heard conceptual proposal, and a
21:15:17 lovely proposal.
21:15:19 But again we ask the Wilson Miller study is in
21:15:22 progress for Channelside.
21:15:23 It is critical for our neighborhood in relation to
21:15:27 developments being proposed and considered that Wilson
21:15:29 Miller turn out their study.
21:15:31 Our neighborhood has invested two consecutive years,
21:15:34 100% of our tiff study. The study is expected to be
21:15:38 presented to the CRA and our neighborhood next month.
21:15:43 We as residents are looking forward to reviewing
21:15:45 Wilson Miller study and having the opportunity with
21:15:48 the CRA to develop a study into the plan that secures
21:15:52 the vision of our neighborhood Channelside.
21:15:55 We request that City Council postpone decisions on any
21:15:59 development proposed until the Wilson Miller study is
21:16:04 Now speaking for the presentation, the quality of the
21:16:07 building, the way it was presented how it interacted
21:16:13 with the entire neighborhood unlike anything I have
21:16:15 seen earlier tonight or anything when we were here
21:16:19 with Historic Hyde Park.
21:16:20 But we heard down the street, they don't do that.
21:16:25 He has done that.
21:16:25 He showed interaction.
21:16:26 He's shown how it will also compliment districts
21:16:31 neighboring us.
21:16:32 That's what should be expected of every developer when
21:16:34 they show you.
21:16:35 And I understand in the future things are going in
21:16:37 that direction.
21:16:38 But it should be expected.
21:16:39 And if not, it should be commanded hopefully.
21:16:42 Because the question we always ask when I look out on
21:16:45 my balcony, floors and ceilings, and plant trees in my
21:16:51 backyard, I have a Herb garden and view all the way to
21:16:55 the City of Tampa and I wonder, why are all these
21:16:58 towers going in my neighborhood when they could add so
21:17:01 beautifully to the central business district.
21:17:03 And why are they all going down outside area and not
21:17:06 in the central -- what is this community doing wrong
21:17:09 on the bigger picture?
21:17:11 Why aren't they where they want to be?
21:17:12 Because we have a lot of wonderful developments within
21:17:14 visions of the area that are coming coming.
21:17:17 And we have great developments like this that I would
21:17:19 love to have seen instead of the towers at the end
21:17:22 with the lighting.
21:17:23 It's gorgeous.
21:17:24 The muralss, it contributes to the vision.
21:17:28 That's quality if you were going to.
21:17:30 But why isn't it downtown?
21:17:35 Thank you.
21:17:39 >> Good question.
21:17:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
21:17:40 Anyone lick to speak?
21:17:42 >> Dennis Campbell.
21:17:44 I'm a proud property owner in the Channel District.
21:17:46 As a matter of fact, my property is exactly across
21:17:49 from the proposed project.
21:17:54 I lived there for ten years.
21:17:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: North?
21:18:00 >>> To the north.
21:18:00 Exactly across Washington on the other corner of
21:18:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn?
21:18:07 >>> No, nothing to do.
21:18:12 I didn't know.
21:18:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else that's going to
21:18:12 speak that has not been sworn in?
21:18:13 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
21:18:15 (Oath administered by Clerk).
21:18:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For those of you that came in I am
21:18:26 going to ask when you state your name, if you have
21:18:27 been sworn I have a little sign to remind you and I
21:18:31 also have a red hat.
21:18:33 Please say that you have been sworn in.
21:18:34 Thank you.
21:18:35 >>> What I would really like to address first is the
21:18:39 lady that was just in front of me, she said residents.
21:18:42 And I have only seen one person up here so I don't
21:18:44 understand why she was speaking for masses.
21:18:47 What I would like to see is everybody out there raise
21:18:53 your hand.
21:18:55 Everybody that's against the project raise your hand.
21:19:00 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
21:19:04 >>> I wanted to give council a visual of the people
21:19:06 that are here.
21:19:06 These are your voters.
21:19:07 These are the people that come out here away from
21:19:10 their families, they got jobs tomorrow, they are
21:19:12 spending the evening here to spoke Schoewe support for
21:19:15 something they believe in.
21:19:15 I think it's your duty as an officer to consider what
21:19:20 these people are here for.
21:19:22 And with that being said, being one of the adjacent
21:19:26 property owners, I am here for.
21:19:29 I am supporting it.
21:19:30 I have got an investment over there with potential
21:19:33 retail and commercial space in the ground floor.
21:19:36 And if you don't put some residents in that area,
21:19:40 people like myself that go out there and spend
21:19:43 millions of dollars to invest in the Channel District
21:19:45 that we owned for a long time might have a tough time
21:19:49 if we don't have residents some to support it.
21:19:53 In the paper a week ago, St. Petersburg, showing how
21:19:56 they have a great city and how Tampa has a million and
21:20:00 two square foot of unrented office space.
21:20:02 You know, I think the solution to that is to put some
21:20:04 bodies in there.
21:20:05 And if you don't open your mind to larger densities or
21:20:10 different ideas or have developers that are willing to
21:20:13 come in and do things like this, you might be shorting
21:20:16 the city in the long run.
21:20:18 I think it's important.
21:20:19 I'm real excited.
21:20:20 I can't afford to do it myself.
21:20:22 The city came in and put this streetcar in.
21:20:24 They put this stop right across the street from me.
21:20:28 But they didn't put anything for people to walk across
21:20:30 to get there.
21:20:31 It's extremely dangerous.
21:20:33 Here's a guy, out of his own pocket that's going to
21:20:35 come in, and ask you foramen advertise?
21:20:38 That's a big amenity.
21:20:39 Today maybe it's not.
21:20:40 But when you got thousands or hundreds of people that
21:20:43 want to walk across that busy intersection, how are
21:20:46 they going to do it? How are they going to do it
21:20:48 And who are they going to thank?
21:20:50 They are going to thank you you gays for helping get
21:20:52 something like this in there.
21:20:53 The city is not going to do it.
21:20:58 They didn't get it done when they built the thing.
21:21:00 I hope I'm not up here shouting a bunch of things to
21:21:02 you that maybe are a little bit stern.
21:21:05 But I'm for it.
21:21:06 I've got my hard money here.
21:21:08 I try living there.
21:21:11 And I want to see the community nice.
21:21:13 Don't want to have things stunned because there's a
21:21:16 few people that might cry about a tower and the height
21:21:22 of it.
21:21:23 Who is up there 200 feet trying to look horizontal?
21:21:26 Not many people.
21:21:27 And if you go to any other major city and you see the
21:21:30 buildings like they have tried to show you tonight,
21:21:36 the landscape, I not just a flat box.
21:21:41 Look down in Dallas and look at that district.
21:21:43 It's all flat, short boxes.
21:21:45 It's dark.
21:21:45 It's not that exciting.
21:21:48 And there's things that they brought up, they have
21:21:51 excellent viewpoints and I hope that you take them
21:21:53 into consideration.
21:21:54 I watched outside because the room was busy.
21:21:57 And I seen some of the comments that you folks have
21:21:59 made on Ken's project.
21:22:02 And there's this study that's coming out.
21:22:05 Well, there's a study right here.
21:22:07 All the people that live here, that work here, that
21:22:09 want this.
21:22:09 Please take that into consideration.
21:22:10 And give this gentleman the opportunity to build
21:22:13 something nice for the community.
21:22:15 I would appreciate it myself.
21:22:16 (Bell sounds).
21:22:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:22:18 Mrs. Ferlita.
21:22:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: Just a comment back to you.
21:22:21 We certainly appreciate the attendance of people
21:22:23 coming in and make and the time that they spend down
21:22:25 here with us.
21:22:26 And the number of hands that are waved in support.
21:22:30 And all of that certainly is part and parcel to what
21:22:32 we do.
21:22:36 I think some of us or all of us I believe had the
21:22:42 opportunity to go see this project before the petition
21:22:45 was submitted.
21:22:46 And it is a very classa project.
21:22:51 However, there are certain guidelines and certain
21:22:53 things that we look at.
21:22:54 And it doesn't mat where there's one person for it or
21:22:57 20,000 against.
21:22:58 It's just simply to make sure that we do our due
21:23:01 diligence and do our job, and make sure that what we
21:23:05 support is something that's compatible for a different
21:23:07 So certainly while everybody's attendance coming is
21:23:11 important, that's for one council member that's not
21:23:15 how I weigh my decision.
21:23:16 I just want to tell you that.
21:23:18 I won't enter into dialogue.
21:23:19 You said yours and I said mine I believe I got the
21:23:23 idea that you're for it.
21:23:25 It's a wonderful thing.
21:23:26 And all I'm saying is, we are not making light of the
21:23:29 people support that we see.
21:23:32 However, we want to make sure that we do what we are
21:23:36 supposed to do before we get there. That's part of
21:23:38 this job, too.
21:23:39 >>> I appreciate that.
21:23:39 >>ROSE FERLITA: Once we get out of here and we support
21:23:43 this or we don't support it, the consensus is
21:23:47 Because those 40 hands dilute in terms of the entire
21:23:52 In terms of the whole city that we represent.
21:23:54 So sometimes we belabor something not simply because
21:23:57 we are trying to give people a hard time hear or that
21:23:59 we don't see where they are coming from in terms of
21:24:02 One versus 40, 40 versus 40, 20 versus 60, that
21:24:06 certainly matters.
21:24:07 But what matters is that we take everything into
21:24:10 So certainly whatever you have observed, whether it
21:24:13 was out there or in here, let me reassure you that the
21:24:16 quality of this gentleman's worth and the hospitality
21:24:19 he showed us when we were there, and the sincerity
21:24:21 with which I believe he presented his case, none of
21:24:24 those things go unnoticed.
21:24:26 But you at the same time, sir, as somebody who we
21:24:29 represent, have to give us the opportunity to really
21:24:31 look at this comprehensively, so that when we go home
21:24:34 we feel like we have treated everybody fairly that.
21:24:37 Means you.
21:24:37 That means the rest of the people in the yellow
21:24:39 And that also means the one lady that's in opposition.
21:24:41 So I just want to tell you that we understand what
21:24:44 you're saying.
21:24:44 Point well taken.
21:24:45 So let's work both ways.
21:24:48 >> I appreciate that.
21:24:50 And very well said.
21:24:52 And way want to also --
21:24:53 >>GWEN MILLER: No, that's it.
21:24:55 No dialogue.
21:24:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to explain to the
21:25:01 people in the audience who might be relatively new to
21:25:05 the Channel District that council has been working on
21:25:07 this area for 15 years.
21:25:10 15 years ago we started with an overlay plan.
21:25:13 And we started looking at what this area should
21:25:16 Ms. Alvarez has been very active in the development of
21:25:18 this T streetcar which has been one of the incentives
21:25:20 for redevelopment along this corridor.
21:25:23 We have all each of us been very involved in this.
21:25:26 I have been tremendously involved for years and years
21:25:28 and years.
21:25:29 We all take these decisions very seriously, because we
21:25:32 understand the long-term ramifications.
21:25:35 And the reason that I had an issue with you the
21:25:39 presentation by the architect when he was showing the
21:25:42 purple buildings on the other side of the street was
21:25:44 that we have to really think about how this entire
21:25:51 area was developing.
21:25:53 It's tremendously important.
21:25:54 And in our downtown plan, the majority of downtown has
21:25:58 absolutely no height limits.
21:26:00 People can go as high as they want.
21:26:02 Most of downtown has no height limits, it has wider
21:26:07 streets, it has a different character.
21:26:08 I would analogize it to the upper east side New York
21:26:13 thing being like most of downtown, this area being
21:26:16 like channel town, smaller streets, smaller buildings,
21:26:19 a different scale, a different neighborhood feel.
21:26:21 And we council members have worked long enough with
21:26:27 Tampa to recognize, Ybor has a different character
21:26:30 from Hyde Park, downtown from the Channel District.
21:26:32 And that's what we are trying to really get light when
21:26:36 we look at this Channel District plan that's going to
21:26:38 be presented in the future.
21:26:39 We want to make sure that we really support the
21:26:44 character in the Channel District as distinct from the
21:26:49 character of the central business district.
21:26:51 So to explain that.
21:26:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Good analogy.
21:26:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Next person to speak.
21:26:59 >>> Dominick.
21:27:00 I have been in the Channel District since 1996.
21:27:04 I have seen the dust settle.
21:27:05 I have seen the dust get kicked up.
21:27:10 One project start up.
21:27:11 Another one complete.
21:27:12 And one thing I have to say is when Sirdar initially
21:27:18 opened his doors to the neighborhood, he specifically
21:27:22 went door to door introducing himself, inviting
21:27:27 everybody in the Channel District to show him exactly
21:27:30 what he was proposing to do.
