Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, June 22, 2006
6:00 p.m. Session

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


[Sounding gavel]
18:07:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
18:07:31 The chair will yield to Ms. Mary Alvarez.
18:07:34 >> Thank you, Madam Chairman.
18:07:36 It gives me great pleasure tonight to introduce John
18:07:42 Wise to do our invocation tonight.
18:07:45 He is the president of the Virginia Park Neighborhood
18:07:47 Association.
18:07:48 He's been the president for over five years.
18:07:50 He's been a resident of Virginia Park for ten years.
18:07:53 And he works at Tampa General Hospital, St. Joe's, and
18:07:58 Memorial Hospital.
18:07:59 Please welcome Mr. John Wise.
18:08:01 Please stand for the invocation and stay standing for
18:08:03 the pledge of allegiance.
18:08:08 >>> Lord of all, humbly we gather here this day in
18:08:11 your presence.
18:08:12 We, each of us, know you and love you in our own
18:08:15 individual way.
18:08:17 Teach us patience.
18:08:18 Teach us to love and respect each other.
18:08:20 And to celebrate our differences with each other.
18:08:24 We call upon you, God, of our own understanding, to
18:08:28 touch the minds and hearts of each one present here
18:08:30 today.
18:08:31 Give us some share in your wisdom that we may, as
18:08:36 citizens of this great community, see right and
18:08:39 goodness flourish among us.
18:08:40 We make this our prayer on this day, in the name of
18:08:44 that same God who gives all of us life and the
18:08:47 opportunity to live with each other in peace and
18:08:49 happiness.
18:08:50 Amen.
18:08:54 (Pledge of Allegiance)
18:09:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
18:09:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
18:09:14 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
18:09:15 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
18:09:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
18:09:17 Before we begin our night agenda, we have some
18:09:20 unfinished business from this morning we need to care
18:09:23 of first.
18:09:24 Is Mr. Santiago here?
18:09:26 Okay, we'll go to Sal Territo, go to him first.
18:09:31 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
18:09:33 We are here for the continuation of the two items that
18:09:35 we have this morning, item number 78 being a
18:09:37 resolution approving the CRA plan for Central Park,
18:09:42 and item number 7, the ordinance establishing the tax
18:09:46 increment financing district for that Central Park
18:09:48 area.
18:09:49 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to move 78 first.
18:09:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can first, council.
18:09:55 I apologize.
18:09:55 Just so we dot all our Is and cross our Ts, I would
18:10:00 like to have those public hearings reopened for the
18:10:03 record.
18:10:04 Item number 71 had a motion to reconsider earlier this
18:10:10 morning and council is now taking it up again.
18:10:12 Again, the reason for that subpoena because item
18:10:14 number 78, the resolution must precede the second
18:10:19 reading for the TIF.
18:10:21 At this time I would like to ask that both public
18:10:23 hearings be opened.
18:10:24 Any witnesses that need to be sworn, anybody that
18:10:26 needs to testify, and then close each one of them and
18:10:29 then take 78 and then 71.
18:10:31 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to rescind 78 because they
18:10:35 continue it.
18:10:36 >> I believe did you a motion to reconsider.
18:10:39 >>GWEN MILLER: 71.
18:10:40 We rescinded 71 but continued 78 to this afternoon.
18:10:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Was it rescind?
18:10:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Rescinded 71 but continued 78.
18:10:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay, I'm sorry, my recollection was

18:10:53 that 71 was a motion to reconsider.
18:10:55 But if it was rescinded --
18:10:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to open it again.
18:11:00 78 is continued -- still open.
18:11:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Why don't we take 78 and ask if
18:11:05 anybody wishes to speak to that.
18:11:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anybody in the public that
18:11:08 wishes to speak to 78?
18:11:10 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
18:11:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close
18:11:20 Now we need to move the resolution.
18:11:23 >> So moved.
18:11:23 >> Second.
18:11:23 (Motion carried).
18:11:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to open 71.
18:11:27 >> Move to open 71.
18:11:29 >> Second.
18:11:29 (Motion carried).
18:11:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:11:33 wants to speak to item 71?
18:11:36 >> Move to close.
18:11:36 >> Second.

18:11:37 (Motion carried).
18:11:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Read the ordinance.
18:11:54 He said we need to read it.
18:12:04 >>KEVIN WHITE: I read it this morning.
18:12:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: This is -- move to adopt the following
18:12:15 for second reading, an ordinance of the city of Tampa,
18:12:17 Florida establishing a redevelopment trust fund for
18:12:22 the Central Park community redevelopment area
18:12:24 providing for funding of said fund for community
18:12:26 redevelopment within the Central Park community
18:12:28 redevelopment area, providing for the administration
18:12:30 of said fund, determining the tax increment to be
18:12:33 deposited into said fund, establishing the base year
18:12:36 for determining assessed values of property in the
18:12:39 Central Park community redevelopment area for tax
18:12:41 increment purposes, providing for the annual
18:12:44 appropriation of the tax increment by all taxing
18:12:48 authorities, levying ad valorem taxes in the Central
18:12:51 Park community redevelopment area, appointing the
18:12:55 governing body of the Community Redevelopment Agency
18:12:57 as the trustee of said fund, repealing all ordinances
18:13:01 in conflict herewith, providing for severability,

