Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, June 8, 2006
6:00 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.

[Sounding gavel]
18:23:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Tampa City Council is now called to
18:23:07 order.
18:23:08 The chair will yield to Mr. John Dingfelder.
18:23:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
18:23:12 This evening it's my pleasure to introduce Scott Lewis
18:23:16 Handley to lead off the evening with some words of
18:23:19 wisdom, the president of Bayshore Beautiful homeowners
18:23:23 association.
18:23:23 We are so proud of all of our neighborhood association
18:23:25 whose really work diligently and successfully in an
18:23:27 effort to make our community the best county be.
18:23:30 Welcome to the podium.
18:23:32 We'll all rise.
18:23:33 And follow with the pledge of allegiance.
18:23:39 >> Smiles.
18:23:40 A smile costs nothing but gives much.
18:23:42 It enriches those who receive it without making poor
18:23:47 those who give it.
18:23:48 It takes but a moment, but the memory of it sometimes
18:23:52 lasts forever.
18:23:55 None is so rich or mighty that he can get along good
18:24:00 without it, and none is so poor that he can be made
18:24:04 rich by it.
18:24:05 A smile creates happiness in the home, fosters good
18:24:11 will in business, and it brings rest to the weary,
18:24:18 cheer to the discouraged, sunshine to the sad, and
18:24:25 antidote for trouble.
18:24:26 Yet it cannot be bought, begged, borrowed or stolen,
18:24:31 for it is something that is of no value to anyone
18:24:34 until it is given away.
18:24:36 Some people are too tired to give a smile.
18:24:39 Give them one of yours, as none needs a smile so much
18:24:43 as he who has no more to give.
18:24:47 (Pledge of Allegiance).
18:25:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Pat.
18:25:04 And we'll try our best.
18:25:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
18:25:07 We have several motions for continuance here, I
18:25:09 believe.
18:25:09 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
18:25:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I have to do something very
18:25:15 important.
18:25:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
18:25:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
18:25:20 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
18:25:23 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
18:25:24 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Thank you. The first request for a
18:25:28 continuance is item number 2, case number 0504.
18:25:32 You have received a letter from Mr. Gardner, the
18:25:35 petitioner's representative, requesting a continuance.
18:25:37 He's requested a continuance to January 11th,
18:25:40 2007.
18:25:41 They are trying to redesign the entire project and has
18:25:45 requested a large amount of time.
18:25:47 They have also voluntarily agreed to renotice for that
18:25:51 hearing.
18:25:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I believe Mr. Gardner is
18:25:55 present.
18:25:56 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Yes.
18:25:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Logistically and legally, if they
18:26:02 redesign and go to the whole project which would be
18:26:05 beyond the bounds of the -- possibly potentially
18:26:07 beyond the bounds of the original PD, would they need
18:26:12 to start over or what?
18:26:13 Mr. Gardner, feel free to enlighten us.
18:26:17 >> Truett Gardner, 101 South Franklin.
18:26:20 It would all be within the existing PD.
18:26:22 What we were doing before is just a portion of the PD
18:26:24 that was the surface parking lot. But this could
18:26:26 involve all of that.
18:26:29 >> All three buildings?
18:26:31 >>> Correct.
18:26:31 >> That would be great.
18:26:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt.

18:26:34 Was there an issue with regard to renotice?
18:26:37 >>> I talked to Heather before the hearing and agreed
18:26:40 to send a renotice.
18:26:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
18:26:44 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a request to continue to
18:26:46 January 11, 2007.
18:26:47 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
18:26:49 on that request for a continuance?
18:26:53 Very well.
18:26:54 >> Move the continuance to January 11th, 6 p.m.
18:26:58 >> Second.
18:26:58 (Motion carried).
18:26:59 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: The next item is number 4, file 647.
18:27:10 Mr. Lick mini requested a continuance to July
18:27:14 13th.
18:27:14 However, the petitioner just submitted a draft traffic
18:27:18 study and was not even a complete traffic study and
18:27:21 therefore the transportation division does not feel
18:27:23 like there's sufficient time to review.
18:27:25 Therefore, staff is requesting a continuance to August
18:27:27 17th.
18:27:33 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We submitted a draft,

18:27:36 transportation analysis, as a courtesy.
18:27:39 It's not supposed to substitute for that.
18:27:41 They had asked for 30 days.
18:27:44 We were anticipating having that within 30 days before
18:27:48 the 13th which still gives us a week or so to get
18:27:52 back to them.
18:27:54 In the event we don't do that, we would be coming to
18:27:56 you on the 13th and ask to continue that forward.
18:27:59 But if we could, we would like to hold the 13th
18:28:03 date.
18:28:03 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Do you have anything to add?
18:28:09 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
18:28:11 Yes.
18:28:14 I have been working with petitioner.
18:28:16 However, it's not sufficient time, July 13th.
18:28:20 It's just not sufficient enough for me.
18:28:22 That's why I would like to request August 22.
18:28:27 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Would anyone in the public like to
18:28:29 speak on item number 4, the request for a continuance?
18:28:33 Okay.
18:28:34 Mrs. Saul-Sena?
18:28:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We need our staff report.

18:28:40 So requesting --
18:28:43 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Withdraw the 13th.
18:28:46 >> Move to continue to August 17th.
18:28:50 >> Second.
18:28:50 (Motion carried).
18:28:50 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 5.
18:28:56 05-165.
18:28:58 The petitioner has requested that this item be
18:29:00 withdrawn.
18:29:03 >> Move to withdraw the item from the calendar.
18:29:06 >> Second.
18:29:06 (Motion carried).
18:29:07 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 8.
18:29:11 File Z 06-57.
18:29:14 This item needs to be continued due to the fact
18:29:17 there's a conflict with the Tampa comprehensive plan
18:29:19 and development of regional impact and these issues
18:29:22 need to be taken care of prior to any rezoning
18:29:24 hearing.
18:29:24 The first available date is August 17th.
18:29:34 >> So moved.

18:29:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe the representative from
18:29:37 petitioner is present.
18:29:38 I want to be clear this is a request from petitioner
18:29:41 so the record is clear.
18:29:42 Is that correct, Mr. Pressler?
18:29:49 >>> Yes.
18:29:50 We have been working with your staff and are both in
18:29:52 agreement for the continuance to the 17th.
18:29:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
18:29:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that
18:29:57 came to speak on item number 8 this evening?
18:29:59 Would you like to speak to the request for a
18:30:00 continuance?
18:30:01 Are you okay with that?
18:30:04 You're okay with it or you want to speak?
18:30:06 Come on.
18:30:09 Anyone else here that would like to speak on the
18:30:11 continuance on item number 8?
18:30:17 >> Christopher Martinez, I'm actually here on behalf
18:30:21 of my father-in-law, north 34th street, just
18:30:25 behind this.
18:30:29 We would like to nip this in the bud if we could and

18:30:32 say I don't think we need to have that gas station
18:30:34 there.
18:30:37 Beer and alcohol.
18:30:38 I don't know if you can see this.
18:30:40 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We need to stick to the continuance.
18:30:46 >>> In my mind, in the mind of the neighbors, we have
18:30:48 a petition, they don't need another gas station.
18:30:56 There's a Hess, there's a Citgo.
18:31:00 We can save a lot of time to the neighborhood and to
18:31:02 yourself ifs we just withdraw this right now.
18:31:05 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
18:31:09 All right.
18:31:10 We have a motion.
18:31:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move to continue this till August
18:31:16 17th at 6 p.m.
18:31:17 And I would just ask the petitioner, would you put up
18:31:22 a revised signage?
18:31:25 Would you have a problem with that?
18:31:31 >>> Making people aware it's the 17th?
18:31:34 >> Sure.
18:31:34 Because it's a long time off.
18:31:37 Whatever signage towed put up before, just change the

18:31:40 date.
18:31:43 >> So it will be a typical sign, 15 days prior to the
18:31:46 hearing.
18:31:46 Yes, sir.
18:31:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, just to inform the
18:31:51 gentleman, that there will be no formal notice other
18:31:53 than that, that the motion is to continue to the
18:31:56 August 17th.
18:31:57 You will not receive any other further notice.
18:32:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion.
18:32:02 We have a second.
18:32:03 All in favor of continuing the item to August 17 at
18:32:05 6 p.m., please say by saying Aye.
18:32:08 Motion carries.
18:32:10 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I'm going to skip down to the case
18:32:13 that accompanied this item, the wet zoning case, item
18:32:16 number 14, WZ 06-38.
18:32:19 And this is the same request for August 17th of
18:32:22 this year.
18:32:23 >> Same motion.
18:32:24 >> Motion and second to continue item number 14.
18:32:28 Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on the

18:32:29 request for continuance on that?
18:32:32 We take it you have the same opinion.
18:32:33 Thank you, sir.
18:32:35 All in favor of the motion please signify by saying
18:32:37 Aye.
18:32:38 Okay.
18:32:39 That will also be continued to August 17th at 6
18:32:42 p.m.
18:32:42 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 10.
18:32:45 Z 06-60.
18:32:46 Petitioner has requested a continuance till comments
18:32:52 from design review committee.
18:32:53 Therefore a request for continuance to August 17th
18:32:56 has been made.
18:32:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
18:32:59 I need to recuse myself from this project, and Mr.
18:33:04 Shelby indicated I need to remove myself even from a
18:33:07 continuance.
18:33:08 I have a relationship, business relationship with one
18:33:11 of the partners of this project.
18:33:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that
18:33:23 came to speak on item number 10?

18:33:26 Okay, very well.
18:33:28 >> Move to continue this till August 17th at 6
18:33:30 p.m.
18:33:30 >> Motion and second.
18:33:31 (Motion carried).
18:33:36 >> Item number 11 cannot be heard because no affidavit
18:33:40 was filed.
18:33:40 This is Z 06-21.
18:33:44 I made a note regarding a morning meeting.
18:33:46 But it became available for July 27th.
18:33:52 That case was not scheduled.
18:33:54 So therefore in order to keep it on an evening
18:33:56 meeting, the petitioner has requested July 27th
18:33:59 meeting.
18:34:00 In the evening.
18:34:02 >> Move to continue.
18:34:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Remove from the agenda and pay the
18:34:07 amendment fee and move to the that date, is that
18:34:11 correct?
18:34:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: There is not going to be any
18:34:14 testimony needed at this point.