21:27:32 And one thing that I did notice among other things is
21:27:36 the fact that he was such a strong supporter of the
21:27:40 Compared to a lot of the other projects that have gone
21:27:42 on, nobody knocked on my door, or a lot of other
21:27:46 peoples doors saying, look, we want to support the
21:27:49 Because being in Channel District since 1996, it was
21:27:53 known as the art district.
21:27:55 High rent.
21:27:56 High sale properties.
21:27:59 Forced a lot of artists out.
21:28:02 Fortunately, I was able to stay.
21:28:04 And it was something that I saw that the changes that
21:28:08 were happening, where there are no more artists,
21:28:11 except what Jenny white and bill Waite have put
21:28:16 It's safe haven for them.
21:28:18 But what was happening as far as all the other
21:28:20 projects, take that into consideration.
21:28:23 And at the same time, everything that Sirdar said that
21:28:28 he would do he has honestly delivered.
21:28:30 One thing I was told was find out what everybody else
21:28:33 was doing and do the exact opposite.
21:28:35 That's a prime example.
21:28:37 Thank you very much.
21:28:39 I thought you swore me in.
21:28:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have to say you were sworn.
21:28:45 >>> Oh, I was sworn in.
21:28:46 Thank you.
21:28:47 >> My name is Fru Krushe, and I have been sworn.
21:28:53 Ivan lived in this community for 31 years.
21:28:55 I have seen a lot of change in that time as most of
21:28:59 I have known Sirdar about three years now.
21:29:03 And what started out as a professional relationship
21:29:05 has turned into a very dear friendship for me.
21:29:11 And I just want to attest to the fact that projects
21:29:14 that he gets involved with, that he pioneers, are
21:29:18 first class, I think the fact that he has a world
21:29:23 class architect working on this project attests to
21:29:26 that, and I think that given the vision that we have
21:29:30 for growth in this community is the kind of project
21:29:33 that we would welcome with open arms.
21:29:37 In my work as a practitioner we work with many, many
21:29:43 different types of clients, a lot of commercial
21:29:45 developers, and I can tell you that he is among the
21:29:49 top in terms of quality, and in terms of his vision,
21:29:53 and I don't think that you could find a better person
21:29:57 to welcome to this community, and have work in this
21:30:01 community and help build this community.
21:30:02 So I appreciate your time tonight.
21:30:04 And I appreciate giving me the talk on his behalf.
21:30:09 And I hope that you will make your decisions
21:30:12 Thank you.
21:30:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:30:21 >>> Joe Robinson: I have been sworn.
21:30:26 2338 Palmetto street in West Tampa.
21:30:28 I don't live in the Channel District.
21:30:30 I don't have millions of dollars over there.
21:30:32 But I did serve to help turn from a slum and blighted
21:30:36 community when we started doing the enterprise
21:30:39 community and all of these other special things
21:30:42 including the clean-up of the 12th street yard,
21:30:46 And there's plenty of brownfields because that
21:30:50 basically was all industrial with shipping and all.
21:30:52 What I heard, you will probably be seeing me more
21:30:56 because I think this is in district 5.
21:30:59 And district 5, my concern is workforce units.
21:31:05 Workforce units, I think I heard the attorneys say
21:31:09 that the workforce units were 5%.
21:31:13 I'm not aware that City Council has adopted a standard
21:31:16 for developers when they come in to set aside certain
21:31:20 percentages of workforce units.
21:31:23 Workforce units as far as I'm concerned is more
21:31:27 clever, nicer way of saying affordable units.
21:31:30 And in Tampa, we have millionaires here.
21:31:34 We have a lot of people affording these high rent,
21:31:38 high ownership districts.
21:31:40 But I'm here to say if this is in district 5, it can
21:31:42 be a $100 million project.
21:31:44 If it's residential you will start to see me at the
21:31:47 workforce unit somewhere around, I think, 5%, a modest
21:31:52 10% is reasonable.
21:31:54 So I am starting to suggest and starting to ask City
21:31:56 Council, when we start seeing these multi-million
21:31:58 dollar deals, with residential, that we start asking
21:32:02 for workforce units to be developed and to be
21:32:06 developed by a reasonable amount.
21:32:09 That's no more different than other requirements that
21:32:17 City Council puts on developments, development
21:32:20 agreements for the museum, development agreement for
21:32:23 all of the buildings that we do.
21:32:24 I'm not here asking for minority business utilization.
21:32:27 What I'm saying is in the future, anything in district
21:32:30 5, I'm looking for developers coming out with higher
21:32:37 percentages of workforce unit so that people that
21:32:38 can't afford these, be working there, that will be
21:32:42 taking care of these places, running those shops and
21:32:45 all, will have something that they can afford so we
21:32:48 have a true diverse community in Tampa, Florida.
21:32:50 And that's all I wanted to say.
21:32:52 Thank you.
21:32:52 >>KEVIN WHITE: Let me for a minute.
21:32:56 Hopefully, I might be able to help speed this along
21:33:00 since this is my district.
21:33:02 I think the great majority of the people are here, as
21:33:07 Ms. Ferlita eloquently stated, we take all of those
21:33:11 things into consideration.
21:33:15 I think that with all of the presentations that this
21:33:19 developer has brought forth, all the extras that he
21:33:24 has gone over and above to include, to incorporate in
21:33:27 this particular proposal, are some of the things that
21:33:32 council has been asking for time and time again.
21:33:34 And he has gone over and above and beyond the call of
21:33:38 duty that is what we have required at this current
21:33:43 And so many times, this audience is full of people
21:33:46 just like you all here tonight that are in opposition
21:33:49 because the developer has not come to explain what it
21:33:54 is that they are doing, they haven't taken the time to
21:33:58 address the neighborhood issues, they haven't taken
21:34:01 into consideration your concerns and what you want.
21:34:03 And here we have a developer that has gone all of
21:34:06 those things right.
21:34:07 We haven't had one person here to to say the developer
21:34:10 has slighted them in one area of this proposal.
21:34:14 And it's also compatible to the neighborhood.
21:34:18 And as the issues that we raise in the Channel
21:34:21 District, as well as Ybor City, with the height, the
21:34:26 F.A.R.s and all of though things, we have come to
21:34:29 realize that none of these areas will fly without
21:34:33 higher density.
21:34:34 None of them will sustain themselves without families
21:34:36 and people living in them.
21:34:38 This is what we need to bring people to our area, to
21:34:43 our downtown area, to our Channelside area, to our
21:34:45 Ybor area, to make these areas vibrant and
21:34:50 economically sound.
21:34:52 We complain about the trolley not being as successful
21:34:58 as it should be.
21:35:00 Well, if we had another 2,000 residents somebody has
21:35:02 to ride it.
21:35:04 We complain about Centro Ybor.
21:35:06 As I stated last week in council, take my family to
21:35:10 the movies all the time, and where do we go?
21:35:12 We go to Centro Ybor.
21:35:15 Because I know there's never a line there.
21:35:16 We are always guaranteed to see the movie we want.
21:35:20 Never sold out.
21:35:20 We can sit on the front row if we like.
21:35:22 That's what we need to do.
21:35:23 We need to bring more people into the area, create
21:35:26 jobs in the area, create a livable neighborhood, where
21:35:30 we can all live and thrive and work, play, and be --
21:35:35 and have retail in the area.
21:35:37 We don't have anybody.
21:35:38 I don't want to slight anybody but you have all stood
21:35:40 There's not one person in opposition to this project.
21:35:46 We have models which we asked for in the last one.
21:35:49 We have them.
21:35:50 The petitioner had a 3-D presentation on DVD.
21:35:54 But we went to the Elmo, which is fine.
21:35:56 We don't have anything to slow, to stagnate and or to
21:36:00 stop this project.
21:36:01 And it's a wonderful project.
21:36:03 We also have a developer that's asking to do something
21:36:08 that he's already begun.
21:36:09 We have so many other developers that come in and ask
21:36:12 for projects and we haven't even seen the first shovel
21:36:15 go in the ground yet.
21:36:16 This developer is doing what he said he's going to do.
21:36:20 And I think we just need to move this and get off the
21:36:22 dime and let's move forward with this project.
21:36:26 And unless there's someone else that wants to speak in
21:36:29 the public, and or if the petitioner has rebuttal, I
21:36:32 move of that we close the public hearing and move
21:36:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
21:36:38 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I still have a problem with the
21:36:43 amenities, and I see that the Planning Commission said
21:36:49 that there were no significant amenities or benefits
21:36:53 in the site plan to validate the requested F.A.R.
21:36:57 And I would like to ask Mr. Snelling to give us an
21:37:03 overview on that, please.
21:37:05 >>THOM SNELLING: Land Development Coordination.
21:37:07 The amenities that are presented to us, there is some
21:37:11 confusion to exactly what that means.
21:37:15 Andrea -- Ms. Zelman, excuse me, on one hand says she
21:37:20 feels the site plan included up to 20 different
21:37:22 amenities on the site plan.
21:37:23 We have a far different count than that.
21:37:25 A lot of the amenities that they may have been
21:37:28 counting are actually code requirements.
21:37:29 We don't use code requirements for building sidewalks
21:37:31 and burying utilities and things like that, as an
21:37:35 amenity that is already required by the code.
21:37:37 So there's some confusion there, that we want to get
21:37:40 to the bottom of.
21:37:42 The other thing, I'm not really sure which amenities
21:37:46 are actual and which are not because on Tuesday, they
21:37:48 came in on Tuesday, and quite candidly, on this this
21:37:52 project, Cathy Coyle had been working on this project.
21:37:55 She was called to the hospital yesterday to take care
21:37:56 of her child.
21:37:57 Otherwise she would have been the one here tonight
21:38:00 analyzing all this data with her staff and giving a
21:38:02 very clear presentation, exactly what is or what
21:38:06 She's not here today.
21:38:07 The only reason I'm here is because my staff person
21:38:10 who understands this in and out is not available to do
21:38:12 So there is some confusion about what amenities are
21:38:15 and they did come in on a late date which is
21:38:19 Saw you the first presentation that you came when the
21:38:20 site plan didn't match up and there was confusion of
21:38:23 what was on and what was off.
21:38:24 And there's potential for that happening here.
21:38:29 The other thing, and speaking to Mrs. Saul-Sena, and
21:38:31 you said it.
21:38:33 15 years you have been working on this.
21:38:36 I sat down at the warehouse with you and talked about
21:38:38 the thing that got the vision award.
21:38:42 The thing at that time was 60 feet tall.
21:38:45 And as the petitioner said, an area that is in
21:38:48 transition, then so be it.
21:38:49 Then that's great.
21:38:50 And I have to say it is a beautiful project.
21:38:52 But that's not really the question.
21:38:53 The question is, if it is indeed transitioning to
21:38:57 something, you're this close before you're having a
21:38:59 very valid study that says this is what it should
21:39:03 transition to.
21:39:03 This may be exactly what you want it to transition to.
21:39:07 You won't know that for four to six weeks until you
21:39:10 take a look at that.
21:39:11 And that's kind of where the confusion comes.
21:39:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
21:39:19 What would suggest is that we give ourselves that
21:39:22 time, we allow the petitioner to come up with a really
21:39:26 crisp list of the amenities that existed previously,
21:39:28 the additional things that they are offering, that we
21:39:32 continue this to the same date as the previous
21:39:34 petition, in the channel district, which will allow us
21:39:39 as a CRA to address the district channel, and what Mr.
21:39:45 Snelling says is true.
21:39:47 The presentation is beautiful.
21:39:48 The proposed building is beautiful.
21:39:49 We just have to see if it's right in this context.
21:39:52 So my motion would be not that we close the public
21:39:55 hearing, but that we continue this.
21:39:57 And I know that we have a number of public hearings.
21:39:59 But based on tonight as an example, one will probably
21:40:03 fall out.
21:40:04 So we continue this to March 9th at 6:00.
21:40:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
21:40:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Petitioner's position in rebuttal.
21:40:16 >>MARTY BOYLE: I wanted council to know --
21:40:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We know.
21:40:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I wanted to know what you were going
21:40:24 to say.
21:40:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That we have already Maced out.
21:40:28 >>> Eleven new and three continuances already.
21:40:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are optimistic one will fall
21:40:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want council to be aware of the
21:40:36 fact that it is going to be in effect an extra
21:40:42 >>ROSE FERLITA: What did we do for the last one?
21:40:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Did you redo both?
21:40:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we should redo them both
21:40:58 the same night because we have we will have just
21:41:01 discussed the Channel District plan.
21:41:03 >>RHEA LAW: We are offering to you, if you would like
21:41:05 for us to create the model for you for the Channel
21:41:09 District, we would be happy to do that, if we could
21:41:11 come back earlier than March the 9th.
21:41:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: For the alcohol channel -- whole
21:41:18 Channel District?
21:41:20 That will save us a bunch of money.
21:41:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What about the study?
21:41:26 The whole district?
21:41:28 >>> Yes, we would be happy to do it.
21:41:29 Just one second.
21:41:42 Law: I told you he goes the extra mile. This is it.
21:41:50 >>> Well, let me ask a question.
21:41:54 As for your request for the model, you want the model
21:41:59 for the entire neighborhood, port authority and
21:42:02 private property to be composed and brought in front
21:42:05 of you.
21:42:07 Is that what you're wishing for?
21:42:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's what we had talked with the
21:42:11 University of South Florida school of architecture to
21:42:13 create for us and I believe the scale -- is Mr. Chen
21:42:17 Mr. Chen can speak to the scale because he was in a
21:42:20 meeting with the school of architecture where we
21:42:23 discussed the scale, the model and the boundaries
21:42:25 which were basically Meridian to the water.
21:42:28 The water all around, and Meridian as the eastern
21:42:33 >>> We will be happy to get that done actually.
21:42:36 What's the scale?
21:42:38 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Actually, I didn't hear him come up
21:42:41 with a calculation of scale.
21:42:42 Your description was something that was transportable.
21:42:48 So it would be approximately something that could be
21:42:50 carried on perhaps a four by four, four by six sheet.
21:42:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Put on top of a card table.
21:43:01 >>> We will offer to manufacture for you and try to
21:43:06 have it transported over.
21:43:07 We have the means and resources that we can get it
21:43:09 done much faster for you.
21:43:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We appreciate it.
21:43:13 >>> And the amenity will add a contribution to the
21:43:19 And just one second.
21:43:21 How soon can we do it?
21:43:28 >>JULIA COLE: Sorry.
21:43:29 Julia Cole.
21:43:30 I apologize.
21:43:31 I was in the back for this.
21:43:33 What I'm understanding occurred, and someone may need
21:43:35 to correct me if I am wrong, the applicant has offered
21:43:37 to create a model to be contributed to the study which
21:43:45 is currently going on?
21:43:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe the actual proposal by
21:43:49 Wilson Miller is completed.
21:43:51 And I was holding up our discussion of it until we had
21:43:54 a scale model so that we could better understand
21:43:57 what's being proposed in the study.
21:43:59 I thought that we needed the model as an educational
21:44:01 This morning at our CRA meeting, we voted to spend
21:44:06 some CRA money to build a model.
21:44:08 And we anticipated that that would take about six
21:44:11 So when we were discussing at previous zoning petition
21:44:14 we said let's wait till we get the model, figure out
21:44:17 the study, and then, you know, we'll have something
21:44:22 more coherent to base our decisions on, going forward
21:44:24 for proposals in the Channel District.
21:44:27 >>JULIA COLE: And the applicant has offered to go
21:44:29 ahead and do that as part of his petition?
21:44:32 I'm a little concerned because, you know, money has
21:44:35 already been allocated to go ahead and do this.
21:44:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The city doesn't move that quickly.
21:44:41 It was day.
21:44:42 >>JULIA COLE: I'm concerned there's a perception that
21:44:45 thisth is being offered up as some sort of quid
21:44:48 pro quo and I want to make sure that's not the case.
21:44:50 >>> Sirdar: That's not the case.
21:44:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's just to expedite the
21:44:58 When the city does something it tends to happen more
21:45:01 slowly and it's of the Wilson Miller proposal for the
21:45:04 Channel District, that Mr. Chen and the USF
21:45:07 architecture professor had already discussed and we
21:45:10 had agreed to today.
21:45:11 I mean, I would like it to happen.
21:45:13 I feel like we need the mod toll make good decisions,
21:45:17 to understand the proposed floor ratios and the
21:45:20 proposed heights and all that jazz.
21:45:24 >>JULIA COLE: I think what this applicant can do to
21:45:25 you is say I would like to create something to give
21:45:28 you more information as part of my proposal.
21:45:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, he's saying --
21:45:35 >>JULIA COLE: I'm a little concerned tying it as part
21:45:38 of this process.
21:45:39 That's what I'm a little concerned about.
21:45:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, independent ently.
21:45:45 >>> DAL: It has absolutely no binding on me.
21:45:48 Actually, if I may say to the council, we have been
21:45:51 struggling with this for 14 months now.
21:45:53 Our first application was filed on December 6th,
21:45:57 And here we are, the cost of opportunity needs to be
21:46:01 factored in, and this is a little cost for us.
21:46:04 In three weeks we will create the model and come back
21:46:07 to you.
21:46:12 >>ROSE FERLITA: That means, sir, if you did this,
21:46:14 which I'm can uncomfortable with already, but if you
21:46:16 did this, then your expectation back would be to come
21:46:19 in three weeks.
21:46:21 >>> Yes.
21:46:23 >> That's unfair to the last petitioner that we said
21:46:25 no to.
21:46:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we should take the last
21:46:28 petitioner --
21:46:29 >>ROSE FERLITA: Now we are disrupting -- if we do that
21:46:31 it's unfair to people who have waited.
21:46:33 This is causing a lot of problems.
21:46:35 I think that this is -- the petitioner starting to
21:46:38 tell us, you have this -- with no expectation of a
21:46:42 positive vote.
21:46:43 I love your project anyway.
21:46:44 Forget about what you're saying you are going to do.
21:46:47 But the perception is, he's coming in to build it
21:46:49 because government works slowly.
21:46:51 That will bring him back in three weeks as opposed to
21:46:54 That means we have to go back and rescind what we said
21:46:57 about the last one so that we treat him fairly as
21:47:00 That means where does everybody else sit?
21:47:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can't do that.
21:47:04 >>ROSE FERLITA: I know we can't.
21:47:05 It's not a fair -- this doesn't look good.
21:47:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And I will not support it.
21:47:16 >>> Just a request.
21:47:17 How do you propose we should come to you forever?
21:47:21 >>ROSE FERLITA: Sir, what happened this morning was in
21:47:23 order for us in good conscience to vote appropriately
21:47:26 and have all the tools before us that we need, we as a
21:47:30 CRA body asked that the administration give us this
21:47:33 tool, these models.
21:47:35 So that's one of those things that we needed.
21:47:40 And although I appreciate your offering --
21:47:45 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Besides, it will give the staff time
21:47:47 to research these amenities that they are talking
21:47:50 And they need that.
21:47:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would just say if we can get the
21:47:58 model, spend more time on public workshops about the
21:48:01 plan so that we would be sure that we had a plan in
21:48:03 place by March 9th.
21:48:05 >>ROSE FERLITA: What was the time frame they said it
21:48:08 would take?
21:48:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Six weeks.
21:48:11 >>ROSE FERLITA: Six weeks.
21:48:12 He's saying three weeks.
21:48:13 If we pushed us to get it back sooner, then I think
21:48:18 it's okay.
21:48:19 $13,000 allocation should be nothing in the scheme of
21:48:22 That's way said this motorcycle.
21:48:24 So I think our charge is to tell Mr. Chen to do some
21:48:29 interacting with whoever is going to do this and get
21:48:31 it back quickly so he can have a fair presentation.
21:48:35 We can vote on this project.
21:48:37 It looks like it's probably going to go at that point
21:48:40 anyway and move on.
21:48:42 >>KEVIN WHITE: This would be my suggestion to
21:48:43 petitioner, if it's okay with council.
21:48:46 What my preference, don't think it's going go but I
21:48:49 prefer to go forward it with tonight and I prefer to
21:48:51 let the next petitioner use your model in their model
21:48:56 to move forward, because I think that's an integral
21:49:00 piece of what they should do.
21:49:01 I don't think that's going to go.
21:49:03 But we have an estimated time of six to eight weeks
21:49:07 from the USF students.
21:49:09 If that's not done by March 9th, I would suggest
21:49:11 that you continue with your model, because if there's
21:49:17 is not done by March 9th then we are going to have
21:49:17 to continue again, because nobody has any conceptual
21:49:21 idea what it will look like.
21:49:23 So if it's no burden upon you I suggest you may want
21:49:26 to go ahead and continue with yours.
21:49:28 That way if USF school of architecture does not have
21:49:32 theirs you can still move forward with your project
21:49:34 because you will have a model and shame on the others
21:49:36 if they don't and they'll have to be continued again.
21:49:39 So that would be my suggestion if that's what you
21:49:42 choose to do.
21:49:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Chen, how do you feel about that?
21:49:46 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I wouldn't care to critique
21:49:49 councilman's white's comments.
21:49:50 However, I would like to suggest something, that we
21:49:53 have discussed, because we always have to be very
21:49:56 careful and squeaky clean about any misperceptions of
21:50:01 what's happening as we deal with zoning issues.
21:50:09 We don't see there would be any problem if this
21:50:11 developer wished to do a full scale model of the
21:50:13 entire Channel District that had his proposed project
21:50:17 within that model, so that co-show how his project
21:50:21 related to the entire district.
21:50:25 And at the conclusion of his -- at the conclusion of
21:50:28 his petition for zoning, that certainly becomes the
21:50:34 property property of the city to do with as we pleas.
21:50:38 >>JULIA COLE: This applicant has the right to say, I
21:50:41 hear what you're saying and I would like to do a full
21:50:43 scale model not withstanding whatever the city is
21:50:46 And that becomes part of his petition.
21:50:47 And once his peat moves forward certainly that's in
21:50:51 the public record and it can be utilized as evidence
21:50:54 in other zoning petitions.
21:50:55 But I think you have two issues here.
21:50:57 One, you have told an applicant before this
21:51:01 application was going forward, you need to wait this
21:51:03 period of time to wait for the model the City of Tampa
21:51:05 is paying for.
21:51:06 And so there's a fairness issue there.
21:51:08 And we also have an issue --
21:51:12 >>: Can they do it?
21:51:13 >>> I still think there's a fairness issue there and
21:51:15 he's being required to wait.
21:51:17 And I think there's also an usual you with how a model
21:51:19 which has been developed by a petitioner moving
21:51:23 forward on a zoning project versus one that's being
21:51:26 paid for by the City of Tampa and how that's utilized.
21:51:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If the model is supposed to be of
21:51:31 the proposed Wilson Miller study, it's supposed to be
21:51:35 what the study is proposing in terms of massing and
21:51:39 heights and F.A.R.
21:51:41 It's not his -- it's not anybody's.
21:51:44 It's the Wilson Miller study.
21:51:45 If he wants to pick up apiece and stick in what he's
21:51:48 proposing then he can.
21:51:49 But what we need, what council needs, is just the
21:51:52 Wilson Miller study so we can see what's being
21:51:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: I think what Ms. Cole is doing is
21:51:59 giving us a prudent way to get to the same point.
21:52:03 If this gentleman has a tool to represent his project
21:52:06 to us wants to be assured what Mr. White said, bring
21:52:09 your model that we need as far as we are concerned to
21:52:12 make a good decision, bring it back.
21:52:13 Then March 9th, he's for sure going to be heard
21:52:18 just like the other petitioner.
21:52:19 He's got the representation of the entire Channel
21:52:21 District, which we want.
21:52:22 And I don't even know if he needs to do this, Ms.
21:52:26 Cole, he can take that model and submit it after that,
21:52:28 or he can take it back home with him.
21:52:31 But at least he knows that there was no misperception
21:52:33 about anything, like the developer with the million
21:52:37 dollar check.
21:52:38 Yeah, he had to pay it eventually.
21:52:40 He's saying we -- I'll bring you what you need.
21:52:44 It doesn't look good.
21:52:45 It doesn't smell good.
21:52:47 And I don't think that's his intention.
21:52:48 His intention is as an aggressive developer, and don't
21:52:51 blame him, was so long ago that we saw that first
21:52:54 phase, from the standpoint of fairness we already
21:52:58 established on March 9th, that's six weeks.
21:53:01 You come back with that, sir, and yours is in keeping
21:53:04 with that, I guarantee you, we probably won't be very
21:53:07 long on your project when we deliberate.
21:53:09 Because again it is a very good, very attractive, very
21:53:13 well thought-out project.
21:53:15 But the process has to be the same for everybody.
21:53:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to clarify council's
21:53:25 There is a potential of a 3-D model of what presently
21:53:30 There's a 3-D model of what exists plus what is
21:53:33 already approved.
21:53:34 And then I hear there is a 3-D model being requested
21:53:38 that reflects what the study is.
21:53:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Correct.
21:53:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to be clear than on what
21:53:46 it is council -- first of all what council has
21:53:49 requested this morning at CRA is what the model of
21:53:51 what the study is?
21:53:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's all three things that you said
21:53:55 and we discussed this at the meeting.
21:53:57 It's what exists, what's been approved, and what the
21:54:03 study suggests.
21:54:04 >> I guess for clarification purposes, is council --
21:54:08 council wishes in order to make this determination to
21:54:10 look at all of that?