18:34:16 We have a motion to remove from the agenda, the
18:34:21 amendment fee.
18:34:21 All in favor of that indicate by saying Aye.
18:34:26 (Motion carried).
18:34:27 >> July 27th.
18:34:29 6 p.m.
18:34:30 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: That concludes.
18:34:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have one housekeeping mat from
18:34:36 this morning to take care of.
18:34:37 File Z-06-19.
18:34:40 This was at 1005 West Platt street.
18:34:48 Mr. Dingfelder.
18:34:49 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the --
18:34:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, but I believe the public
18:34:53 hearing was not closed for that, if I understand
18:34:55 correctly.
18:34:56 If I recall correctly.
18:35:02 >> Move to send it to legal.
18:35:04 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I think you're right.
18:35:05 We didn't close the public hearing.
18:35:08 >> Move to close.
18:35:09 >> Second.

18:35:09 (Motion carried).
18:35:16 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
18:35:18 vicinity of 1005 West Platt street in the city of
18:35:21 Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section
18:35:22 1 from zoning district classification CG commercial
18:35:26 general to PD land development office providing an
18:35:28 effective date.
18:35:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
18:35:31 Discussion on the motion?
18:35:32 All in favor please signify by saying Aye.
18:35:35 Motion carries.
18:35:37 All right.
18:35:37 We are now on item number 1.
18:35:43 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
18:35:49 I did distribute a clean copy of the ordinance to each
18:35:54 of you and a substitute ordinance for the clerk.
18:36:13 Let me start by saying that this process has taken
18:36:18 approximately 20-some years.
18:36:22 The MPO, the corridor study completed August 2003,
18:36:28 analyzed the entire corridor, and gave various
18:36:34 streetscape and roadway improvements.
18:36:36 It's one of the graphics for the intersection of

18:36:38 Kennedy and Howard.
18:36:40 And they show the shape trees along the street.
18:36:47 They have to give a lot of -- bike lanes, pedestrian
18:36:55 routes, so forth, to create Kennedy as true pedestrian
18:36:58 corridor, make it more pedestrian friendly, beautify
18:37:03 the streetscaping.
18:37:05 What we did from that point, from August 2003, was
18:37:11 begin to workshop the ordinance, and in 2004, early
18:37:15 2005, we had several meetings at the Tampa Tribune
18:37:18 auditorium, and invited many stakeholders including
18:37:23 property owners along Kennedy Boulevard, neighborhood
18:37:25 associations, developers, and we had four public
18:37:30 meetings on that, and from there, you know there was a
18:37:34 lapse in time due to staff and land development.
18:37:36 We did develop the ordinance that's before you.
18:37:43 We have an artist rendering which was done by
18:37:45 Charlotte Heim, historic preservation office.
18:37:49 It's actually within the body of the ordinance, which
18:37:54 shows Kennedy, the sidewalk, the shade tree and the
18:38:02 lighting.
18:38:11 Running concurrently with this is a major resurfacing
18:38:14 project, the DOT is doing along Kennedy. The first

18:38:19 stage is from essentially from the bridge to woodland
18:38:23 Avenue which is one block west of MacDill, exactly
18:38:27 two and a half miles in a five mile segment.
18:38:29 And so you can see, we have the plans, the
18:38:33 construction plans in the office.
18:38:34 But this is what we went by through all the sections,
18:38:38 and through the typical cross section.
18:38:42 From the bridge to church Avenue, which is just west
18:38:44 of Dale Mabry, is an 80-foot right-of-way, and in the
18:38:47 Westshore section, west of church Avenue, it widens to
18:38:51 120-foot right-of-way.
18:38:53 And we tried to address various issues with utilities,
18:38:58 and building setbacks, and Wilson Stair and I worked
18:39:01 on some design elements and things, and we also
18:39:07 developed some graphics, which is probably the first
18:39:10 time we have done this to a great degree in our code.
18:39:16 To actually incorporate a streetscape plan view, which
18:39:20 shows a typical intersection, shows the sidewalks, the
18:39:25 tree placement, the lighting placement, it shows the
18:39:28 medium improvements, and this is taken directly from
18:39:30 the D.O.T. plans, and they are going -- D.O.T. is
18:39:36 going through and putting the brick banding in the

18:39:38 street, the side street.
18:39:40 They are also giving several hundred thousand dollars
18:39:44 to the Parks Department to view the banding of the
18:39:48 sidewalk.
18:39:49 They have given a very large grant for that. And this
18:39:51 shows varying buildings along the plan view.
18:39:55 Second, which shows the typical sidewalk, which is ten
18:40:04 feet, which shows the tree placements, the live oak
18:40:07 was chosen as the tree to provide shade, as the
18:40:13 corridor study shows, shade trees should be used along
18:40:15 the corridor, given that there really isn't any shade
18:40:18 out there now, and Wilson, Cathy Beck and I actually
18:40:25 took a walk downtown and Cathy Beck from the Parks
18:40:32 Department identified trees that are living in serious
18:40:35 drought situations.
18:40:36 We have several trees out there in downtown that are
18:40:38 not irrigated, that have pavement running right up to
18:40:40 the trunk, without greats or wells, that are doing
18:40:44 quite well.
18:40:44 We narrowed it down to the live oak.
18:40:46 Wilson does believe that it's a bulletproof tree and
18:40:53 he can give you more information on that.

18:40:54 But this shows the basic building placement in the
18:40:57 range of five to ten feet from the property line, and
18:41:01 the right-of-way line.
18:41:05 And streetscape lighting.
18:41:09 We originally had a traditional light, and working
18:41:13 with Wilson, and Joe Topf on that, and this is the
18:41:23 family -- this is the streetscape light.
18:41:28 The company was kind enough to take some photos along
18:41:31 the corridor and overlay their lights in the section.
18:41:37 So as you can see, this light blends in very well with
18:41:41 the old and the new.
18:41:52 >> So does that --
18:41:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Does that mean cot go either way,
18:41:56 the developer can put in one or the other or what?
18:42:02 >>> The way it's written in the ordinance is we --
18:42:05 there are alternatives, design equivalents.
18:42:09 We are not going to allow alternative lighting styles
18:42:11 necessarily.
18:42:13 But obviously if you can find that maintains this
18:42:22 character he may be able to approve that through an
18:42:24 alternative review.
18:42:27 Finally, the sidewalk detail specifications, Wilson

18:42:32 has drawn in when we first started this process, 14
18:42:36 feet on center and then brick along the curb line.
18:42:42 Really quick, I will walk you through -- there has
18:42:48 been some question as to why we chose tree placement
18:42:50 and light placement of what we get in the planned
18:42:54 view.
18:42:54 I do want to walk you through that briefly.
18:42:59 The cross section did show the typical 80-foot section
18:43:02 along the 80-foot section of Kennedy shows a 10-foot
18:43:08 border, at 24-foot lanes and a 12-foot center where
18:43:12 the turn lanes are.
18:43:14 Now, some of the sections in the construction plans
18:43:17 show the sidewalks can vary 13 or 14 feet from
18:43:20 property line to curb. The basic border is ten feet.
18:43:25 And what I did is I went to the water department.
18:43:32 Because utilities were a question.
18:43:33 Obviously, and Wilson can go further into the actual
18:43:38 requirements for these live oaks.
18:43:39 But when you plant these live oaks it takes up a lot
18:43:42 of spaces for referral.
18:43:46 Twice or three times the distance.
18:43:49 But you step out, so when I went to the water

18:43:54 department, I met with Tom over at the planning
18:43:58 section, and I pulled the atlases for this five-mile
18:44:02 section.
18:44:05 And in the five-mile section, you will note this is
18:44:08 the Hillsborough River, this is the bridge.
18:44:14 They had the water lines measured out from across the
18:44:17 line.
18:44:17 And along those sections, the water lines do run
18:44:20 towards the center of the road.
18:44:21 They are 26 and 28 feet out.
18:44:24 This Wednesday right here, as you will notice buff,
18:44:27 the building lines do come right up to the sidewalk.
18:44:29 Everything is pretty much built.
18:44:31 There's not much room.
18:44:32 Actually, go back and retrofit, what they placed in
18:44:35 there was palm trees.
18:44:42 We go to the next section from North Boulevard to
18:44:45 Moody Avenue.
18:44:46 This is pretty much the only section left, the section
18:44:50 that has the bridge.
18:44:51 Two-thirds of a mile, each section is a mile.
18:44:54 Two-thirds of this section, you will see the lines,

18:44:57 the water lines, and it is an 8-inch main, which is a
18:45:00 very large main.
18:45:03 The lines fit 28, 25, 20 and 30 feet off the parcel
18:45:08 line.
18:45:10 So pretty much in this segment, can go anywhere along
18:45:15 the sidewalk, against the curb or the property line.
18:45:18 But when you hit Albany Avenue -- west lawn Avenue,
18:45:25 eight feet.
18:45:26 From the parcel line which essentially as I showed you
18:45:29 before is called a ten-foot sidewalk.
18:45:31 So eight feet off the property line.
18:45:36 Just along the curb.
18:45:37 But what I did is Armenia, it's all eight feet, 7
18:45:49 feet, 6 feet.
18:45:50 Some sections have lines on both sides.
18:45:54 And then finally this is where the 120-foot section
18:45:57 comes in.
18:45:59 We are 8 feet on the north side.
18:46:02 Hubert Avenue is here.
18:46:03 The Westshore district.
18:46:07 Ten feet, all the way out to the end.
18:46:14 Going through the corridor plan that was done, looking

18:46:16 at the tree types, this is the tree that looks back
18:46:20 out for the design managers.
18:46:24 Looking at the historical development pattern, and
18:46:26 what buildings were coming in now, and trying to
18:46:29 create that chain of atmosphere, this is the plan we
18:46:34 came up with for the corridor.
18:46:38 If you have any questions.
18:46:39 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Questions?
18:46:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No questions?
18:46:53 >> I'll ask questions after.
18:46:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that
18:46:56 would like to speak on item number 1?
18:47:08 >>> As you guys probably are aware, Linda and I have
18:47:12 been pushing the Boulevard thing since 1988, I guess,
18:47:17 when we first got started on this.
18:47:19 As a matter of fact, when I was going through files
18:47:23 here I looked and I found something kind of funny
18:47:26 here.
18:47:28 There was article 1 of many back from that day.
18:47:34 Yeah, this is how long it's been since we started
18:47:36 working on it.
18:47:41 Linda looks pretty much exactly the same.