21:54:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's all in the same model.
21:54:13 It's either -- .
21:54:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The study that Wilson Miller is
21:54:19 putting in on.
21:54:21 >>> SADIR: I was going to clarify that going to the
21:54:25 hearing, will be a complete model existing, of the
21:54:32 construction, and what the Wilson Miller study
21:54:36 >>ROSE FERLITA: Exactly.
21:54:39 >>> I will bring to the your attention for your
21:54:42 viewing and hopefully it will be easy for you to see
21:54:46 what we advocate and the direction.
21:54:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Does the petitioner agree to a
21:54:55 particular date for this continuance?
21:54:57 >>> My only request, it is council's decision.
21:55:03 My only request that if we can come back earlier.
21:55:07 >>KEVIN WHITE: We didn't have any openings before
21:55:09 That's why we had the 9th.
21:55:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are actually waiving the rules
21:55:14 to get you in on the 9th.
21:55:16 >>> That's fine.
21:55:16 >>GWEN MILLER: A motion?
21:55:19 We have a motion and second to continue to March
21:55:20 9th at 6 p.m.
21:55:21 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
21:55:25 Opposed, Nay.
21:55:25 (Motion carried).
21:55:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Snelling, could you please
21:55:32 provide council in two weeks a description of what is
21:55:34 approved on the other side of Channelside Drive, on
21:55:38 the port side?
21:55:39 Because I don't think we are necessarily up to speed
21:55:43 on that.
21:55:45 Is 30 days better?
21:55:48 >>ROSE FERLITA: I don't think Mr. Snelling can hear
21:55:50 Why don't you wait?
21:55:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we have a five-minute break?
21:55:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to go in recess for five
22:07:33 [Sounding gavel]
22:07:34 69 Tampa City Council is called back to order.
22:07:35 Roll call.
22:07:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
22:07:43 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
22:07:44 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
22:07:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
22:07:46 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
22:07:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to clarify earlier
22:07:50 when I referred to a 3-D model I meant a physical
22:07:54 Somebody just explained that in the architectural
22:07:56 profession when you say 3 OD model they might think
22:08:01 you mean a graphic.
22:08:04 >>ROSE FERLITA: I thought you meant the 3-D little
22:08:10 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open number 12.
22:08:14 >> Second.
22:08:14 [Motion Carried]
22:08:15 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
22:08:16 I have been sworn.
22:08:20 Z 05-180.
22:08:22 It's a Euclidean request going from RS-60 to RS-50
22:08:28 Petitioner, we had objection to the site plan.
22:08:33 And their proposal.
22:08:34 The petitioner has come forward to us and actually is
22:08:39 going to ask for a continuance.
22:08:40 He would like to amend his application to a planned
22:08:45 And in doing so, I think that one of our objections
22:08:49 was we weren't sure what they were going to be
22:08:52 building there.
22:08:53 Under Euclidean we had no say or we could not look at
22:08:56 the design.
22:08:57 And under a planned development we will be able to see
22:09:00 the style and the design of the building they would be
22:09:04 putting on the site.
22:09:05 And I'll let the petitioner speak.
22:09:17 >>CHAIRMAN: We lost our quorum
22:09:25 Truett Gardner: It's only you.
22:09:28 You can do whatever you want.
22:09:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's 55 in here.
22:09:31 >>GWEN MILLER: We feel it up here.
22:09:37 Did you find him?
22:09:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Push the button.
22:09:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Ring the bell.
22:09:46 >>ROSE FERLITA: The next best thing to having a child
22:10:00 is having Kevin White next to me.
22:10:04 >>KEVIN WHITE: I thought Ms. Alvarez was in here.
22:10:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Roll call, please.
22:10:08 You lost the quorum.
22:10:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
22:10:13 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
22:10:14 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
22:10:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
22:10:16 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
22:10:17 Mr. Gardner.
22:10:18 >>> Truett Gardner, 101 south Franklin.
22:10:21 We have a unique situation where four feet from having
22:10:24 two zoning district but having talking to Tony Garcia
22:10:29 and John wise of the neighborhood association we are
22:10:31 amenable to coming back with a PD which would allow
22:10:33 them to address some issues that they would like to
22:10:36 That's fine.
22:10:37 I understand March 23rd is open so we would like
22:10:39 to shoot for that.
22:10:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Can I get a motion?
22:10:44 >> So moved.
22:10:44 >> Second.
22:10:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone here to speak on item
22:10:47 number 12?
22:10:48 We have a motion and second.
22:10:49 (Motion carried)
22:10:52 March 23rd at 6 p.m
22:10:55 We need to open item number 14.
22:10:58 >> So moved.
22:10:59 >> Second.
22:10:59 (Motion carried).
22:10:59 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
22:11:30 This is Z 06-03.
22:11:32 You will see a site plan in front of you.
22:11:34 I apologize for no aerials.
22:11:36 Somewhere between my office and here tonight, the file
22:11:39 So I had to recreate what we had.
22:11:45 We had the site plan.
22:11:46 We have the staff report.
22:11:47 I do not have the aerials for you.
22:11:49 However, Planning Commission submitted their aerial.
22:11:54 This is a request to go from RS-50 single family
22:11:58 residential to a planned development.
22:12:01 There are no waivers associated with this petition.
22:12:04 The reason the petitioner is having to come forward
22:12:09 with this request is it's in the overlay, it is
22:12:12 currently an RS-50 designation, that requires you to
22:12:14 have 50 feet of frontage, and a minimum size of.
22:12:21 The platted lot is only 48 feet wide.
22:12:24 It's lacking two feet to hit that -- it's not a
22:12:28 buildable lot as it is and they have to rezone to a
22:12:34 The property is located like I said within the
22:12:36 Seminole Heights overlay district.
22:12:38 It is located at 305 west EMMA street.
22:12:43 And they are planning to go to PD.
22:12:46 The platted parcel measures 48 feet wide along Emma
22:12:52 street and only 4,899 square feet of land.
22:12:57 This is lot 188 at the meadow brook subdivision which
22:13:00 is plotted in 1924.
22:13:03 The plat shows a 48 by 102-foot lot. The site is
22:13:08 located within the Seminole Heights overlay, like I
22:13:10 said. The proposed front yard setback is provided by
22:13:13 using the block averaging mechanism which reduce it is
22:13:16 front yard yard to 14 feet 4 inches to the porch
22:13:20 feature. The residents will maintain a 10-foot side
22:13:23 yard set back, and there is a 37-foot rear yard set
22:13:26 If you want to look at the Elmo for location, --
22:13:34 >>: Do we have an elevation?
22:13:35 >>> Yes, we do.
22:13:57 There were objections at the time of staff report.
22:13:59 However, in speaking with the petitioner tonight,
22:14:01 going over the objections, the first one was from our
22:14:07 landscape, Mary priceson, who noted it does not need
22:14:18 to be removed.
22:14:19 It does not need to be removed there. Was
22:14:21 clarification made.
22:14:22 She noted if there was to be a wall or fence put up on
22:14:26 foundation it would be utilized in this area.
22:14:29 So it should not affect the tree.
22:14:32 She noted that there's 12-inch Laurel oak on the north
22:14:35 property line that's in poor condition and that needed
22:14:37 to be removed.
22:14:38 And that one additional tree will need to be planted
22:14:41 based on the removal of that tree.
22:14:44 The petitioner has agreed to make note on a site plan
22:14:47 that additional tree will be planted.
22:14:50 One of our notes, our objections on the site plan, was
22:14:55 that we wanted no -- will comply with Seminole Heights
22:15:00 overlay district, and the petitioner is willing to add
22:15:02 the note stating that it will comply.
22:15:06 Other than that, we find the orientation, the proposed
22:15:11 residence will be oriented towards the front of the
22:15:15 zoning lot, that the creation of a new zoning lot will
22:15:18 fall the precedent of development pattern, that the
22:15:20 setbacks, the front yard is consistent with the
22:15:23 character of the block.
22:15:30 It's consistent with the overlay.
22:15:31 As long as a note is placed on the site plan.
22:15:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In the notes it said that the
22:15:38 traditional pattern of ribbon driveways, and this is
22:15:42 not a ribbon driveway.
22:15:51 It's just a slab of concrete.
22:15:52 >>MARTY BOYLE: Right.
22:15:54 I believe you can interpret that.
22:15:55 It says ribbon driveway may be constructed.
22:15:59 Don't believe it must be constructed.
22:16:09 That's my understanding.
22:16:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is someone from transportation
22:16:14 Also, could we have someone from stormwater explain
22:16:17 their objection?
22:16:27 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
22:16:30 You had a question about the ribbon driveway?
22:16:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there one?
22:16:34 Is there not?
22:16:35 You all had an objection.
22:16:38 I assumed that is what your objection was.
22:16:41 >>> It's really not an objection.
22:16:43 They just need to show the sidewalk through the
22:16:46 They are showing a sidewalk.
22:16:47 And we would just like to see it through the driveway.
22:16:50 But it's not really an objection.
22:16:54 They just need to shot.
22:16:57 They'll make them do it at construction service and
22:16:59 they are not required to pay on their driveway for
22:17:03 single-family home.
22:17:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And stormwater, can you explain
22:17:09 your objection?
22:17:11 It says objection.
22:17:18 >>> Alex: Yes, 391 cubic feet of volume storage
22:17:24 Alex Awad, stormwater, and I have been sworn.
22:17:28 >> Did they provide that?
22:17:29 >>> I haven't seen it on the plan.
22:17:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff?
22:17:41 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
22:18:05 I have been sworn in.
22:18:11 You can pretty much see the residential, pretty
22:18:14 consistent in south Seminole Heights area.
22:18:16 Land use category of course is residential 10.
22:18:23 It is pretty much in character with what's been going
22:18:26 on with south Seminole Heights area.
22:18:28 What you have been getting in your past rezoning,
22:18:31 primarily southeast Seminole Heights.
22:18:33 When don't see a lot of rezonings that much in south
22:18:35 Seminole Heights.
22:18:39 But in looking at this, I think the most critical
22:18:41 things, I did -- ask if there's any contact with the
22:18:50 Seminole Heights presidents in this particular
22:18:57 And representative for the rezoning.
22:19:02 You will probably note on the site plan some of the
22:19:05 most pertinent issues that need to be addressed
22:19:08 underneath the overlay district, are noted on the site
22:19:11 plan, which the 5-inch sidewalks, and of course the
22:19:14 18-inch above finished grade which are two of the most
22:19:17 important ones that they look forward to especially
22:19:19 the 18 above grade and the 6-foot to 12 roof pitch.
22:19:28 The request is consistent with the predominant
22:19:30 residential pattern, single family detached.
22:19:32 And applicant will comply with the Seminole Heights
22:19:37 overlay residential guidelines.
22:19:39 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
22:19:41 proposed request.
22:19:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
22:19:43 >>MARTY BOYLE: If I may interrupt.
22:19:50 The petitioner agreed to place the stormwater, that --
22:19:53 a note on the plan stating that they will provide a
22:19:56 half inch stormwater retention, and also that they
22:19:59 would put the sidewalk through the driveway.
22:20:04 >>> Good evening.
22:20:05 Sarah petram, north Nebraska Avenue and I have been
22:20:10 sworn in.
22:20:11 Basically this property was purchased by an individual
22:20:13 who planned on constructing a sing am family
22:20:16 residential across the street because the family
22:20:18 happened to live on the other side of the street.
22:20:20 And unbeknownst to her it was not a buildable
22:20:23 She was told that it was a grandfathered-in lot so
22:20:27 that's why we are here today.
22:20:28 It just doesn't meet the two feet as the RS-50 zoning.
22:20:31 It meets all the setbacks required.
22:20:32 And the owner of the property is willing to meet any
22:20:35 conditions necessary to go forward.
22:20:39 Those all I have.
22:20:40 Thank you.
22:20:40 Any questions?
22:20:41 >>CHAIRMAN: No.
22:20:42 Anyone in the public that would like to speak on item
22:20:51 >>> My name is Jason Donald.
22:20:53 I have been sworn in.
22:20:58 West Emma.
22:20:59 I'm the property owner directly next door to the -- to
22:21:04 build the home.
22:21:07 Just a little background about the house and the
22:21:12 Real briefly.
22:21:13 I bought the home in 2004.
22:21:15 The previous owner sold myself and I believe Ms. Ramos
22:21:19 who is the petitioner the lot.
22:21:23 When he split the lot, when I purchased my home, the
22:21:25 lot was supposed to be split ahead of time.
22:21:27 It was not done so properly.
22:21:29 So unfortunately I stand here in front of you as an
22:21:33 owner of an illegally zoned lot.