18:47:45 It's probably been more difficult on me.
18:47:48 With that said, you know, we are excited that it may
18:47:53 be finally moving forward and coming what we have been
18:47:56 hoping for, for such a long time.
18:47:59 Although I am here to ask you not to approve the
18:48:02 ordinance this evening.
18:48:04 There's some issues with it that I really would like
18:48:06 us to have a little more time with.
18:48:09 I know we have already continued it a couple of times.
18:48:11 But there's some real important aspects of this that I
18:48:14 think we need to address before moving forward.
18:48:18 And the tree issue is still, I think, a really
18:48:20 critical one.
18:48:21 Since we started this, I have kind of become a
18:48:27 Boulevard streetscape geek and have just, I mean, gone
18:48:31 to hundreds and hundreds of Boulevards on every
18:48:35 continent except Africa and Antarctica, and
18:48:40 photographed and sketched and paced them off and drawn
18:48:43 all these things and analyzed them.
18:48:45 And the tree placement is absolutely the most critical
18:48:48 part of this.
18:48:49 When you go to all the books on streetscape design,

18:48:53 the first thing that's talked about is the tree
18:48:55 location.
18:48:55 And understand we have some issues here with these
18:48:57 water lines.
18:48:59 But to just automatically say, okay, we are just going
18:49:02 to put all the trees off the right-of-way, onto
18:49:06 private property, minimum of 12 feet, in some cases
18:49:09 it's oaf 20 feet from the edge of pavement, that
18:49:11 really contradicts not only tradition but really just
18:49:16 good streetscape urban design.
18:49:17 And I think we can move these things closer, we can
18:49:21 compromise between where the water lines are and where
18:49:23 the trees go to really make this a vibrant kind of
18:49:26 pedestrian place we want.
18:49:27 I don't think that far from the edge of pavement, we
18:49:33 are not going to get what we all want.
18:49:36 And if it takes a couple weeks to figure these things
18:49:40 out, 100 years from now, a couple more weeks or month,
18:49:42 really isn't going to matter, I don't think.
18:49:45 So in addition to the trees, I think there's a couple
18:49:48 other issues.
18:49:49 There's a couple contradictions in the code.

18:49:51 There's some issues that Michelini and I don't agree
18:49:54 with.
18:49:54 I think 30% along the street is way too low.
18:49:59 I think real true pedestrian Boulevard has a lot more
18:50:02 than 30% transparent fee.
18:50:05 Howard Avenue is 50.
18:50:06 And personally --
18:50:08 >> What does that mean?
18:50:09 >>> How much lot, how much sidewalk.
18:50:14 How much solid.
18:50:15 And 30% glass only is 70% solid wall.
18:50:18 That's just not a very pedestrian friendly
18:50:20 environment.
18:50:20 I really think that needs to be changed.
18:50:24 And an issue that could be changed later.
18:50:26 There are a lot of little issues that like that I
18:50:29 think need to be addressed.
18:50:30 The little contradiction in there is that --
18:50:40 >>SHAWN HARRISON: You have another minute.
18:50:42 >>> Well, just some min issues that I really think,
18:50:45 and I know Cathy and everybody are jam-packed,
18:50:48 swamped, but I think if we really sit down, just one

18:50:51 of two more meetings, we can get a lot of these issues
18:50:53 resolved and get the ordinance right so we don't have
18:50:56 to fuss with it, and it can be something that we can
18:50:59 have the Boulevard for 100 years and not worry about
18:51:02 it.
18:51:02 Thank you.
18:51:03 >> Thank you.
18:51:05 Anyone else?
18:51:10 >>> Steve Mick lien, also asking that you not pass
18:51:13 this on first reading this evening.
18:51:15 There are some tweaking things that have to occur in
18:51:17 here.
18:51:19 We are very supportive of the Kennedy Boulevard
18:51:20 overlay program.
18:51:21 I think it has a lot of merit.
18:51:24 It will help a lot.
18:51:28 In anticipation of this code, we started complying
18:51:31 with it, started implementing some of the
18:51:34 recommendations.
18:51:34 But there's some issues in here that have to be worked
18:51:37 out.
18:51:37 And I think there are some design matrix problems, as

18:51:41 Joe pointed out, between dimensional issues that are
18:51:44 reflected here, that trees can be no further than the
18:51:46 buildings, no further than that.
18:51:48 And I think some of the -- the placement of the
18:51:52 building versus the placement of the trees are
18:51:53 probably in conflict, where it can't be more than ten
18:51:57 feet setback, where the trees have to be 12 feet, and
18:52:00 some things like that.
18:52:01 There's also a provision in here, although the
18:52:03 development people don't mind paying for the light,
18:52:05 but this code transfers the responsibility of
18:52:08 maintenance to the property owner.
18:52:11 TECO has an agreement with the city to maintain those
18:52:14 lights.
18:52:16 It's going to be very difficult to try to
18:52:18 administer -- trying one property manager that they
18:52:21 have to maintain a light, and not knowing who is going
18:52:24 to be doing what.
18:52:26 That's part of the agreement they have with the city.
18:52:29 And use the rights-of-way.
18:52:34 Cathy pointed out right-of-way. The right-of-way
18:52:35 extends to the sidewalks.

18:52:36 And we pushed buildings up the sidewalk in some cases
18:52:41 in anticipation of trying to present that program edge
18:52:44 that we talked about so much.
18:52:46 And incorporating thousands -- houses and things like
18:52:50 that. I think it goes a long way toward accomplishing
18:52:53 what we want it to be.
18:52:54 It just needs a little help.
18:52:56 It's also requiring full landscape plan to be
18:52:58 submitted.
18:53:00 For rezoning.
18:53:00 I don't think that you should be required to put a
18:53:03 full landscape plan together for consideration.
18:53:06 You need a conceptual plan.
18:53:08 The permitting and the actual placement really has to
18:53:11 be coordinated with the utility company and other
18:53:13 things.
18:53:17 You can't have substantial deviations.
18:53:21 Joe and I have been talking about the percentage of
18:53:24 the building to reach a happy medium and those kinds
18:53:27 of things.
18:53:28 We also have in here the towers and things have to be
18:53:33 screened, the architectural features of a building,

18:53:37 and there's other things in here that there are no
18:53:44 options -- or few options for consideration.
18:53:47 There's identification that you have reasonable
18:53:49 alternatives.
18:53:50 But in some cases no options for some of the
18:53:55 categories.
18:53:55 I think that ought to be included in there.
18:53:59 They have a building setback line established 5 feet,
18:54:03 10 feet maximum.
18:54:04 I think we ought to include building averaging on the
18:54:06 setbacks as well, because you run into the same
18:54:10 problems when you start establishing absolutes, when
18:54:13 other buildings don't have the same flexibility
18:54:15 because they are existing.
18:54:16 You have one building pushed up and others pushed back
18:54:20 and it makes no sense to have the buildings go jogging
18:54:23 in and out.
18:54:24 The same problem we had on Howard Avenue.
18:54:29 There's some other things in here, things like use of
18:54:32 covered block on fences, it says you will have
18:54:36 unpainted or unfinished block.
18:54:38 You can have unfinished block that's textured and

18:54:41 colored not provided for.
18:54:43 One last point.
18:54:43 The fencing is adjacent to residential areas, limit of
18:54:48 6 feet.
18:54:49 Many people have come before us with -- we are coming
18:54:53 to you with projects asking for 8-foot masonry wall.
18:54:58 They are saying you can't do that there.
18:55:00 I think there ought to be some lights provided.
18:55:08 I just think it would be best to continue it.
18:55:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone else that -- from
18:55:14 the public that would like to speak on item number 1?
18:55:17 >>> Steve Brennan, do you need my address?
18:55:21 >> Yes, please.
18:55:23 >>> Tampa City Center, across the street.
18:55:31 I've worked with your staff over the last few months
18:55:34 on some issues in this ordinance.
18:55:38 I want to thank your staff for their consideration and
18:55:44 their willingness to listen.
18:55:45 I think the project is a good one.
18:55:47 I hope the realization is good and something we can
18:55:53 all appreciate.
18:55:56 If this continues at the rate it seems to be going

18:55:59 forward, we will probably see it sooner rather than
18:56:02 later.
18:56:02 But I support it.
18:56:06 I hope it winds upcoming to reality.
18:56:09 And again I'd like to thank the staff for being
18:56:12 flexible on some issues.
18:56:14 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, sir.
18:56:15 Is there anyone else that would like to speak on item
18:56:17 number 1?
18:56:19 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:56:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
18:56:23 I can't express how happy I am with this and how
18:56:26 frustrated I am that it's taken so long and it's still
18:56:30 not exactly right.
18:56:33 I want to publicly say that they have given personally
18:56:39 hundreds of hours to making it a grand, wonderful
18:56:43 Boulevard.
18:56:43 And this isn't what it needs to be.
18:56:46 But I want to work on it some more because there are
18:56:52 some people from the projects, and you have some
18:56:54 things that need changing, Mr. Michelini does, there
18:56:58 are some things I would like to see changed.

18:57:01 I'm afraid if we put it off it will get lost in the
18:57:05 queue of things.
18:57:06 I have a commitment from Cindy Miller that after this
18:57:08 is adopted we will immediately work with the other
18:57:11 departments to see what changes we can make as far as
18:57:15 the tree placement.
18:57:16 Because I agree with you, Joe, the tree placement is
18:57:20 absolutely the defining part of the grand boulevard
18:57:23 and what we have here is not right.
18:57:25 But I am so frustrated that it's taken this long I
18:57:32 want to go ahead with it.
18:57:34 I wish I was feeling exultant but I'm not.
18:57:38 I'm feeling very compromised.
18:57:40 I feel I would rather get this done in 20 years and by
18:57:44 20.5 have something right than continue with what we
18:57:48 have now which is absolutely no design.
18:57:50 So based on that I would like to move it.
18:57:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: You want to move the ordinance?
18:57:58 >>> I want to move the ordinance.
18:58:00 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion on item number 1.
18:58:02 Is there a second?
18:58:04 >> Second.