22:21:38 The lot, 187, 188 were two lots together, 96 feet
22:21:45 They split them what the meadow brook plat plan
22:21:48 previously was and they did it -- they didn't do it
22:21:52 So I now have an illegally zoned house because of this
22:21:55 previous owner.
22:21:57 One of the reasons I'm here is because I am now having
22:21:59 to take legal action against that previous owner in
22:22:01 order to rectify the situation.
22:22:03 So without being able to move forward I'm trying to
22:22:07 help this process along but in the same sense I'm
22:22:09 being hindered by it myself.
22:22:15 I'm objecting to the PD zoning.
22:22:17 Obviously it's 40 feet wide -- the lots are 48 feet
22:22:21 wide, RS-50 is what it's currently zoned.
22:22:28 The PD zoning is something we haven't seen in our
22:22:30 neighborhood yet.
22:22:31 I went through the public records and got as much
22:22:34 information as I could dig up and I haven't found any
22:22:36 other PD.
22:22:37 This will be a new zoning.
22:22:38 I don't know how it can effect things in the future in
22:22:42 future growth.
22:22:43 Certainly I have a concern with that.
22:22:46 Next I have concern for a tree that's on the property.
22:22:49 The city has claimed, or somebody has given me
22:22:51 information that they said the tree is no longer
22:22:56 I stand to differ.
22:22:58 If I can use this.
22:23:04 That tree is 14 feet 4 inches in diameter measured by
22:23:09 the city, has over 24-inch rise and is approximately
22:23:12 150 years old.
22:23:14 The roots are extensive.
22:23:16 They run under my house.
22:23:18 I'll show you another example.
22:23:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is the your house in the other
22:23:24 Can you go back to the previous picture?
22:23:29 Is the red porch your house?
22:23:30 >>> Yes, ma'am.
22:23:33 And unfortunately, the tree sits directly on the
22:23:35 property line.
22:23:36 Split right in half.
22:23:41 This is from my backyard.
22:23:43 24-inch rise from the root system.
22:23:46 And potentially if development comes in and any damage
22:23:50 is done to that root system, I think I run a high risk
22:23:53 of it being killed off and doing severe damage to my
22:23:58 If it would even fall and not hit anything the root
22:24:01 system would tear up probably half of my home.
22:24:04 In addition to that, the root system, because of the
22:24:07 rise is so high, which I just noticed we are going to
22:24:10 address the issue with water retention.
22:24:14 I now deal with moisture and have had to install fans
22:24:19 under my house because I have hardwood floors and they
22:24:21 are starting to warp.
22:24:22 By putting another house there, there's less permeable
22:24:27 area and it's going to create more water for me.
22:24:28 (Bell sounds).
22:24:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Time is up.
22:24:31 We have a question for you.
22:24:32 >>> Yes, ma'am.
22:24:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm looking at a plan that was
22:24:35 submitted to us.
22:24:36 Is your house located to the west or the east?
22:24:41 >>> My house is located directly to the west.
22:24:44 Everything runs towards the river which is the west.
22:24:47 >> So that would be there's a picture.
22:24:48 It's a circle that says 60.
22:24:50 I would assume that's the diameter of the tree and
22:24:52 there's an X through it on this plan.
22:24:55 Did we have anybody from parks take a look at that
22:24:59 >>> Yes.
22:25:00 >>MARTY BOYLE: Dave Riley looked at the tree and made
22:25:03 his determination.
22:25:04 >> What was it?
22:25:05 >>> That it could be removed, that it wasn't a viable
22:25:07 tree any longer.
22:25:08 >> Was it an oak tree?
22:25:12 >>> It's actually a mix, a blend.
22:25:14 It's an older tree.
22:25:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is it split in the middle?
22:25:20 >>> Yes, ma'am.
22:25:22 Across the property line.
22:25:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It looked like from what you are
22:25:26 showing me, it looks like it's split right in the
22:25:29 >>> It comes up two massive trunks that are probably
22:25:34 two feet.
22:25:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Said they could remove the tree.
22:25:46 Would anyone else like to speak?
22:25:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close the public hearing.
22:25:52 >> Second.
22:25:52 (Motion carried).
22:25:53 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance rezoning property in
22:25:57 the general vicinity of 305 west Emma in the city of
22:26:02 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
22:26:04 section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-50
22:26:08 residential single family to PD single family
22:26:11 residential, providing an effective date.
22:26:13 69 I have a motion and second.
22:26:15 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:26:16 Opposed, Nay.
22:26:16 (Motion carried).
22:26:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just to help the neighbor better
22:26:21 understand, probably his best course of action would
22:26:26 be go for a.
22:26:29 What the PD does is allows people to build a
22:26:33 single-family home so we are very secure what's going
22:26:35 to go there there and that's what I probably recommend
22:26:38 to you.
22:26:38 >>KEVIN WHITE: Also, I think the gentleman that came
22:26:41 up, if there was anybody in this world that was more
22:26:45 protective of trees than Mrs. Saul-Sena, believe me,
22:26:51 it would not fly.
22:26:53 >>MARY ALVAREZ: She's a tree hugger.
22:26:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion to open number 16 -- number 15?
22:27:03 >> So moved.
22:27:03 >> Second.
22:27:03 (Motion carried)
22:27:04 >>MARTY BOYLE: The last one.
22:27:31 I have been sworn.
22:27:32 Item number 15.
22:27:33 Z 06-04.
22:27:38 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property at
22:27:41 2302 west Beach Street and 2502 north Howard street to
22:27:47 a PD zoning district.
22:27:50 It's going from an RS-50, a CI and a PD to a PD.
22:27:56 There is an existing two-story structure on-site.
22:28:02 It generally referred S referred to as the Golden
22:28:09 Look at the Elmo.
22:28:09 It shows a side view of it.
22:28:26 The two-story structure is 32 feet in height and it
22:28:29 was previously used as a nightclub hall with a small
22:28:31 apartment on the second floor.
22:28:33 The petitioner intends to have retail, in our staff
22:28:36 report we have restaurant.
22:28:37 However, petitioner called me today.
22:28:39 The plan says restaurant and our staff report says
22:28:42 restaurant, they are not going to do a restaurant in
22:28:45 there so I need to strike that from the plan and
22:28:48 ignore it from the staff report.
22:28:50 And professional offices.
22:28:51 And there is going to be one second-floor apartment
22:28:54 for the owner's personal use.
22:28:56 The existing structure is zoned PD.
22:28:58 The parcel if you look at the site plan, the parcel to
22:29:02 the north is RS-50 and the parcel to the south is CI.
22:29:08 The plan shows 30 parking spaces provided including
22:29:11 two ADA spaces.
22:29:13 Only 16 spaces are required.
22:29:16 The site will have access from the north Howard and an
22:29:19 additional parking lot will have access from west
22:29:22 Beach Street.
22:29:22 The existing building is historical in nature, and
22:29:26 it's going to be renovated.
22:29:28 The site is located within the West Tampa overlay
22:29:36 On the Elmo, the building is -- this is the existing
22:29:40 This will be parking.
22:29:42 To the south and to the north is the additional
22:29:48 If you will look at your site plan, which I'm trying
22:29:51 to get mine out, you will see that the additional
22:29:59 parking to the south across west Beach Street,
22:30:04 originally the petitioner had that surface parking lot
22:30:07 going fairly close to the property line and almost to
22:30:10 the right-of-way line.
22:30:12 In talking with Hernandez of preservation, with the
22:30:20 West Tampa overlay we encouraged them to pushing push
22:30:24 the parking back.
22:30:25 They lost approximately eight spaces by doing so but
22:30:27 they created a heavily landscaped area, and they made
22:30:31 it more in keeping with the Howard Avenue design.
22:30:37 I will show you also, Dilys from historic -- Dilys was
22:30:44 very interested in taking place because of what she
22:30:46 considered a landmark building right across the
22:30:50 Under staff findings, we have an objection from
22:31:06 We asked -- they took care of the tree debit-credit
22:31:12 But on the five additional trees to be planted they
22:31:15 did have to ask for a waiver from the 50%.
22:31:19 The waivers are -- and I should read those to you --
22:31:21 to reduce the buffer from the property north from 15
22:31:25 to 8 feet, reduction from 15 to 12 feet on the west
22:31:30 property line, and to allow access to west Beach
22:31:31 Street which is a local street.
22:31:32 They also asked for a waiver which I was speaking
22:31:35 about to reduce the number of trees required to be
22:31:38 planted within the use area, and that reduction is
22:31:46 Also they asked that the required six foot high 8-inch
22:31:50 wall on the west property line at the parking lot
22:31:52 adjacent to the building be set up here and told to
22:31:58 protect the root systems of the trees that are there.
22:32:00 The petitioner has agreed to do that.
22:32:05 There is a stormwater objection that they need to
22:32:07 provide a half inch retention on the property.
22:32:11 And I don't believe that it is on the site plan.
22:32:14 It is on the site plan?
22:32:20 I'll ask stormwater in a second after I finish my
22:32:31 We pointed out, with the existing building they have
22:32:34 no choice in their setbacks in their buffering so we
22:32:38 had to call that out.
22:32:39 However, we do feel that what they are doing with the
22:32:42 site, and it being a preexisting condition, that they
22:32:46 could not do the normal buffering from some of the
22:32:49 lands from the residential uses that they normally
22:32:53 could do.
22:32:54 So that wasn't an issue for us.
22:32:56 We felt that it met the criteria for the facade, and
22:33:03 that on the parking, that they took our concerns, and
22:33:09 the petitioner redesigned the surface parking lot and
22:33:13 set the parking back 32 feet from the property line,
22:33:15 and they are planning significant trees and
22:33:18 landscaping in the area.
22:33:22 And stormwater says they would like for a note to be
22:33:27 >>ALEX AWAD: Stormwater department.
22:33:31 And I have been sworn.
22:33:34 There's a note on the plan for the parking lot, I
22:33:38 believe to the south it says half inch requirement, we
22:33:44 want that note "if required" taken out and provide the
22:33:47 half inch.
22:33:58 >>MARTY BOYLE: Petitioner agrees.
22:33:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
22:34:00 On the site plan it says they are going to plant
22:34:03 significant trees around the southern parking lot.
22:34:06 And I wondered if -- I know that if you plant larger
22:34:11 trees you get credit for the additional inches.
22:34:13 If they do that wouldn't that make up for the ones
22:34:18 that they aren't providing or removing?
22:34:21 Are they asking for a waiver?
22:34:23 >>MARTY BOYLE: Yes.
22:34:24 50% removal in the vehicular use area.
22:34:27 But that -- you ask for something and then you give
22:34:33 something back.
22:34:34 >> My question is this is a PD.
22:34:35 If they were to state on the plan that these were
22:34:38 like, you know, four inch trees or six inch trees,
22:34:42 wouldn't that meet the requirement?
22:34:44 >>> Yes.
22:34:45 >> Because I didn't see any sizes identified of trees,
22:34:50 new trees that they are committing to.
22:34:55 So that like didn't occur to them?
22:34:58 Can we suggest it now?
22:35:00 >>> We can suggest it now.
22:35:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because I don't really want to
22:35:03 waive the things.
22:35:05 I want them to commit.
22:35:06 I would like them to be specific about these would be
22:35:09 trees of a certain caliber so we know that we'll get
22:35:12 that screening that we all aspire to.
22:35:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
22:35:26 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
22:35:27 I have been sworn in.
22:35:31 Ms. Alvarez, this is in the hood.
22:35:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: All over the place.
22:35:48 >>KEVIN WHITE: I have Moses Knott three nights a week.
22:35:54 >>TONY GARCIA: And one of the nature business
22:36:07 corridors in the West Tampa business area, Armenia
22:36:11 directly to the west.
22:36:12 As you can see the photograph over here just a couple
22:36:14 of blocks from one of our most magnificent historic
22:36:18 structures in the West Tampa area, Centro Espanol, as
22:36:21 I heard you mention, Mrs. Alvarez, under your breath.
22:36:28 >>ROSE FERLITA: Did you notice he's totally focused on
22:36:30 Ms. Alvarez?
22:36:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Don't be jealous.
22:36:32 >>TONY GARCIA: I know Mrs. Ferlita how you like to
22:36:38 frequent all the different eating establishments.
22:36:40 >>ROSE FERLITA: We know where you parked.
22:36:44 >>TONY GARCIA: And you too, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
22:36:48 I think I have it --
22:36:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Don't tell him.
22:36:53 >>TONY GARCIA: I would mention you two more times.
22:36:58 Regarding the land use categories, to the east east,
22:37:02 of course heavy commercial along with business
22:37:04 corridors, the lighter colors, as it gets closer to
22:37:09 the intersection of Howard and Columbus drive, CMU 35,
22:37:16 directly across the street from the Centro, and the
22:37:19 bakery, serving people in the community, and of course
22:37:26 the site in question unfortunately, a cigar factory,
22:37:34 the parking lot represents the site.
22:37:40 That's the site we are talking about right now.
22:37:41 Again, more renovation and revitalization to the West
22:37:45 Tampa business corridors.
22:37:46 I do know that there are some technical issues that
22:37:51 will probably still have to be worked out, that will
22:37:54 have to come back.
22:37:54 The only technical issue that we looked at was
22:37:57 probably the pedestrian connection to the actual
22:37:59 pedestrian parking lot which is located directly to
22:38:02 the south of the site.
22:38:04 And the connection from the safety issue from that
22:38:07 parking lot to the actual Golden Nugget, whatever it's
22:38:12 going to become, the employee market is going to
22:38:16 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Overhead parkway?
22:38:24 >>TONY GARCIA: I don't think so.
22:38:28 And the only other thing would probably be, the
22:38:32 location of the parking lot, it's pretty far back to
22:38:36 the neighborhood.
22:38:36 If they could probably move it up a little bit to the
22:38:39 middle of the parking.
22:38:40 I don't know if that's feasible.
22:38:42 I don't know if transportation will have any issue
22:38:43 with that.
22:38:44 But if they could probably move that ingress-egress a
22:38:48 little further because it does face two single family
22:38:50 residential homes directly behind the Nugget, I think
22:38:54 that would be a little more amenable.
22:38:56 Other than that Planning Commission staff finds the
22:38:59 request consistent with the comprehensive plan.
22:39:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Garcia, would you do that
22:39:04 presentation again? I didn't understand it.
22:39:06 It wasn't too clear.
22:39:08 >>TONY GARCIA: Focus.
22:39:10 >>KEVIN WHITE: Can we do it --
22:39:12 >>GWEN MILLER: I wanted to hear it again so I could
22:39:15 get his attention.
22:39:16 >>TONY GARCIA: One more time?
22:39:21 >>KEVIN WHITE: For brevity sake is there anyone in the
22:39:34 audience in objection to the project?
22:39:36 Never mind, we'll go forward.
22:39:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, go ahead.
22:39:40 >>> Cathy bird, innovative restorations.
22:39:44 I have been sworn in.
22:39:46 For the petitioner Barbara baker.
22:39:48 This is a project that a lot of the community is very
22:39:52 aware of, not only as a historically contributing
22:39:56 building to the national historic register district,
22:39:59 but it is also in the landmark process at the national
22:40:04 I have over here, to give you a little bit of history,
22:40:11 the project is under rehabilitation right now.
22:40:13 It has been through review at staff level with the
22:40:20 It is also currently being reviewed at the state
22:40:26 historic preservation office and they have been very
22:40:28 involved -- very involved in everything that we are
22:40:30 The rehabilitation on the building as commented has
22:40:33 been under way for a few months.
22:40:39 This is the Howard street face. This is a contiguous
22:40:44 This is a two-story wing, followed by a single-story
22:40:48 component with another two-story wing.
22:40:51 It is the owner's intent initially was to have a
22:40:56 two-story antique emporium, and general store on the
22:41:00 first floor, future tenant of some type, yet to be
22:41:05 defined, and then a single apartment above on the
22:41:09 other two-story component.
22:41:10 She has since reevaluated her business plan, and she
22:41:13 is now going to occupy the entire first floor
22:41:17 component as the antiques emporium in the general
22:41:21 store and has decided to take the second story
22:41:23 component which is already originally configured
22:41:26 pretty well for this use to make it professional
22:41:30 And again retaining the single apartment on this other
22:41:33 two-story component.
22:41:36 That is the reason why there was a change in the site
22:41:41 This was still envisioned to be the mercantile
22:41:46 component, future tenant, and now it's mercantile
22:41:49 office and residence.
22:41:49 And that's the reason for the change.
22:41:52 That also changed what the parking requirements are
22:41:54 going to need to be.
22:41:56 But to give you a little bit of -- on the aerial, I
22:42:00 think you probably -- it's probably already been
22:42:03 demonstrated fairly well.
22:42:04 This is north direction here.
22:42:07 This is a vacant lot, formerly an underlying zoning of
22:42:13 RS-50 currently vacant and is what we are referring to
22:42:16 as the north lot, the north parcel.
22:42:18 Then this is soon to be balker and company antique
22:42:23 emporium and general store.
22:42:25 And then the south parcel, which is as was mentioned
22:42:28 just moment ago, the cigar factory and is now a vacant
22:42:35 One of the significant components about this being
22:42:37 able to be heavily landscaped which is one of the
22:42:42 elements that not only appeals to the city, but was
22:42:45 actually a driving force for the property owner, is
22:42:48 she did not -- she desperately did not want this to
22:42:52 read like a surface parking lot where it's paved
22:42:55 corner to corner because she felt that flew in the
22:42:56 face of what she was trying to accomplish in the first
22:42:59 place which was to have something that was very
22:43:01 pedestrian oriented.
22:43:02 She is investing a tremendous amount of her own
22:43:05 private money to rehabilitate and restore all of the
22:43:09 original storefront openings, and so it will still be
22:43:14 completely accessible, and it is being historically
22:43:18 replicated, all being custom fabricated, has been
22:43:22 historically replicated.
22:43:23 One of the beauties that we have is an old photo.
22:43:28 Week see Watt used to look like.
22:43:29 Even though none of those windows were still intact,
22:43:31 we were able to replicate all of them from the
22:43:34 photograph right down to the doors and when could even
22:43:36 tell the hard wear.
22:43:39 So we are getting into detail.
22:43:39 So a lot of the interior components were able to be
22:43:44 salvaged, a lot of the tin ceilings, the original bead
22:43:49 board, the octagon concrete floors are still in place.
22:43:54 It's just been one of those projects that has been a
22:43:56 fabulous opportunity to work on, because so many of
22:43:59 the components are still intact.
22:44:01 So to walk you through what we are doing here, again,
22:44:07 here is the north -- after the design review committee
22:44:12 meeting they asked us to reorient this lot.
22:44:15 It had a different flip.
22:44:17 We were imagining we were going to have to have a
22:44:19 dumpster enclosure at this location just to have truck
22:44:22 access, vehicle access.
22:44:24 But solid waste was able to -- was actually able to
22:44:28 come up with a solution that not only worked better
22:44:30 for the site but worked better for them in terms of
22:44:34 So we are putting in a dumpster enclosure that faces
22:44:37 to the Beach Street, and we will be putting in a curb
22:44:41 cut, and those will be roll-out dumpsters, that they
22:44:44 will have.
22:44:44 And that's how they are going to be addressing the
22:44:47 solid waste component.
22:44:49 We have all of the required buffering as far as
22:44:52 landscape buffering.
22:44:55 And additional landscape buffering at the request of
22:44:58 One of the things that storm particularly liked about
22:45:02 this is there was formerly solid concrete paving all
22:45:07 around the original parcel of the gold Nugget tavern,
22:45:11 and that has all been completely removed and restored
22:45:13 to green space.
22:45:18 And storm loved that part because apparently this is a
22:45:20 problem area for them.
22:45:22 Coming over here to the south parcel, again in keeping
22:45:25 with the owner's desire to have it be extremely
22:45:28 friendly, and heavily landscaped, she is proposing --
22:45:33 she is requesting landscape buffers in excess of what
22:45:38 has ever been required.
22:45:39 And in some cases significantly in excess.
22:45:43 Fortunately, because of the use of the building, the
22:45:46 required parking by code was 16 parking spaces total
22:45:51 between the two lots.
22:45:52 We are able to accommodate 30 parking spaces in total.
22:45:57 And as we all understand, that is something that is
22:45:59 like unheard of in the West Tampa area.
22:46:03 If you don't require any on-street parking, you have
22:46:06 really been able to pull something off.
22:46:07 So we are very happy to be able to say that we are
22:46:12 requesting the waivers as was stated before by Marty
22:46:16 We are requesting a landscape buffer, waiver, here, at
22:46:21 this portion along the west property line, at the
22:46:24 south parking lot, and that is, it requires 15 feet.
22:46:29 We are asking 12.
22:46:30 This came about as a result of noticing to push the
22:46:34 parking back, and desiring not to just keep
22:46:37 eliminating parking spaces, which was starting to
22:46:41 exacerbate a problem.
22:46:43 We are asking for three-foot waiver here.
22:46:45 We were also asking for the -- I have to go back to my
22:47:02 On the north parcel, there were the two landscape
22:47:07 buffer waivers that we were asking for.
22:47:08 And that really is being driven by the fact that it's
22:47:10 just a small parcel, and to do the turning radiuses
22:47:14 that you need and give them the ADA compliant spaces,
22:47:20 that that is just the way it ended up, because you can
22:47:23 get into the space but you couldn't turn out and turn
22:47:25 to get it back out.
22:47:26 So that's really what's driving the north parcel,
22:47:29 which is the smaller -- which is the smaller of the
22:47:32 The north parcel buffer.
22:47:34 Then the landscape buffer on the south.
22:47:37 And then again the issue of the trees.
22:47:38 I talked to the petitioner and she has no problems, if
22:47:42 you would like to stipulate to a particular caliper of
22:47:46 We can certainly do that.
22:47:48 We had had the conversation with parks prior, and
22:47:51 actually asked the question, do you have a particular
22:47:53 species of tree that you want to see or particular
22:47:56 And we were told just to follow the guidelines of code
22:48:00 and the building department.
22:48:02 So that's the reason we didn't stipulate anything in
22:48:04 particular on the site plan.
22:48:06 Although we certainly can and the petitioner is
22:48:08 So I'm not sure if you have any other questions.
22:48:13 I think I have addressed all of the issues on the
22:48:17 The half inch storm issue that was raised before, at
22:48:22 the time the DRC hearing and we were told this is what
22:48:26 they believed they were going to do because it hadn't
22:48:29 been actually engineered, they felt this was the
22:48:32 criteria we were going to follow and that was the
22:48:34 reason, "if required" because that question stayed out
22:48:37 there as a bit of a question.
22:48:39 But to eliminate the "if required" and say this is
22:48:41 what we are going to do, that just made our engineers
22:48:45 life a lot easier.
22:48:47 He's actually -- he's going to be engineering to half
22:48:50 inch storm.
22:48:51 So we are going to take that out.
22:48:53 I think with that being said, any questions?
22:48:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Good proposal.
22:49:04 What Mr. Garcia said about the pedestrian crosswalk,
22:49:09 is that a problem for you?
22:49:09 >> >> no, not at all.
22:49:12 That actually seems appropriate.
22:49:15 Certainly that would make sense.
22:49:16 >> Good.
22:49:17 Colleagues, Barbara baker, this is a labor of love for
22:49:25 And she is the one that renovated the Morgan cigar
22:49:31 factory north of this property here.
22:49:34 And she has done a great job.
22:49:36 And she's done it all with her money.
22:49:37 She never asked for one penny.
22:49:39 And she's doing the same thing with this project.
22:49:41 This is a wonderful project for the West Tampa area.
22:49:44 It's going to be a show place when she gets through
22:49:48 with it.
22:49:49 And she told me that this place was a bordello until
22:49:55 just a few years ago.
22:49:56 So it's probably got some ghosts in there.
22:50:01 But she has taken this project to heart.
22:50:06 And I'm telling you, she has put her heart and sole
22:50:09 and her money into this thing.
22:50:10 And it's just nothing but beauty.
22:50:14 It will be something that the whole West Tampa area,
22:50:17 and the whole City of Tampa will be proud of.
22:50:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
22:50:22 would like to speak on item number 16?
22:50:24 Number 15.
22:50:34 Come on, lily.
22:50:36 I know who you are.
22:50:38 >>> My name is Janice Williams.
22:50:40 I've been sworn in.
22:50:41 1902 west Conrad street.
22:50:43 I am also the president of the old West Tampa
22:50:46 president neighborhood association and crime watch.
22:50:49 And in all good conscience I cannot support the
22:50:55 petitioner, because to be quite honest with you, I
22:50:58 received no correspondence from her.
22:51:00 And she has not been in contact with me.
22:51:03 And my responsibility being in charge of a
22:51:08 neighborhood association is to let the people, the
22:51:11 residents know what's going on.
22:51:14 I need feedback from them to know whether or not any
22:51:17 desire or need for a change in the area is something
22:51:22 that they can support.
22:51:25 So of course we want change in West Tampa.
22:51:29 And it's wonderful that there are people who want to
22:51:32 invest and spend their own money here.
22:51:34 But I don't think that these people should disrespect
22:51:38 the residents who live there.
22:51:41 And this lady before mentioned that the community is
22:51:43 aware of all of this.
22:51:45 The community is not aware of all of this.