18:58:05 >>SHAWN HARRISON: A second by Mrs. Alvarez.
18:58:07 Discussion on the motion?
18:58:08 >> Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida,
18:58:24 chapter 27 zoning City of Tampa code of ordinances
18:58:31 creating section 27-468, Kennedy Boulevard corridor
18:58:35 district development design standards, providing for
18:58:38 severability, providing for repeal of all ordinances
18:58:40 in conflict, providing an effective date.
18:58:44 >>KEVIN WHITE: I am going to support the moving of the
18:58:46 ordinance.
18:58:47 And I think you were there, the swing supporting this.
18:58:55 And I realize that you wanted to hold off on this.
18:58:58 But when you say from 1988, I think it's time that we
18:59:03 move forward with something rather than keep something
18:59:09 had that's been almost 20 years in the making and I
18:59:12 think it's time we start moving forward and we can
18:59:14 make modifications as we progress at this point in
18:59:17 time rather than to continue continuing the item.
18:59:21 So I will be in full support of moving this forward,
18:59:23 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:59:24 And your picture looked great.
18:59:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Any further discussion on item

18:59:29 number 1?
18:59:30 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
18:59:32 Opposed?
18:59:33 Motion carries.
18:59:39 If there's anyone in the public that wishes to speak
18:59:41 on any of our public hearings, and the only ones we
18:59:45 have left now are 3, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 13.
18:59:51 Please stand and raise your right hand to be sworn.
18:59:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all written communications
19:00:13 that have been available to from the public at council
19:00:17 offices be received and filed into the record at this
19:00:19 time.
19:00:24 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Need a motion to receive and file.
19:00:25 (Motion carried).
19:00:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If any member of City Council has had
19:00:29 any verbal communication was any petitioner, his or
19:00:32 her representative, or any members of the public in
19:00:34 connection with any of tonight's hearings, please
19:00:36 disclose the identity of the group, or entity with
19:00:38 whom the verbal communication occurred, and the
19:00:40 substance of the verbal communication prior to your
19:00:43 vote, and please, ladies and gentlemen, when you state

19:00:47 your name, please affirm for the record, state that
19:00:48 you have been sworn.
19:00:50 Thank you.
19:00:51 That will speed things along.
19:00:53 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: land development.
19:00:55 I have been sworn.
19:00:55 The subject property is located at 2902 west union
19:00:59 street at the corner of Habana and union right across
19:01:02 from the Speedline athletic wear facility,
19:01:07 commercially intensive.
19:01:10 The parking lot that they are using now is zoned
19:01:12 RM-16.
19:01:13 As you may know, parking is not allowed without a
19:01:19 special use approval in RM-16 so therefore they were
19:01:23 cited by the code enforcement division.
19:01:26 Both union street and north Habana contain 48 spaces,
19:01:32 the additional storage site and let me show you.
19:01:38 This is the existing site.
19:01:41 This is the storage building.
19:01:42 And you can see even though it's RM-16 residential
19:01:46 multifamily zone district it is multifamily --
19:01:56 single-family.

19:01:58 Due to the locations of the existing storage building,
19:02:01 a five foot buffer, 6-foot fence is providing a --
19:02:05 provided along the boundary line to residential
19:02:08 property along the south.
19:02:13 The petitioner has requested a couple of waivers. And
19:02:17 those waivers include access to a local street because
19:02:20 one of the driveways is to union which is a local
19:02:23 street.
19:02:23 A 7-foot buffer versus 8-foot buffer.
19:02:28 And also small reduced buffer of 8 feet between the
19:02:32 residential property and the subject property versus a
19:02:37 15-foot buffer.
19:02:41 The objections were technical in nature and have all
19:02:44 been addressed.
19:02:45 Therefore staff has no objections.
19:02:46 That concludes staff comments.
19:02:49 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Planning Commission?
19:02:50 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:02:53 I have been sworn in.
19:02:55 Future land use category in the area, the subject land
19:02:59 use designation were 20 to medium mixed use to the
19:03:03 east side of north Habana, on the southwest corner of

19:03:08 union street and Habana, and parking for the primary
19:03:12 use which is directly to the north over here which is
19:03:15 the designation of commercial 24.
19:03:20 Parking for this particular site, impact of
19:03:26 surrounding residential area.
19:03:27 Planning Commission staff has no objection to the
19:03:29 proposed request.
19:03:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:03:32 Petitioner?
19:03:39 Steve Michelini.
19:03:40 Basically, we are trying to clean up an existing
19:03:42 nonconforming use.
19:03:44 It's been there for many, many years.
19:03:46 At least 20 years that I know of.
19:03:48 And it's a very passive use, a daytime use principally
19:03:56 and when it's not in use it's a vacant and open area.
19:04:00 Basically, we were just trying to clean up an existing
19:04:04 nonconform use, request your approval.
19:04:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Michelini, on Habana Avenue
19:04:13 south, going from your property line, and then there's
19:04:15 a sidewalk, and then something.
19:04:19 It's before you get to Habana, before you get to the

19:04:21 curb.
19:04:22 I don't know if it's a grassy area or dirt or what.
19:04:26 It looks like there might be an opportunity to put
19:04:32 some trees in the city right-of-way.
19:04:38 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I don't mind putting them there but
19:04:40 it's very close to that intersection.
19:04:41 When you come off from the intersection.
19:04:44 And transportation is not going to allow us to put
19:04:48 trees near that intersection.
19:04:49 But we have agreed to put the trees along and outside
19:04:54 of the view triangle.
19:04:58 >> Is this part of the site plan?
19:05:00 >>> That's just part of the requirement we'll have to
19:05:02 go through in permitting.
19:05:04 >> Putting them in the right-of-way or on your
19:05:08 property?
19:05:08 >>> Beck put them on the right-of-way if you like.
19:05:11 It has to be outside of the view triangle.
19:05:14 >> I'm just saying if there's an opportunity to put in
19:05:16 the city right-of-way, and help landscape the street a
19:05:20 little bit, then why don't we do that?
19:05:23 >>> Add a note that requires trees maybe in the

19:05:25 right-of-way, outside of the view triangle?
19:05:31 >> If it's allowable by transportation.
19:05:33 >>> If it's outside the true vie triangle and meets
19:05:37 the technical standards, we don't have any problem
19:05:39 with that.
19:05:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA:
19:05:46 >>> We were trying to keep it as a wooden fence that
19:05:48 would be wooden in nature.
19:05:50 We thought about masonry wall but there are no masonry
19:05:53 walls probably within a mile or half a mile from
19:05:56 there.
19:05:56 And it would be obtrusive.
19:05:58 It would be at a scale with the residential area that
19:06:01 surrounds it.
19:06:02 So you're trying to keep it very low key, and wooden
19:06:05 fence.
19:06:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that
19:06:11 would like to speak on item 3?
19:06:13 >> Move to close.
19:06:14 >> Second.
19:06:14 (Motion carried).
19:06:15 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance rezoning property in

19:06:25 the general vicinity of 2902 west union street in the
19:06:28 city of Tampa, Florida more particularly described in
19:06:30 section 1 from zoning district classifications RM-16
19:06:34 residential multifamily to PD planned development,
19:06:37 off-street commercial parking, lot and enclosed
19:06:40 storage, providing an effective date.
19:06:41 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
19:06:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Shelby asked me to confirm on
19:06:51 the record.
19:06:53 >>> We had a note regarding --
19:06:58 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: There was one tree for every 20 feet
19:07:01 there, busy?
19:07:04 There's standard on a streetscape.
19:07:08 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Chairman.
19:07:09 I have a question.
19:07:10 I know that your accommodating the request of Mr.
19:07:12 Dingfelder.
19:07:13 But in terms of the trees that you're planting and
19:07:15 where you are planting them, whatever he wants you to
19:07:17 do, Steve, it's not going to be something that's going
19:07:20 to be under --
19:07:23 >>> A power line.

19:07:24 We are talking about the required trees, not
19:07:26 additional trees beyond what we are required to do.
19:07:31 >>ROSE FERLITA: It's not going to create a problem
19:07:33 under power lines.
19:07:34 >>> The required trees.
19:07:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If it's underlines change the
19:07:43 variety of trees.
19:07:45 >>> Mary Daniel.
19:07:46 The required trees are required to be placed on the
19:07:48 lot, vis-a-vis additional trees.
19:07:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: No one had agreed to the planting of
19:07:57 additional trees, other than what was required.
19:08:02 But that's really between you and traffic at this
19:08:04 point.
19:08:04 That's what the site plan says.
19:08:08 >>> Right.
19:08:08 Mr. Dingfelder asked if we would put in the
19:08:12 right-of-way.
19:08:13 We said yes.
19:08:13 But that would be for the ones in the site putting
19:08:16 them in the right-of-way.
19:08:18 >> So long as it --

19:08:22 >>> W transportation, the view triangle.
19:08:24 >> Just for clarification, I think they would be safer
19:08:27 out there on the right-of-way.
19:08:29 And they give more to the community if they are out
19:08:32 there on the right-of-way.
19:08:33 In this case --
19:08:36 >>> Mary Daniel, land development.
19:08:39 The city is required to maintain trees on the
19:08:43 right-of-way.
19:08:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I understand.
19:08:48 Ding.
19:08:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
19:08:50 Any further discussion?
19:08:51 (Motion carried)
19:08:54 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
19:08:57 I have been sworn.
19:08:59 The subject property is located at 3818 Ridge Avenue.
19:09:06 This was heard previously on April 13th, involves
19:09:09 property that is Ridge Avenue on the east.
19:09:18 It has a couple of PDs in the area for single family
19:09:21 residential and multifamily residential in the
19:09:24 northern portion of the neighborhood.

19:09:25 And there is a commercial general.
19:09:32 The petitioner is reflect the build the property for 3
19:09:36 detached single family dwelling units, and 411,145
19:09:44 square feet, and 12,045 square feet.
19:09:47 The building as proposed that fronts bridge Avenue
19:09:51 with setback 20 feet so maintain the same street
19:09:54 setback as other buildings in that streetscape, and
19:09:57 the buildings will be set back 30 feet from the enter
19:10:00 line of the access drive.
19:10:01 The rear buildings will be approximately set back --
19:10:06 I'm sorry, set back from the rear property line
19:10:08 approximately 70 feet away from the high water line.
19:10:12 Due to potential flooding, the residences will be
19:10:15 constructed above grade, only utilitarian functions on
19:10:19 grade.
19:10:19 There is only one remaining objection with reference
19:10:22 to this particular petition.
19:10:24 And that is with reference to the transportation
19:10:27 technical standards, and the access drive.
19:10:30 There was a question with reference to TECO, and
19:10:34 TECO's ability to service that given the drive
19:10:37 profile, and the petitioner approached TECO, it was

19:10:42 confirmed, got a letter from TECO to staff that that
19:10:45 would be serviceable.
19:10:46 And that they had that provision on that property.
19:10:51 That concludes staff comments.
19:10:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
19:10:55 In looking at this at ridge, there isn't an elevation,
19:11:04 it's going to be a front door to make it look normal.
19:11:08 I don't care so much about the houses back by the
19:11:11 river but the one on the street that's set 20 feet
19:11:13 back, do we know if there's like a front door so it
19:11:16 will look normal?
19:11:21 >>> I'll have the petitioner pass the elevation as
19:11:23 round again.
19:11:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Planning Commission?
19:11:26 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:11:31 I have been sworn in.
19:11:32 These were technical issues that required this to be
19:11:35 continued.
19:11:35 Planning Commission stands by its original finding of
19:11:38 consistency to the comprehensive plan on the project.
19:11:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:11:43 Petitioner?

19:11:47 >>> Eddie Diaz, west Mississippi Avenue.
19:11:50 Yes, I have been sworn in.
19:11:52 I just would appreciate a few seconds to refresh
19:11:57 everybody's memory.
19:11:59 So it was 12:30 at night the last time we met.
19:12:05 I didn't bring my pillow this time but I thought about
19:12:07 it.
19:12:07 I wanted to ask that we address the issues that were
19:12:11 immediately addressed, and I'll get into further
19:12:14 detail.
19:12:15 At the time, there was questions about whether or not
19:12:17 we had met with the homeowners association.
19:12:21 I had a letter from them.
19:12:26 I think it was four days later, they had an
19:12:29 association meeting at the Franciscan center and we
19:12:34 did meet approximately 50, 60 people there. There are
19:12:37 actually some of the people in the audience that had
19:12:38 been there.
19:12:39 Unfortunately the homeowners association president, I
19:12:41 guess, couldn't make it and we had asked him to be
19:12:43 here.
19:12:44 He said he was but obviously I guess he was not able

19:12:47 to be here.
19:12:47 So we did, and we have addressed that concern.
19:12:51 The other concerns that is probably the most, that
19:12:58 basically is now your decision, relates to the
19:13:03 driveways, and the city transportation classified this
19:13:09 as a subdivision due to the fact that it's three
19:13:13 residential units, and if it was two it would be
19:13:16 considered a private driveway.
19:13:21 I have some pictures that I would like to present to
19:13:23 you, that would possibly clarify pre-approved sites
19:13:32 that were not doing any more, any less than what you
19:13:36 guys have approved previously.
19:13:46 You want me to get a picture up here.
19:13:49 I feel like a bureaucrat.
19:13:50 I like paperwork. I'll use this one as an example.
19:13:51 Immediately to the south of me is Kate circle. Can
19:14:12 they zoom in up there?
19:14:14 I don't know if they can.
19:14:15 Anyway, this is the circle, right here, this driveway,
19:14:22 comes back and services three lots in the rear.
19:14:25 And then it exists out Indiana which is right here ^
19:14:37 So basically that is basically this private road here.

19:14:45 And it is only ten foot in width.
19:14:49 And that comes in off of Indiana where it's actually
19:14:56 the exit, and this is the entrance off of Ridge
19:14:59 Avenue.
19:15:02 Unfortunately I didn't get a good shot of that.
19:15:04 The other subject property, I didn't have an aerial to
19:15:07 present you, it was on the intersection of MLK, right
19:15:11 at the bottom of the bridge, the arena developed back
19:15:17 quite a few years ago.
19:15:18 And I'll present this photo, a ten-foot driveway that
19:15:24 services six residents.
19:15:26 And has no other issues.
19:15:30 So again, I realize this is history.
19:15:32 And I'm here today asking for a request to pass the PD
19:15:39 in order to be able to build what I hope you remember
19:15:43 as -- my sister and brother-in-law got the property.
19:15:51 With that, what I would like to do is show you some of
19:15:56 my support.
19:15:58 I have my supporters here this evening.
19:16:00 It would probably be easier for me to explain.
19:16:08 This is Ridge Avenue.
19:16:12 Miss Ann Compton, she is my need neighborhood to the

19:16:17 north.
19:16:21 Matt Powell is my immediate neighbor to the south.
19:16:26 Matt.
19:16:32 Again I have letters of support of everybody that you
19:16:35 see here, except for these people I haven't talked to.
19:16:39 They didn't sign it.
19:16:39 And these people here were not living there at the
19:16:43 time.
19:16:43 They were renting it.
19:16:44 I also have -- because I want to cover all my bases.
19:16:50 We went across the river, so that the person that has
19:16:52 to view the back of these houses.
19:16:57 Michelle, raise your hand.
19:16:58 And she's also here in support of this project.
19:17:07 We had an additional question, I believe, by Ms.
19:17:10 Desiree Valdez, we addressed that with her, dealing
19:17:13 with the 20-foot off the street.
19:17:15 We made sure it met that requirement.
19:17:17 So outside of anything new, I believe I have covered
19:17:21 all my bases.
19:17:22 The only decision from your point is whether you would
19:17:25 allow me to build my project.

19:17:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:17:30 We'll see if there's anyone here to speak on item
19:17:35 number 6.
19:17:36 >> Move to close.
19:17:37 >> Second.
19:17:38 (Motion carried).
19:17:48 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:17:50 vicinity of 1109 west Cass Street in the city of
19:17:53 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described -- is
19:17:56 this right?
19:17:59 >> No, 6.
19:18:04 >> Sorry.
19:18:04 >>ROSE FERLITA: Would you consider relocating that
19:18:07 project?
19:18:08 [ Laughter ]
19:18:11 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:18:13 vicinity of 3818 Ridge Avenue in the city of Tampa,
19:18:17 Florida more particularly described in section 1 from
19:18:19 zoning district classifications RS-60 residential,
19:18:23 single-family, to PD, planned development,
19:18:26 single-family, detached residential, providing an
19:18:28 effective date.

19:18:30 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
19:18:31 Question on the motion, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
19:18:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
19:18:37 Can I ask transportation a question?
19:18:39 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It's already closed.
19:18:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm just slightly concerned that
19:18:43 transportation thinks that the road is not -- there
19:18:49 are other roads, and because the property owners
19:18:51 themselves are going to be impacted by this, not the
19:18:53 neighborhood.
19:18:54 And they'll have to figure it out.
19:18:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
19:19:02 All in favor?
19:19:04 Motion carries.
19:19:06 Thank you all for coming down.
19:19:09 Motion and second to open item number 7.
19:19:14 (Motion carried).
19:19:15 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
19:19:16 The subject property is located at 4830 North Florida
19:19:19 Avenue, a special use request for off-street
19:19:22 commercial parking.
19:19:23 And this is the current Air Masters site.

19:19:30 This is the subject property.
19:19:32 This is Florida Avenue.
19:19:33 And parking.
19:19:39 The current mixture of buildings for public use for
19:19:42 the Air Masters business.
19:19:45 The property across the street.
19:19:49 There's a school that is run out of that building.
19:19:53 Property immediately to the south.
19:19:57 And the view north.
19:20:02 If you take a look at the zoning map you can see that
19:20:04 the corridor along Florida Avenue is commercial.
19:20:08 This is the site right here.
19:20:10 And it incorporates this one lot that is residential
19:20:13 single-family RS-50.
19:20:17 The petitioner is requesting special use for the
19:20:21 parking to serve the Air Masters site.
19:20:23 The petitioner will develop the front portion of the
19:20:28 site according to commercial intensive design
19:20:31 standards, just reflecting the parking lot special
19:20:36 use.
19:20:37 A minimum 15-foot buffer will be provided along the
19:20:42 residential property to the west.

19:20:44 Due to solid waste constraints, solid waste dumpster,
19:20:50 driveways to the site have been designed to direct
19:20:52 traffic to North Florida Avenue north to prevent
19:20:54 cut-through traffic from this business to the
19:20:57 residential neighborhood.
19:21:00 There were several objections on this particular
19:21:02 petition.
19:21:03 And in an effort to address -- and the petitioner has
19:21:07 given me a revised site plan.
19:21:08 Special use standards have been met regarding the
19:21:10 parking, a note regarding half inch retention, and
19:21:16 impervious surface has been added.
19:21:18 And minimum recommended trees, buff has been
19:21:22 addressed.
19:21:23 However, there was one sticking point with the
19:21:27 landscape review.
19:21:29 And that is on the Elmo.
19:21:33 There's an existing 30-inch tree that petitioner
19:21:36 originally had proposed removing.
19:21:38 Petitioner has redesigned the driveway so as to not
19:21:42 impact that tree.
19:21:43 And because of the heavy agenda that we had to have --

19:21:49 that council had before vacation, originally we were
19:21:52 just going to come back for first reading
19:21:54 consideration if this passed must we are the council
19:21:56 this evening.
19:21:56 In the mo morning.
19:21:58 But because of the package end you are going to see,
19:22:00 if council would be willing to waive the 13-day rule
19:22:02 to address this very minor graphic correction.
19:22:06 That concludes staff comments.
19:22:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second to waive
19:22:10 the 13-day rule.
19:22:12 All in favor?
19:22:14 Motion carries.
19:22:15 Planning Commission.
19:22:21 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:22:22 I have been sworn in.
19:22:26 A couple of additional facts regarding this particular
19:22:28 site, regarding -- regarding future land use
19:22:31 categories, in this particular area, which is within
19:22:33 the boundaries of south Seminole Heights, residential,
19:22:40 the commercial North Florida Avenue.
19:22:42 As you can see the subject site has a dual land use

19:22:45 designation, the parking will be is where the
19:22:50 commercial development for redevelopment of the
19:22:53 building will go.
19:22:55 The site will direct -- currently you have parking in
19:22:58 the front, will be directed to the rear, will increase
19:23:01 pedestrian safety in the area.
19:23:02 And will also provide additional landscaping to
19:23:06 impervious qualities in the south Seminole Heights
19:23:08 area.
19:23:09 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
19:23:11 proposed request.
19:23:12 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:23:12 Petitioner.
19:23:21 Petitioner is otherwise engaged right now.
19:23:24 We need somebody to step up to the microphone here.
19:23:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Could Mary come, or petitioner?
19:23:32 >>> Sorry, Mr. Chairman.
19:23:33 Michael Hunter, Dale Mabry representing Air Masters,
19:23:37 Inc. We are still debating the issue.
19:23:40 I have never asked for -- well, strike that.
19:23:42 I have been sworn.
19:23:44 I've never -- in recent times asked for waiver of the

19:23:47 13-day rule.
19:23:50 Transportation sent e-mail on the landscape.
19:23:52 We amended the plan to allow for capturing of this
19:23:56 30-inch tree, which is located here.
19:23:59 We have now revised it.
19:24:08 We pick up that tree, the 6-foot separation.
19:24:13 I'm with you on that, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
19:24:15 Unfortunately, 30 seconds ago, Mrs. Calloway indicated
19:24:18 they are concerned about the proximity of this
19:24:22 driveway.
19:24:28 We have to shift the drive aisle over on Louisiana.
19:24:31 And what that does is compresses that separation.
19:24:35 So they want to us eliminate this drive, and concerned
19:24:40 about accidents with the dumpster.
19:24:42 So we think we can accommodate it.
19:24:47 But if you feel hesitant doing a graphic change.
19:24:51 We thought we had this all wrapped up this evening.
19:24:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Why don't we see where we go with it
19:24:58 and at that time from there.
19:25:01 >>> Other than that issue.
19:25:02 >> I love the fact that you're trying to save the
19:25:05 tree.