22:51:47 And I don't think it's right to bypass or overlook a
22:51:52 neighborhood association when people want to do things
22:51:56 like this.
22:51:57 I mean, I understand what you're saying, Ms. Alvarez,
22:52:02 and it is wonderful what's happening in our area.
22:52:04 It's great to see all these changes.
22:52:06 But this should be a cooperative effort for people who
22:52:10 live there, people who work there, and people who love
22:52:12 it and I'm insulted that I was not contacted, and that
22:52:20 we received nothing in writing from this individual
22:52:24 about her desire to make these changes.
22:52:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ma'am, when did you become president
22:52:30 of the old West Tampa?
22:52:32 >>> I became president --
22:52:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Don't speak out.
22:52:37 >>> -- October of 2005.
22:52:39 And I do want to say for the record, I have received
22:52:43 no -- there's been no correspondence from the time I
22:52:47 took this position related to this petitioner and what
22:52:51 it is she's asking for.
22:52:58 >> Was McCrane the president?
22:53:01 Did she get information?
22:53:02 She's with the overlay committee.
22:53:04 >>> She's with the overlay committee, Mrs. Alvarez,
22:53:06 but the fact of the matter is there should have been
22:53:07 some printed information or there should have been
22:53:09 some mention of any type of discussion related to this
22:53:15 Any type of re zoning request.
22:53:17 I have nothing in writing as far as correspondence
22:53:21 that I inherited when I became the president.
22:53:25 You know, I'm trying to be fair to everyone.
22:53:27 Because I represent homeowners, property owners, you
22:53:30 know, everybody.
22:53:35 But I cannot come here before you.
22:53:37 I should be your eyes and ears, too.
22:53:39 Not only I do I represent the neighborhood, but I
22:53:41 should be able to come here, and try to at least
22:53:44 assist you in whatever decision it is you're making.
22:53:47 And I can't do that.
22:53:49 Because I don't have the tools that I need.
22:53:52 So I can't support this at this time.
22:53:55 What I would like to ask if it's possible is for you
22:53:57 to at least postpone a decision until I have had the
22:54:01 opportunity to meet with the petitioner, and also have
22:54:03 the opportunity to bring this issue to the residents
22:54:08 of old West Tampa.
22:54:10 If I could at least have that, I would appreciate it.
22:54:12 Thank you.
22:54:12 >>GWEN MILLER: I agree, because most of the time, the
22:54:17 developer or petitioner usually meets with the
22:54:19 neighborhood association and presents the plan to them
22:54:21 and let them know what's going to happen to them.
22:54:24 You say they did not meet -- no meetings?
22:54:27 >> Not with the neighborhood association.
22:54:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have a technical question
22:54:33 for the clerk's office.
22:54:33 Can't you see in the petition folder that the
22:54:38 petitioner communicated with the good neighbor
22:54:42 courtesy notice with the neighborhood organization?
22:54:45 Is that something you can look up?
22:54:47 >>THE CLERK: According to what we received as far as
22:54:49 the notices that were mailed, there was a mailing to
22:54:51 the old West Tampa north association, attention to Ms.
22:54:57 Harriet McCray.
22:54:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What was the date?
22:55:00 >>> This was stamped by the post office December
22:55:02 22nd, 2005.
22:55:04 December 22nd.
22:55:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: She was not the president at the time.
22:55:10 >>> This is the first that we received.
22:55:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: An attempt was made.
22:55:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: An attempt was made.
22:55:23 >>> I'm lily, and I have been sworn in.
22:55:27 Please accept my apology.
22:55:29 But the reason I know the date that Janice was
22:55:33 accepted as our president, because it was my husband's
22:55:38 And I am one who made the decision along with the
22:55:43 crime watch members that she would be a good
22:55:47 And I think that I made a good choice, because with
22:55:50 her, she gets things done.
22:55:54 She doing a lot of things that Harriet McCray did
22:55:57 not do.
22:55:58 A lot of mail that we received to attend meetings, we
22:56:03 never know anything about it.
22:56:05 So I'm along with Janice.
22:56:08 I will not accept it either.
22:56:10 But I will invite Barbara baker to come to one of our
22:56:14 meetings at Rey Park on the second Tuesday of the
22:56:19 The next meeting will be the 14th, 2006, the time
22:56:26 of the meeting is 6:30 p.m.
22:56:28 And she is very welcome to come.
22:56:31 And address this issue to our other members, and I
22:56:35 will see that other homeowners and people in the
22:56:38 community know what is going on.
22:56:41 Thank you.
22:56:45 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Lily.
22:56:52 >>> My name is Vivian Triplet.
22:56:54 I live at 2354 west Beach street.
22:56:58 I have been there for 41 years and I own four lots in
22:57:01 the area.
22:57:02 I received this in my door.
22:57:05 I could place this?
22:57:06 This is what she's planning on doing.
22:57:24 And I don't have a problem with the notice but I do
22:57:28 have a problem with her taking the empty lots, putting
22:57:32 a wall -- and I live right on that street next to
22:57:37 those apartments.
22:57:38 When I been looking out my front door every morning
22:57:43 down Howard, then I got to face a wall and a dumpster.
22:57:47 And I pay taxes.
22:57:48 And I been there 41 years.
22:57:50 And I don't think it's right.
22:57:51 I think if she wants to remodel the Golden Nugget, I
22:57:56 don't have a problem with that.
22:57:57 If she want to do something, I don't have a problem
22:57:59 with that.
22:58:01 If she want a parking lot, I don't have a problem with
22:58:05 nothing but the wall she's fixing to put where we have
22:58:10 to look at the wall when I look out my door.
22:58:12 And that's what I have -- and all this market and the
22:58:20 empty lot that's what she's planning on doing.
22:58:22 She's talking about office.
22:58:24 I been there 41 years.
22:58:25 They never brought anything to West Tampa decent.
22:58:28 Everything they bring is either drugs, or something.
22:58:32 I been on Beach Street 41 years.
22:58:35 I dealt with the blind kid, the Nugget, I went through
22:58:42 all of this.
22:58:43 And now, I decided to rest.
22:58:46 But I can't rest after after she put this.
22:58:49 Because it's not going to work.
22:58:52 When she was building they stole stuff out of that
22:58:55 building then.
22:58:56 And they have had a sign on the post in front of my
22:59:01 Now, she's not going to put no antique shop.
22:59:04 I don't think she is.
22:59:06 I don't know what it's going to be.
22:59:08 But it's not going to be no antique shop.
22:59:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Ma'am, come back to the podium.
22:59:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
22:59:15 And that is, would you -- the reason that she's
22:59:18 proposing to put a wall is because that's what she's
22:59:21 required to do by our code.
22:59:23 Would you prefer having landscaping along the edge
22:59:26 there rather than a masonry wall?
22:59:30 >>> A fence.
22:59:31 >>GWEN MILLER: What kind of fence?
22:59:34 >>> A wrought iron fence.
22:59:36 Somewhere where I can look.
22:59:39 Don't want to look out the door and look at a wall and
22:59:43 >> Your property is immediately to the west of hers on
22:59:45 Beach Street?
22:59:46 >>> Yes.
22:59:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I can understand that you would not
22:59:51 be wild about a dumpster being next to your house,
22:59:54 because who would be?
23:00:00 >>> I'm across --
23:00:05 >>KEVIN WHITE: Are you next to the empty lot or
23:00:06 directly behind the Nugget?
23:00:08 >>> I'm across on the right -- it's the left of Beach
23:00:12 when you come down Howard.
23:00:13 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Behind the parking lot.
23:00:22 >>> Beside the apartments.
23:00:23 >>GWEN MILLER: What do you have there now?
23:00:25 >>> Just the apartments and I own the rest of the lot
23:00:27 except Joe Robinson's house.
23:00:31 My fence.
23:00:31 My fence.
23:00:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You're on the south part?
23:00:35 >>> South, yes.
23:00:36 >> So you're not affected by the dumpster.
23:00:39 You're on the north side.
23:00:40 >>> Oh, she's not going to put it on the south side?
23:00:42 I thought it was on Beach Street.
23:00:44 If she put it --
23:00:45 >>: It's on the north side of Beach Street.
23:00:51 >>> Where is the dumpster going to be, on the left
23:00:53 Oh, behind the building?
23:00:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You're okay with that?
23:01:03 >>> If it's going to be behind the building I have no
23:01:03 problem with that. But I do have a problem with the
23:01:04 >> So you prefer a masonry -- you don't want masonry.
23:01:09 >>> I just don't want to look out my door every
23:01:12 morning and have to face the wall.
23:01:15 >>GWEN MILLER: You want a wrought iron.
23:01:22 >>> Yes.
23:01:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
23:01:34 >>> My name is Betty walker.
23:01:37 I just bought the house at 2327 west Beach Street
23:01:40 seven months ago.
23:01:41 And I love the area.
23:01:44 I love where it is.
23:01:46 It does need cleaning up.
23:01:48 And I think that Barbara baker's building would be a
23:01:51 great improvement there.
23:01:54 I, like Vivian trip, have a definite problem with
23:01:58 where is the dumpster going to be.
23:02:01 And also I have a problem with there should not be any
23:02:05 ingress or egress on Beach Street because as it is,
23:02:09 there are absolutely no -- on my seed -- side of the
23:02:12 street which is the north side of beach, there's
23:02:14 exactly three driveways, eight houses.
23:02:17 So the parking is all on the street.
23:02:20 The street is little.
23:02:21 It's, you know, just a small street.
23:02:24 And on the other side of the street there's only two
23:02:26 driveways, and that's in front of those three
23:02:34 So there is no parking on Beach Street as it is.
23:02:36 The postman, I have been on the phone with the postman
23:02:39 and the police for a month now, because the postman
23:02:43 does not have to deliver the mail unless he can drive
23:02:45 up to the mailbox.
23:02:47 Well, he can't drive up to the mailbox because they
23:02:50 are parking along the street.
23:02:52 There's nowhere else to park.
23:02:53 So to make an ingress and egress on Beach Street would
23:03:00 certainly make a lot of congested cars in there.
23:03:04 I mean, it would be a bigger mess than it already is.
23:03:07 And it's already a big mess, because her building is
23:03:13 Going to be beautiful, now.
23:03:14 And it will add a lot to the neighborhood.
23:03:16 Because those houses are all under -- they should be
23:03:20 under code enforcement.
23:03:22 They have holes.
23:03:22 They need patching.
23:03:23 They are falling down.
23:03:24 They have poles sitting in the yard.
23:03:29 I knew what the neighborhood was when I moved there.
23:03:32 I cleaned up my house, to the very best of my ability.
23:03:38 I followed code.
23:03:38 I have done everything according to code including
23:03:43 The house is 105 years old.
23:03:45 So I brought in a man from out of town to put 20 piers
23:03:49 underneath my house.
23:03:50 Not exactly a cheap thing.
23:03:53 Then I painted.
23:03:54 I lifted the ceilings back up to 10 feet, because they
23:03:57 were lower because cheap plastic stuff down to
23:04:02 whatever it was.
23:04:03 So I have put a lot of money, a lot of time, a lot of
23:04:07 prayer, a lot of blood, sweat and tears into this
23:04:11 And I got to keep what is residential, residential.
23:04:16 I would not like to see ingress and egress on Beach
23:04:21 Street because we don't have the space for it.
23:04:30 I certainly back up Ms. Vivian Tripp because she's
23:04:34 been there 41 years and she's the one person that
23:04:37 keeps her yard immaculate and goes out of her way to
23:04:41 keep the neighborhood nice.
23:04:42 But I definitely hope that you will have code
23:04:44 enforcement come over and do their job.
23:04:46 Thank you.
23:04:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
23:04:54 >>> Yes.
23:04:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The driveway that you're talking
23:04:58 about, is that the one where they were planning to put
23:05:01 the dumpster?
23:05:03 >>> I'm not sure where they are putting the dumpster.
23:05:05 You said on the north side of the building?
23:05:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
23:05:08 >>> Where is the dumpster?
23:05:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Because we're talking about ingress or
23:05:14 egress on Beach Street.
23:05:16 >>> That's what I'm concerned with is the traffic and
23:05:18 the dumpster.
23:05:19 >> The dumpster is required.
23:05:21 >>> Yeah.
23:05:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask staff a question?
23:05:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: You certainly may.
23:05:28 >>> I'm fine with that.
23:05:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did staff say that -- planning
23:05:35 staff say that they wanted the access point to the
23:05:38 parking lot on the south side to be closer to Howard?
23:05:43 >>> Well, I believe you mentioned Howard and beach.
23:05:47 Am I right?
23:05:51 That's way want to know.
23:05:52 >>TONY GARCIA: Listened to her concern.
23:05:57 I talked with Ms. Calloway, and Ms. Calloway needs at
23:06:01 least 40 feet from the street.