19:25:05 My question is, does your petitioner need all these
19:25:10 parking spaces?
19:25:12 >>> Well, let me show you.
19:25:16 Existing conditions.
19:25:17 That's looking north.
19:25:20 The site has been legal nonconforming for years,
19:25:23 trying to clean it up.
19:25:25 >> Oh, it's going to be way better.
19:25:27 My question is, the parking spaces, if you don't need
19:25:30 them and you wanted to waive some of them so that you
19:25:33 could move the driveway to avoid the tree to get to
19:25:35 the dumpster, that's fine with us.
19:25:38 >> I understand.
19:25:39 And we are back four to five spaces over the required
19:25:41 minimum so we have that flexibility.
19:25:43 Bigger issue is turning radius.
19:25:45 >> What I am suggesting is you look for the parking
19:25:48 spaces.
19:25:56 >>> If I had not been presented transportation's
19:25:58 objections I wouldn't have asked deport 13 day waiver.
19:26:01 We had 95% of the issues worked out.
19:26:03 I think the bump is if we can get the earliest

19:26:05 possible date I don't think the graphic change will be
19:26:07 substantial.
19:26:08 >> Is there anyone here that came to speak on item
19:26:11 number 7?
19:26:12 All right.
19:26:13 Let's just schedule it for a morning session.
19:26:14 >>THE CLERK: 22nd?
19:26:21 >>> The 22nd won't be possible because staff won't
19:26:24 have time to review it so --
19:26:27 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Let's do it the second week after we
19:26:29 come back from break, which would be the 20th or
19:26:32 so of July.
19:26:37 >>> July 20th.
19:26:38 >>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Lamboy, does that give you enough
19:26:41 time?
19:26:42 >>> 20th of July is enough time.
19:26:44 >>> We'll accept that.
19:26:45 Thank you.
19:26:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to continue to July 20th
19:26:50 in the morning.
19:26:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second to
19:26:55 continue item 7.

19:26:56 All in favor indicate by saying Aye.
19:26:58 Motion carries.
19:27:09 >> Move to open number 9.
19:27:10 >> Second.
19:27:10 (Motion carried).
19:27:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 9 is open.
19:27:27 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
19:27:45 I have been sworn.
19:27:45 This a Euclidean request.
19:27:48 Staff has no objections.
19:27:49 I am going to read my summary just to let the council
19:27:52 know a couple of things.
19:27:53 The petitioner is proposing to rezone property at 4424
19:28:01 west Carmen street from RS-50 to RM-18 residential
19:28:04 multi family.
19:28:06 It's from Hesperides to Carmen. The Westshore Palms
19:28:11 neighborhood is characterized by a mix of housing
19:28:11 types, including apartments, townhouses, single family
19:28:14 detached dwelling units.
19:28:17 This is the subject property if you look at the Elmo.
19:28:19 This is the tree we'll be talking about that's on the
19:28:22 subject property.

19:28:25 A view of the west elevation of the subject property.
19:28:29 Houses to the east of the subject property.
19:28:33 To the north of the subject property is land taken by
19:28:37 D.O.T. for the expansion.
19:28:38 So it's currently vacant.
19:28:41 Another view to the north to the northeast -- west of
19:28:45 the subject property.
19:28:48 This is Westshore.
19:28:49 One block south of the subject property you will PD
19:28:52 find townhouse developments.
19:28:54 You will find on the aerial they are not there for
19:28:57 2004 but they are there now.
19:29:00 This is an example of one of them.
19:29:01 Another at Hesperides and Gray.
19:29:09 And another.
19:29:09 The petitioner states on the application that four
19:29:14 town homes are requested on this site. As part of the
19:29:14 Euclidean request, no waivers can be requested.
19:29:17 Therefore, all setbacks and other land development
19:29:19 regulations have to be met.
19:29:21 As illustrated on the map many plan developments have
19:29:25 been approved.

19:29:26 One block from the subject property is multifamily.
19:29:30 Transformation, the single family, residential,
19:29:34 neighborhood single-family attached development.
19:29:39 The site plan through the planned development process.
19:29:41 Euclidean process is not required for site plan review
19:29:44 that. Concludes staff comments.
19:29:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Planning Commission?
19:29:49 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission.
19:29:53 I have been sworn.
19:29:54 A couple of other additional statements.
19:30:00 Predominant land use category is residential 207.
19:30:03 As she has stated and of course she's already gone
19:30:06 through the obvious change to the area on the
19:30:09 Westshore, also exemplified on this area.
19:30:13 The other significant thing that I did want to point
19:30:15 out, actually took photos of this and didn't bring
19:30:19 them to you all, the interstate extension over here,
19:30:22 there will be a huge retention pond that will
19:30:24 incorporate all this block.
19:30:27 And it will be replaced by retention pond.
19:30:30 And this block will essentially be gone, and this
19:30:33 house will be the first house that will interface to

19:30:36 the interstate so there will be no interface of
19:30:39 residential to the north of this site.
19:30:41 I wish I had those photos to show you.
19:30:45 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
19:30:48 proposed request, to the residential character of this
19:30:52 particular segment.
19:30:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: petitioner?
19:30:56 >>> Matt Myers, Langford Law Group, the petitioner,
19:30:56 1715 West Cleveland Street.
19:31:10 I have been sworn.
19:31:13 We are seeking to rezone from the RS-50 residential
19:31:16 single-family to the RM-18 residential multifamily to
19:31:22 construct four town home units.
19:31:25 And this is consistent with the Tampa comprehensive
19:31:28 plan.
19:31:29 And I believe it's also consistent with previous
19:31:32 petitions that have been approved by this council.
19:31:35 This is a Euclidean petition.
19:31:39 I have brought the preliminary site plans, a
19:31:42 preliminary rendering to give the council a better
19:31:44 idea.
19:31:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order, I guess.

19:31:57 If it's the Euclidean -- if it's a Euclidean zoning in
19:32:02 anything he shows, really, it can't become part of the
19:32:09 record, because it's Euclidean.
19:32:10 He could pretty much do what he wants to do.
19:32:15 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: they are illustrative only.
19:32:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question would be -- and don't
19:32:30 answer until you get back to the microphone so it's on
19:32:31 the record -- but it appears from the aerial that we
19:32:38 have that there are single-family homes to the west of
19:32:40 you and to the east of you.
19:32:41 So if you got a lot of single family around you, why
19:32:44 did you not reflect a planned development so that we
19:32:47 have some commitment to the site plan, and to an
19:32:51 elevation, and we could know if we are protecting the
19:32:55 folks who live here.
19:32:59 I would much prefer to see a PD.
19:33:03 Did you think about it?
19:33:08 >>> Well, it was thought about.
19:33:11 >> Is this three stories?
19:33:13 >>> No, it's not.
19:33:13 It's two.
19:33:14 >> It appears to be three.

19:33:15 >>> It's three.
19:33:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's two over garage.
19:33:21 >>> That's correct.
19:33:21 It's a garage with two living levels.
19:33:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That makes it three.
19:33:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the height limitation on
19:33:29 RM --
19:33:32 >>> 35.
19:33:32 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: 35 feet.
19:33:35 >> The question is, how come you didn't go for a PD?
19:33:38 >>> Well, we like this Euclidean.
19:33:41 Obviously much quicker for us.
19:33:44 And we thought it would be a benefit to the community
19:33:50 and to the new development to get this done as soon as
19:33:53 possible.
19:33:54 And we wanted to get it in there before the
19:34:01 apartments, when they started doing that building,
19:34:05 potential clients, and we thought it would be a
19:34:09 benefit before the retention, and of course we are
19:34:19 willing to comply with whatever retention
19:34:21 requirements, we are willing to comply and maintain
19:34:25 the requirements for the protection of the trees, we

19:34:31 think it will be a positive addition to the community,
19:34:38 what's already developed and what will be developed.
19:34:41 And that's the basis for us requesting the rezoning be
19:34:45 granted.
19:34:48 >> Thank you.
19:34:49 That's tend of your presentation?
19:34:52 >>> Yes.
19:34:53 If you have any questions.
19:34:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that
19:34:56 would like to speak on this item?
19:34:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
19:35:00 On the staff report, under stormwater, it said the
19:35:07 note will have to be added to the permitting site
19:35:10 plan.
19:35:15 Regarding the half inch retention.
19:35:16 There's no site plan.
19:35:17 So how is Alex going to add that note?
19:35:22 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: The petitioner will commit to the
19:35:24 stormwater provision.
19:35:26 Just because there's no site plan at this point, we do
19:35:31 want people to be aware of the flooding problems in
19:35:34 that area.

19:35:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But just logistically from a
19:35:37 bureaucratic perspective, he goes to permitting July
19:35:44 18, will they address the half inch requirement?
19:35:49 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Well, one of the things that we can
19:35:51 do bureaucratically, and that note is part of the
19:35:59 permitting system, and say that stormwater one half
19:36:03 inch retention for water -- existing impervious,
19:36:08 that's the only way in this particular instance we can
19:36:10 guarantee, as long as the petitioner agrees.
19:36:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Cole, can you help us on this?
19:36:17 >>> Can I say one thing?
19:36:19 On the preliminary site plan, while it is preliminary,
19:36:21 we are committed to meeting all the requirements of
19:36:25 the water retention.
19:36:26 I believe it's on the north side.
19:36:28 We already have a nine-inch plan to put in some kind
19:36:33 of stormwater drainage system over there.
19:36:35 And then there's a three-inch, I believe, on the
19:36:37 bottom towards Carmen street, one-inch.
19:36:43 So we are exceeding what they are asking for.
19:36:46 And that is our full intention.
19:36:47 And I think the development of the further retention

19:36:54 across the street.
19:37:02 >> I have a question for our tree person, Mary.
19:37:06 Because it's not a PD, what can we require?
19:37:14 >>> Mary Daniel, land development.
19:37:17 I have been sworn.
19:37:18 At the time of permitting, the commercial -- I mean,
19:37:21 the residential site review people will automatically
19:37:24 review for chapter 13 and ensure compliance with that
19:37:28 ordinance.
19:37:30 And I have highlighted some of those in my report.
19:37:33 >>> Okay.
19:37:33 And the petitioner, would he be able to waive because
19:37:38 he's going for the Euclidean?
19:37:40 >>> Correct.
19:37:40 >> He wouldn't be able to go to the board of
19:37:42 adjustment or anything?
19:37:43 >>> Co-go to the VRB.
19:37:47 >> Okay.
19:37:48 >>> That would be an option.
19:37:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't like this.
19:37:53 I like PD.
19:37:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I have a question.

19:37:56 What is the time difference, in applying for a PD
19:38:00 versus in applying for Euclidean zoning?
19:38:05 >>> There is no time difference.
19:38:06 It's just the petitioner's ability to develop a plan.
19:38:12 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:38:14 If I might, could I ask for this item to be continued,
19:38:17 the last item of the agenda?
19:38:19 Issues have come up.
19:38:20 I think Mr. Dingfelder asked a question that I need to
19:38:23 look at, and I need to be able to discuss that with
19:38:25 the applicant.
19:38:25 So if you wouldn't mind.
19:38:27 >>SHAWN HARRISON: That's fine.
19:38:29 We are going to get through with the agenda in
19:38:30 relatively short order.
19:38:32 Talk quick.
19:38:33 And we'll continue this matter to the end of the
19:38:34 agenda.
19:38:37 And we will at this point need a motion to open item
19:38:39 number 12.
19:38:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
19:38:42 >> Second.

19:38:42 (Motion carried).
19:38:43 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
19:39:15 I have been sworn.
19:39:16 Subject property is at 1709 west Kirby street, it is
19:39:19 located on Kirby near Rome Avenue.
19:39:22 As you can see on the zoning map, a couple of PDs
19:39:31 along Rome.
19:39:36 The subject property.
19:39:40 The front elevation.
19:39:43 The existing housing along Kirby.
19:39:46 On the south side of Kirby along the north side of
19:39:49 Kirby.
19:39:51 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property
19:39:53 from RS-50 to PD.
19:39:55 The subject property was platted in 1926 as part of
19:40:00 the Almima subdivision, originally platted at 50 feet
19:40:02 by 82 feet and 60 feet by 82 feet for 100 square feet
19:40:08 and 4900 square feet respectively.
19:40:10 In 1987, the lots were rezoned RS-50, the common lot
19:40:12 size in the area. The RS 50 zoning designation
19:40:19 requires a frontage of 50 feet, an overall size of
19:40:20 5,000 square feet.

19:40:21 The petitioner is proposing the construction of two
19:40:24 single-family detached residences, the elevations are
19:40:27 on the plans you have in front of you.
19:40:29 The plots would be
19:40:39 In typical Florida style, porches and front garages,
19:40:45 It would be approximately 35 feet from grade, 20 feet
19:40:49 from the front, ten Pa and a half feet from the sides,
19:40:53 20 feet from the rear.
19:40:54 There were several objections that the petitioner has
19:40:56 agreed to add notes to the site plan regarding notice
19:41:01 of compliance and off-street parking, also a note
19:41:07 regarding retention, sidewalk, and notes regarding
19:41:11 adding -- a note being added to the plan regarding
19:41:15 curbside collection.
19:41:18 That concludes staff comments.
19:41:21 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:41:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, I have a quick question.
19:41:26 We don't see any of these notes.
19:41:32 >>> I need to place them on this evening.
19:41:36 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Planning Commission?
19:41:37 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:41:42 I have been sworn.

19:41:42 The predominant land use category for this particular
19:41:45 area, which is the neighborhood association that this
19:41:48 project is residential 10, right off of the
19:41:52 intersection.
19:41:53 This is just to the west of the intersection of Rome
19:41:57 Avenue and Kirby.
19:41:58 This is north of Sligh Avenue by several blocks.
19:42:01 And east of Armenia.
19:42:04 You can see by the aerial, we do have a variety of
19:42:06 different types of houses, styles, varieties, on
19:42:11 various sizes of lots.
19:42:12 The proposed request to go to a PD for this lot is not
19:42:17 unreasonable based on the character of housing in the
19:42:20 area.
19:42:21 There has been a variety of renovations in the area,
19:42:24 and new houses built, for the current rezonings in the
19:42:28 area.
19:42:29 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
19:42:31 proposal.
19:42:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do we have a copy of the aerial?
19:42:40 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I think I left them on the printer.
19:42:42 I'm sorry.

19:42:42 With reference to the street table that was not added
19:42:45 either.
19:42:45 And Mary pointed that out to me.
19:42:47 I think this should probably be continued to another
19:42:50 date.
19:42:51 I had e-mailed the staff report to the petition area
19:42:53 week ago, didn't receive it and I called and said,
19:42:59 hey, I didn't receive any notes from you or anything.
19:43:01 We tried to scramble but it wasn't going to happen.
19:43:03 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Let's see if there's anyone in the
19:43:06 public to speak on item number 12, other than the
19:43:08 petitioner.
19:43:10 Why don't we move this one also to July 20th at 10
19:43:14 a.m.
19:43:14 Heather, is that all right?
19:43:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
19:43:17 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
19:43:19 (Motion carried)
19:43:22 Item number 13.
19:43:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to open.
19:43:25 >> Second.
19:43:26 (Motion carried).

19:43:26 >>SHAWN HARRISON: 13 is now open.
19:43:33 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: The subject property is located at
19:43:52 1020 west Indiana.
19:43:55 If you could look at the design map, the subject
19:43:58 property is just south of Mr. Diaz's property.
19:44:01 We talked about it earlier.
19:44:03 It's a family of residential sing is will-family --
19:44:05 I'm sorry, neighborhood residential single-family
19:44:07 development.
19:44:08 The petitioner is proposing to rezone property from RS
19:44:10 60 to PD, existing one-story residence on the site
19:44:14 will remain and be separated from the front bridge
19:44:17 Avenue.
19:44:18 Petitioner is proposing construction of one two-story
19:44:21 residence on the site, the elevations are on the plan.
19:44:24 Lot 10, will have a 10,224 square feet.
19:44:29 Lot 11, proposed 2-story residence will be located,
19:44:32 will have an overall size of 9,802 square feet.
19:44:37 Located on the southern portion of the lot, on
19:44:39 particular access to the site will be from Ridge
19:44:41 Avenue.
19:44:42 The front setback for the proposed residence will be

19:44:45 32 feet.
19:44:46 The left side will be 13 feet and the east setback
19:44:50 will be 7 feet and the rear setback will be 30 feet.
19:44:56 There were objections that have been subsequently
19:44:58 removed regarding transportation, adding a note for
19:45:03 sidewalk.
19:45:04 Sidewalk was added.
19:45:05 Unfortunately, transportation hadn't had the
19:45:11 opportunity to review it prior to my staff report
19:45:13 being published so that objection has been removed.
19:45:15 And if petitioner is in agreement with the requirement
19:45:18 one half inch retention I will add that note to the
19:45:20 plan.
19:45:21 And I just have not been able to get in touch with
19:45:24 petitioner last night.
19:45:26 That concludes staff comments.
19:45:27 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Planning Commission?
19:45:36 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:45:37 I have been sworn in.
19:45:39 As Mrs. Lamboy stated it is within the boundaries of
19:45:42 the river bend neighborhood -- Riverside heights,
19:45:45 excuse me, neighborhood association boundaries.

19:45:48 The predominant land use for the area is residential
19:45:51 10.
19:45:51 The request is to split the particular lot in question
19:45:53 on the corner of Indiana and Ridge Avenue to allow for
19:45:57 the redevelopment for two single-family detached
19:46:01 homes, which is the predominant character for the
19:46:04 area.
19:46:04 Planning Commission staff had no objection to the
19:46:07 proposed request.
19:46:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
19:46:10 Petitioner?
19:46:19 >>> My name is Peter Mestre.
19:46:25 I was sworn in. we are requesting a single-family
19:46:28 residence on a lot that's 9800 square feet.
19:46:31 The reason that we are requesting this is because the
19:46:33 lot is irregular in shape.
19:46:35 It's almost like a triangle.
19:46:38 And it has all of the square foot requirements for an
19:46:42 RS 60 lot and has 156 feet on Ridge Avenue also.
19:46:48 We are not asking for any setback variations.
19:46:55 Received a setback for most cases.
19:46:57 And we feel that the request is in character with the

19:47:01 neighborhood.
19:47:01 We want to build a nice house on that lot.
19:47:05 We also spoke with the neighborhood association, my
19:47:09 partner.
19:47:10 We'll let you know we spoke to the neighbors, and no
19:47:14 one was opposed to it.
19:47:15 And we feel it's a good project for the neighborhood.
19:47:21 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the neighborhood
19:47:24 that would like to speak to item number 13?
19:47:26 Come on up.
19:47:38 >>> I have not been sworn in.
19:47:43 (Oath administered by Clerk).
19:47:49 >>> My name is Chris Pam he will, 1105 west Plymouth
19:47:55 street, the owner of 1025 west Indiana, also speaking
19:47:59 on behalf of my mother ALVINA, who owns property on
19:48:05 west Indiana.
19:48:11 The existing home has an encroachment on the side
19:48:15 setback on my mother's property.
19:48:17 And until that is resolved, I believe that should be
19:48:23 held against them.
19:48:26 I have taken some photographs.
19:48:41 Encroachment on the east side.

19:48:49 >> Saying it was built across the property line?
19:48:52 >>> It seems some sort of structure like a screen
19:48:56 porch and they decided to enclose it.
19:48:58 You can see there's drain pipes and the water, when it
19:49:02 rains, just goes onto the property.
19:49:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it on your mother's property?
19:49:07 Or is it into the setback area?
19:49:09 >>> It's the setback area.
19:49:11 Right.
19:49:11 But it's probably right on the property line.
19:49:20 I believe until that is resolved, we have objections.
19:49:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone else in the public
19:49:28 that would like to speak on this item?
19:49:32 >> Move to close.
19:49:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait a minute.
19:49:38 Could the staff -- the picture that we have, the plan
19:49:43 shows what the neighbor is talking about, which is the
19:49:49 petitioner's existing one-story house, encroaches into
19:49:53 the side setback.
19:49:56 And what he's requesting is that we not allow this to
19:49:59 go ahead until we deal with that.
19:50:02 So I guess I'm asking you for some advice because it

19:50:06 appears that indeed this is encroaching into the side
19:50:09 setback.
19:50:10 And what's before us is recognizing or legitimizing
19:50:14 what's already there.
19:50:15 Unless we legitimize something that isn't.
19:50:18 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: You are correct in that it does
19:50:22 encroach into the side setback.
19:50:24 However, with a PD process, it will basically wrap all
19:50:28 this in.
19:50:28 I have to do some permit research to determine whether
19:50:31 that was legal or not.
19:50:34 And I couldn't tell you whether it was legally built
19:50:36 or not.
19:50:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I think the neighbor has a
19:50:40 really good point.
19:50:41 I guess maybe the petition core explain what the story
19:50:43 is.
19:50:44 >>> And also, it doesn't encroach on their property as
19:50:48 illustrated.
19:50:49 It just encroaches into the --
19:50:53 >> All right.
19:50:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Petitioner, you have rebuttal time.