23:06:02 So I think we can meet a negotiated agreement on where
23:06:06 the ingress-egress is on the plan.
23:06:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wasn't it supposed to be closer to
23:06:11 Howard so it would are more directly across?
23:06:15 >>> You will have an interface with the existing
23:06:17 structure there. I think she made a recommendation
23:06:19 maybe that the short ingress-egress for the southern
23:06:22 parking lot, if it could line up to where probably
23:06:26 your access point would be for the dumpster, that
23:06:28 would probably work out much better.
23:06:30 >> Which would move at way from the houses?
23:06:32 >>> So will be negotiated --
23:06:36 >>> Well, if she could put the dumpster behind the
23:06:37 The dumpster is no long area problem.
23:06:39 The problem is the ingress and egress off Beach
23:06:42 >>TONY GARCIA: Right.
23:06:45 Which is here.
23:06:46 And we are talking about --
23:06:51 >>> Where are you going to put the ingress and egress,
23:06:53 off Howard?
23:06:55 >>TONY GARCIA: Up here.
23:07:03 There was no parking on Beach Street.
23:07:09 Little a little narrow street. The only thing I'm
23:07:12 asking for is no ingress or egress on Beach Street.
23:07:17 Thank you.
23:07:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
23:07:25 >>> Joe Robinson.
23:07:26 2338 Palmetto street.
23:07:31 Been West Tampa household since 1962, 44 years, longer
23:07:36 than anybody speaking.
23:07:37 And I hate to disagree with 'em.
23:07:40 And I'm going to tell you why.
23:07:41 Number one, they don't know what they are talking
23:07:43 Number two, I own more property around there than any
23:07:46 of them do. Number 3, I been over there saving West
23:07:51 They want about egress and parking lot.
23:07:56 No trees, no landscape, a chain link fence right now
23:07:59 violating code and it's got a CO right now, the Centro
23:08:03 Espanol in West Tampa.
23:08:06 This is a project that must go forward.
23:08:07 This is not a project that we need to worry about, old
23:08:11 West Tampa, who got notice, because I checked the
23:08:13 It was sent to Ms. McCray.
23:08:16 She didn't get it to them, too bad.
23:08:18 People know what's going on in that building.
23:08:20 They don't speak for all the neighborhood.
23:08:22 I own a quarter block with the Centro Espanol
23:08:25 including a house next to Ms. Triplet who continually
23:08:29 gives me harassment, okay?
23:08:31 The other issue is the dumpster is on an enclosed
23:08:35 You're not going to see it.
23:08:37 They are only going to pick it up maybe twice week.
23:08:39 And it's on Beach Street where you already have
23:08:44 I didn't move there yesterday.
23:08:45 I didn't move then they're ten years ago.
23:08:47 I been there all my life and I'm gonna die there, so
23:08:50 for these people to say this is not something we
23:08:53 need -- the Golden Nugget was a drug hole, the Golden
23:08:56 Nugget had people get killed, the Golden Nugget had a
23:09:00 wet zoning.
23:09:01 They don't have that anymore.
23:09:03 She's not taling about bringing any alcohol.
23:09:05 They are talking more landscape than a lot than people
23:09:08 play football on.
23:09:09 Then four duplexes before you ever get to her property
23:09:13 and between her property line and her house is another
23:09:16 So she has plenty of buffering.
23:09:18 She almost had so much buffering she didn't get
23:09:20 I didn't get any notice.
23:09:21 Because I'm not within 250 feet.
23:09:23 I'm 258 feet so I didn't get notice but I know about
23:09:28 what's going on.
23:09:28 It was adequate signs put up there.
23:09:30 Everybody knows what's going on.
23:09:32 If they knew about it, the fact that people stole
23:09:34 something out of it, they knew that there was going to
23:09:36 be something there.
23:09:37 This is not the first time that people oppose that.
23:09:39 I don't think that this should be delayed.
23:09:41 It's already been on the table for years.
23:09:44 I think that the fact that we need the overlay people
23:09:49 that review it, the overlay, the people that review
23:09:53 every plan, going into West Tampa, I don't think
23:09:57 anybody here said they objected to the.
23:09:58 I think this is more of a personal thing, a personal
23:10:02 And if I continuously get harassed by Mrs. Vivian
23:10:07 Triplet I will sue her.
23:10:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Speak to the subject.
23:10:11 >>> We are talking about code enforcement.
23:10:13 >>GWEN MILLER: We are talking about harassment.
23:10:16 >>> When I hear people that have --
23:10:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Stick on the subject.
23:10:20 >>> Years and years in the neighborhood that Goetz get
23:10:21 something like this to come and then we come here
23:10:23 tonight, and then we hear about, oh, we need to do.
23:10:26 This I stay close than any of them.
23:10:28 And I own more property than any of them.
23:10:30 And I pay taxes more than any of them.
23:10:32 Eight On Your Side want to see this project go
23:10:34 forward, so help me God.
23:10:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
23:10:42 >>> Barbara baker 2802, from the hood and proud of it.
23:10:50 I have been sworn.
23:10:51 And I have been in the neighborhood for 17 years.
23:10:53 >> Is this part of rebuttal?
23:10:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It's part of rebuttal.
23:11:01 >>> Absolutely rebuttal.
23:11:02 First of all, I just want to start off and say I'm
23:11:17 absolutely baffled that I'm getting any resistance in
23:11:20 this community at all.
23:11:21 I bought this building seven years ago.
23:11:23 It was a drug hole.
23:11:25 It was an active brothel.
23:11:27 I personally had to clean up the mattresses and since
23:11:30 then I have had some of the female workers there come
23:11:33 back to me and ask me instead of putting an antique
23:11:37 mall in could they go back to work in what they
23:11:39 previously did?
23:11:40 I had cleaned up the building.
23:11:41 It is an absolute showcase.
23:11:46 We are hoping to have our CO within the next 60 days.
23:11:46 I am hoping to open the antique mall, Labor Day
23:11:49 I'm appalled at the people saying that I did not
23:11:52 notify them when I did.
23:11:54 I'm appalled that -- that's the reason Vivian has that
23:12:00 flier, I personally went door to door for four city
23:12:03 blocks around is the building to introduce myself,
23:12:05 long ago, on what I was doing, to try and make them a
23:12:08 part of it.
23:12:09 I have been a community leader there.
23:12:11 I have put hundreds of thousands of dollars into this
23:12:14 I put hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Morgan
23:12:17 cigar factory.
23:12:18 It's not only a historic landmark locally but
23:12:21 nationally in both cases.
23:12:23 I have every intention of moving forward nationally on
23:12:25 the gold Nugget.
23:12:26 I have gone to great lengths to restore it.
23:12:29 I won't even talk what it was.
23:12:31 I'm talking something that you will walk in and you
23:12:33 will think you're in a real 100-year-old general
23:12:37 I do design work for universal and Disney.
23:12:40 Half of you have been in my building to see, that I
23:12:43 don't know anything but quality.
23:12:45 So to sit here and argue that I am going to put a
23:12:47 stump sister -- dumpster and put a million dollars in
23:12:50 this building that this is even an issue, to sit here
23:12:52 and judge me when I invited you --
23:12:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Baker, talk to us.
23:12:57 >>> All right.
23:12:57 I invited her to come down to my building over a year
23:13:00 ago and find out who Barbara baker is and what I am
23:13:04 I am tired of these public forums of people
23:13:07 criticizing what I am doing.
23:13:08 I have been through vandalism, through criticism, and
23:13:11 all I tried to do is make this neighborhood better.
23:13:13 I started the Howard Avenue kids club eight years ago.
23:13:16 I have had over a thousand kids, and I spent every
23:13:21 damn dime of it. I have not asked for anything.
23:13:24 I have not asked for tax credits for doing any of it.
23:13:26 I do it because I care about these inner city kids and
23:13:28 street kids because I was a street kid.
23:13:30 I came from poverty.
23:13:31 I want to show these kids, you reach for the stars,
23:13:34 and you can accomplish things in life and that is what
23:13:36 I have done.
23:13:37 I have run over 65,000 promotions internationally from
23:13:40 the Morgan cigar factory.
23:13:42 I bought a multi-million dollar business 17 yourself
23:13:44 ago that's still going strong.
23:13:45 I made the commitment to stay in this community when I
23:13:48 could easily liquidate everything or going back to
23:13:53 California or whatever.
23:13:54 You know, I don't understand, people challenging me on
23:13:56 this when in all actuality I have been they should be
23:13:59 doing nothing but support meeting because I have done
23:14:01 nothing but raise the property values, probably 20,
23:14:04 $30,000, Vivian.
23:14:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Barbara, calm down.
23:14:09 >>> I know.
23:14:09 I will calm down but I am just over it.
23:14:11 I really am.
23:14:12 We have done everything to comply.
23:14:14 We have bent over backwards to do whatever it takes.
23:14:18 I will put a nursery in knew want me to. I want to
23:14:20 the look beautiful.
23:14:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No.
23:14:23 >>> Why go go to that expense and then worry about a
23:14:25 few trees?
23:14:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Barb remarks let us take our vote,
23:14:29 >>> I would like to submit what I am -- most of you
23:14:31 know because most of you everybody to my project.
23:14:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think we got your message.
23:14:36 I think the rest of the world got your message, too.
23:14:38 >>> As you said earlier, Mary, I am passionate.
23:14:41 And I really do want to see this work.
23:14:43 And this could make a difference in this community.
23:14:46 It will be precedent setting.
23:14:47 I am marketing it as a tourist attraction, people
23:14:50 coming from all over the State of Florida to visit.
23:14:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And we are the one that is care.
23:14:55 And we are the ones that are going to help do you
23:14:59 >>> I appreciate the support I can get this evening.
23:15:02 Thank you.
23:15:04 Can I submit these?
23:15:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Give them to our attorney.
23:15:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion to close.
23:15:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
23:15:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
23:15:12 (Motion carried).
23:15:13 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And I am going to read this.
23:15:15 >>ROSE FERLITA: I'm hopeful, now that everybody has
23:15:19 vented and they got all their neighborhood issues out,
23:15:23 maybe they'll all get along.
23:15:24 I don't know.
23:15:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I am going to go ahead and read this.
23:15:29 And Joe, I don't usually, you know, I'm not usually
23:15:34 with you but this time you did it.
23:15:36 Good guy.
23:15:38 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
23:15:40 vicinity of 2502 north Howard and 2302 west Beach
23:15:44 Street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
23:15:46 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
23:15:48 district classifications RS-50 residential single
23:15:50 family, CI commercial intensive, and PD, restaurant
23:15:54 bar -- no, we are not doing a restaurant bar.
23:15:59 Hold it.
23:16:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a new ordinance.
23:16:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Wait a minute.
23:16:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we just strike it?
23:16:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It's got restaurant and bar on this
23:16:19 Can you run upstairs?
23:16:22 >>ROSE FERLITA: Or we can continue this fight next
23:16:28 >>JULIA COLE: It's such a minor change.
23:16:36 Go ahead and change the ordinance and bring it back.
23:16:39 Go ahead since it's really --
23:16:45 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Providing an effective date.
23:16:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
23:16:47 I would like to say something.
23:16:48 Barbara, I only wish could you do for people what you
23:16:51 do for buildings. This place was such a negative,
23:16:54 miserable, unattractive, just blight on the
23:16:59 And it is turning into something that is such a gift
23:17:01 to the neighborhood.
23:17:02 And I'm very excited about what you are doing.
23:17:04 The Morgan cigar factory is gorgeous.
23:17:07 I wish that they hadn't torn the cigar factory down
23:17:10 across the street where you were making your parking
23:17:12 lot or you would probably do something with that too.
23:17:14 It's a pleasure to support this.
23:17:15 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
23:17:17 (Motion carried).
23:17:18 >>JULIA COLE: I want to clarify, the ordinance which I
23:17:24 submitted, the change, is to a PD mixed use.
23:17:29 It changes from a restaurant.
23:17:31 Just so you are aware of that.
23:17:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Receive and file.
23:17:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
23:17:42 >> Second.
23:17:42 (Motion carried).
23:17:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It's 11:15.
23:17:48 I have to go home.
23:17:51 It's 11:15.
23:17:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: (Off microphone)
23:18:24 The last meeting that we participate in tonight, I
23:18:35 want to personally thank him for the contribution he
23:18:37 made to making me feel welcome, to giving me the
23:18:41 background, and of my coming on board.
23:18:47 I want to say that it's a pleasure of working with
23:18:49 I want to thank him for all that he's done to help me
23:18:52 serve you better.
23:18:53 So very good.
23:18:55 >> Move to receive and file.
23:18:58 >> We've done it.
23:18:58 >>GWEN MILLER: We stand adjourned.
23:19:07 (Meeting adjourned at 11:19)