19:50:57 A minute or so.
19:50:58 >> When we purchased the property, it was already
19:51:01 there. It's probably been there for many -- I would
19:51:03 say at least 20 years.
19:51:04 We bought it from the original people that built that
19:51:07 house in the 50s.
19:51:09 It's a screen enclosure.
19:51:11 Screened porch.
19:51:12 Has screening around it.
19:51:14 And it does go -- we put it on the survey.
19:51:17 And it doesn't effect the other side at all.
19:51:24 >> I think they are concerned about drainage because
19:51:26 it's right smack up to their line and evidently it
19:51:29 drains over there.
19:51:32 Could you correct it?
19:51:34 >> I would try to do something, maybe put a gutter,
19:51:36 some kind of gutter in it.
19:51:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What is the construction of the
19:51:42 roof?
19:51:42 Wood?
19:51:43 >> Actually, it's just like a fiberglass type roof.
19:51:49 It's a screen enclosure like a sunroof kind of thing.

19:51:52 The guy must have built it many years ago.
19:51:54 >> So worst case scenario it's not part of the main
19:51:57 structure, you could take it out if you had to.
19:51:59 >> If I had to, I could take it out.
19:52:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A couple of weeks.
19:52:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Or pass it on first reading and ask
19:52:10 for some report, at second reading to find out if it
19:52:13 is a preexisting nonconforming, or if it's just
19:52:16 totally illegal in which case it may very well change
19:52:19 if outcome of the second hearing and we couldn't do it
19:52:22 tonight.
19:52:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think I would feel more
19:52:27 comfortable to continue it like one week.
19:52:33 Heather, how long do you need to check out what they
19:52:36 did?
19:52:38 >>> The research will take me a matter of a couple of
19:52:41 hours in the morning.
19:52:42 >> If we continue to one week?
19:52:45 >>> But the problem, the next two weeks.
19:52:47 Our agenda is a killer.
19:52:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I make a suggestion?
19:52:53 If it's easier on the petitioner to just stipulate to

19:52:55 taking that thing down and getting the approval,
19:52:59 otherwise getting the approval, because I don't know
19:53:02 that there's any significant objections.
19:53:05 And that might be something you might want to confer
19:53:07 with your partner and see.
19:53:11 >>> We would be willing to take it down if staff
19:53:12 determines that it's something that's illegal.
19:53:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: In that case you probably have to
19:53:18 wait a month.
19:53:18 That's my point.
19:53:22 >>> We would go ahead and take it down.
19:53:24 It's just a screen room. It's not that good looking.
19:53:27 But I didn't think it was a problem for the other side
19:53:29 at all.
19:53:32 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:53:33 The problem with that is, that would in essence create
19:53:36 a graphical change in the site plan.
19:53:39 We have been really pretty hard lined on graphical
19:53:43 changes and requiring a 13-day requirement and making
19:53:46 change, graphical changes, in the middle of hearings.
19:53:50 We would have to bring back a new ordinance, or -- I
19:53:53 mean, I understand what you're saying.

19:53:55 But we have --
19:53:59 >> Cate, you don't want to start --
19:54:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we had a note that just said the
19:54:03 screened concrete patio will be removed?
19:54:07 Can you just add a note to that effect?
19:54:09 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Isn't this an existing house?
19:54:18 >> We don't know that it's illegal right now.
19:54:20 And that's why I made the suggestion to take a look at
19:54:22 that in two weeks, and if it is illegal, then
19:54:25 petitioner, you can determine what you want to do with
19:54:27 it.
19:54:29 At that point.
19:54:29 If you remove it, it's going to have to go back on
19:54:32 first reading but at least you know you are going to
19:54:34 come back on first reading with it.
19:54:36 If it's not illegal, then we'll debate what to do with
19:54:39 it in two weeks.
19:54:41 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I agree.
19:54:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Fountain passes on first reading
19:54:47 then it will come back in two weeks for second
19:54:49 reading.
19:54:50 And at that time we'll have an idea, we'll no L know

19:54:53 for sure whether it's illegal or not.
19:54:55 And we can all decide what to do then.
19:54:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's fair.
19:54:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
19:55:03 >> If that's the motion, I'll make it.
19:55:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We haven't closed the public hearing
19:55:07 yet.
19:55:08 Further discussion?
19:55:10 >> So moved.
19:55:11 >> Second.
19:55:11 (Motion carried).
19:55:12 >>SHAWN HARRISON: This is number 13.
19:55:19 >> An ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:55:21 vicinity of 1020 west Indiana Avenue in the city of
19:55:24 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
19:55:26 section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-60
19:55:29 residential single-family to PD, planned development,
19:55:32 single family residential, providing an effective
19:55:33 date.
19:55:35 >> We have a motion and second.
19:55:36 Discussion on the motion?
19:55:37 >> Tell the gentleman that spoke on behalf of his

19:55:43 mother, I believe Mr. Ramos, this gives the staff two
19:55:48 weeks to research that, find out if it's an illegal
19:55:51 structure, and when this comes back in two weeks our
19:55:54 staff will be able to let us know, and also let the
19:55:57 petitioner know, and everything should be cleared up
19:56:00 for folks, both parties, at that time.
19:56:06 >> This will be set for public hearing at 9:30 a.m. on
19:56:09 June 22nd.
19:56:10 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All in favor of the motion signify
19:56:12 by saying Aye.
19:56:13 Opposed?
19:56:14 Motion carries.
19:56:14 We are back on item number 9.
19:56:19 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:56:20 The concern that I have has been dealt with, and the
19:56:23 only other issue that was remaining was regarding, I
19:56:26 guess, the staff report regarding Euclidean zoning,
19:56:33 there is no ability to condition with zoning.
19:56:37 On the staff report informational purposes only.
19:56:40 But this applicant would be required at the time of
19:56:42 permitting to comply with whatever codes are there at
19:56:47 that time.

19:56:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm not going to be able to support
19:56:52 this because I really feel insecure about the
19:56:55 Euclidean zoning.
19:56:56 It seems to me the petitioner doesn't have a vague
19:56:59 idea what he's doing as opposed to a specific idea, he
19:57:03 handed us very complete elevations, and plans, and I
19:57:07 don't see why we couldn't have the security of a PD.
19:57:11 So that's why I am not going to support it.
19:57:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of procedure.
19:57:18 Could this be converted over without starting all over
19:57:23 to a PD?
19:57:26 Without starting the whole process and renoticing,
19:57:30 et cetera, et cetera?
19:57:32 >>JULIA COLE: The application would have to be amended
19:57:34 and, yes, they would have to renotice because any
19:57:36 amended application for a different type of rezoning
19:57:38 requires the renotification.
19:57:42 >> Even if it's a stricter one?
19:57:43 >>JULIA COLE: Even if it's a stricter one, yes.
19:57:46 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
19:57:47 So, petitioner, you have rebuttal time.
19:57:54 >>> Owen LaFave, I am the property owner.

19:57:57 I have been sworn in.
19:57:58 First, I would like to thank you for giving me the
19:58:01 opportunity to talk.
19:58:02 I will say that I wish Mr. Gonzalez was here to
19:58:06 provide the aerial of the neighborhood.
19:58:09 Unfortunately the aerial I was provided is a little
19:58:11 aged and misleading in the sense that all the property
19:58:13 across the street to the north of the property as well
19:58:16 as to the west, all that has been cleared for
19:58:18 interstate expansion, and as he did mention as well as
19:58:20 a retention pond.
19:58:24 Any park that will eventually connect with the
19:58:26 riverwalk.
19:58:29 We did take the opportunity to talk to the residents,
19:58:31 and none of them appear to be against a three-story
19:58:35 structure on the property.
19:58:35 You can see by lack of residents opposed to the this
19:58:40 evening.
19:58:40 Also that it is multifamily in close proximity to the
19:58:43 interstate, we feel that multifamily development is
19:58:46 more appropriate for the neighborhood than
19:58:47 single-family.

19:58:50 The site plan that we did submit to you, even though
19:58:53 it's Euclidean, we wanted to be as transparent as
19:58:56 possible to provide with you what our intentions are
19:58:58 for the property.
19:59:00 Some of those issues that were brought up were the
19:59:02 drainage.
19:59:03 We did try to address those in the site plan that you
19:59:06 do have there, providing retention actually to the
19:59:09 north of the property as well as a three-inch swell
19:59:12 that runs along the side of the property line.
19:59:15 Another issue is the trees.
19:59:17 We are concerned about the trees as well.
19:59:18 As you see on the site plan there's an oak and a pier
19:59:21 that's on the Boulevard that we have no intention of
19:59:24 removing or touching.
19:59:26 It's our intention to protect those trees.
19:59:27 They are beautiful trees and add to the property as
19:59:29 well as the aesthetics of the neighborhood.
19:59:33 And as far as the rest of the tree and landscaping
19:59:36 requirements, it's our full intention to comply with
19:59:38 all of those, and those will be addressed in
19:59:43 permitting.

19:59:45 The Euclidean approach, the reason we decided to take
19:59:47 this approach again, because we had no objection to
19:59:50 any of the residents when we talked with them about
19:59:52 the possible rezoning of property and we are not
19:59:54 asking for anything that's outside the code. We had
19:59:57 conversations with land use, transportation, as well
19:59:58 as existing trees and the structure, and feel that
20:00:02 everything is in line and we felt it was appropriate
20:00:05 to move forward as Euclidean.
20:00:12 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
20:00:12 The pleasure of council?
20:00:16 >> Motion to close the public hearing.
20:00:18 >> Second.
20:00:18 (Motion carried).
20:00:19 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We'll see where it goes.
20:00:23 Is there anyone that would like to read the ordinance?
20:00:28 Okay.
20:00:29 War we on, number 9?
20:00:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: An ordinance rezoning property in the
20:00:37 general vicinity of 4424 west Carmen street from
20:00:42 zoning district classification RS-50 to RM multifamily
20:00:48 providing an effective date.

20:00:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
20:00:51 Discussion on the motion.
20:00:53 Mr. Dingfelder.
20:00:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Generally speaking, I agree with
20:00:55 what Ms. Saul-Sena said.
20:00:57 However, the young gentleman is very convincing and
20:01:00 I'll take a leap of faith and hope that he does what
20:01:02 he says he's going to do.
20:01:04 So I'll go with the motion.
20:01:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Further discussion?
20:01:11 All in favor?
20:01:12 Against?
20:01:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nay.
20:01:14 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion carries 5 to 1.
20:01:17 >> Move to receive and file the documents.
20:01:18 >> Motion to receive and file.
20:01:20 >> Second.
20:01:20 (Motion carried).
20:01:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: You remember this morning I made a
20:01:25 motion to give a commendation for Larmon furniture.
20:01:32 I would like to do that next week at the June 15th
20:01:34 meeting.

20:01:38 >> We have a motion and second.
20:01:39 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
20:01:41 (Motion carried).
20:01:42 Anything else to come before council?
20:01:44 All right.
20:01:45 We are adjourned.
20:01:45 Thank you all for coming.
20:01:48 (Meeting adjourned)