18:13:03 providing an effective date.
18:13:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:13:06 Voice roll call.
18:13:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
18:13:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
18:13:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:13:13 >>ROSE FERLITA: Yes.
18:13:14 >>KEVIN WHITE: Yes.
18:13:15 >>THE CLERK: Motion carries with Harrison and
18:13:18 Dingfelder being absent.
18:13:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Is Mr. Santiago still here?
18:13:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I apologize.
18:13:26 Mr. Santiago is upstairs preparing for things that
18:13:30 have to be in the meeting later.
18:13:33 If you can, you do have the resolution before you.
18:13:36 I believe the ordinance
18:13:48 And I believe the public hearing for -- that's Ybor
18:13:52 City?
18:13:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, Ybor City.
18:13:54 Do you want to read that?
18:13:56 Okay.
18:13:58 >> Move an ordinance -- this is a second reading.

18:14:01 Move to adopt the following ordinance --
18:14:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe it's first reading.
18:14:10 >> This is for --
18:14:15 >>> Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida
18:14:16 amending code chapter 25 transportation article 1,
18:14:21 division 3, authority and types permitting sections
18:14:25 amendment sections to identify and authorize the no
18:14:27 transportation impact zone for a portion of Ybor City
18:14:31 in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida, no
18:14:35 transportation impact fees more particularly described
18:14:38 in section 4 herein, and effective for a period of
18:14:41 three years commencing August 22nd, 2005, nunc pro
18:14:46 tunc, providing for revised city of transportation
18:14:50 impact fee district schedule repealing all ordinances
18:14:53 in conflict, providing for severability, providing an
18:14:55 effective date.
18:14:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:14:57 Question on the motion.
18:14:58 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:14:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm going to vote to support this
18:15:01 but what I would like staff to do now, I would like
18:15:05 them to keep track of the fees being waived so that

18:15:08 this comes back two years down the line, you have --
18:15:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita?
18:15:15 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, thank you.
18:15:17 As I submitted by reasons for sustaining,.
18:15:27 >> Tell Mr. White to come in.
18:15:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Ferlita, can't leave.
18:15:48 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a quorum now.
18:16:03 We have a motion on the floor.
18:16:10 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
18:16:12 Opposed, Nay.
18:16:15 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
18:16:16 absent and white being absent at vote and Ferlita
18:16:20 abstaining.
18:16:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to formalize my request
18:16:25 that the finance department keep track of the fees
18:16:30 that are waived so that when we vote upon this in two
18:16:33 more years we'll have a sense of transportation fees
18:16:36 that are uncollected to help us make our
18:16:39 determination.
18:16:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
18:16:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that a motion?
18:16:45 >> Yes.

18:16:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second?
18:16:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
18:16:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:16:50 (Motion carried).
18:16:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm just reminded because of
18:16:54 council's break this ordinance will be coming back for
18:16:56 second reading and public hearing on July 13 at 9:30
18:17:01 a.m.
18:17:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Cathy Coyle.
18:17:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
18:17:07 Item number 1, we did receive a request to withdraw.
18:17:15 >> So moved.
18:17:16 >> Second.
18:17:16 (Motion carried).
18:17:16 >> Item number 2 there was a request to continue by
18:17:27 the agent.
18:17:29 It doesn't say whether he's present.
18:17:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, this is set for a public
18:17:38 hearing.
18:17:39 The petitioner is not present.
18:17:41 There was a letter sent to council.
18:17:44 Council, if you do wish to continue this, I don't know

18:17:49 what the basis for the continuance is, number one.
18:17:51 Number two is that the letter did not make reference
18:17:56 to any particular date for a continuance but if you
18:17:59 are going to continue a public hearing, it has to be
18:18:02 opened and continued to a date certain.
18:18:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open the public hearing.
18:18:06 >> So moved.
18:18:07 >> Second.
18:18:07 (Motion carried)
18:18:10 89 what date would the council like to continue it to?
18:18:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A year from now.
18:18:16 [ Laughter ]
18:18:17 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I would ask to find it inconsistent
18:18:23 to planning zone staff. The next available night
18:18:27 according to our calendar would be October 25th.
18:18:30 >>GWEN MILLER: That's what we'll go with.
18:18:32 We have a motion and second.
18:18:33 (Motion carried).
18:18:36 6 p.m.
18:18:37 Okay?
18:18:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Item number 4, Z 06-48, we did just
18:18:48 receive the site plan last week from the petitioner.

18:18:50 Through no fault of his own, there was a
18:18:52 miscommunication on staff's behalf of whether or not
18:18:55 there was even a site man required.
18:18:57 This was a petition that was amended from a CI to a CN
18:19:00 which does require a site plan.
18:19:02 This is the situation where the property was
18:19:04 previously zoned C-2, and through zoning conformance
18:19:08 was reduced to an RM-16 zoning.
18:19:10 They are submitting for an office building sitting on
18:19:14 the property currently. The site plan just needs to
18:19:17 be cleaned up as far as referencing the waivers needed
18:19:20 and other provisions required by the different codes
18:19:23 that we have today, and to clean that up and to get it
18:19:26 properly adapted, if council is so willing.
18:19:29 I would move at this point if we have no objections
18:19:31 other than cleaning up the site plan just moving it to
18:19:33 a day meeting if there's no objection.
18:19:35 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open the public hearing
18:19:37 first.
18:19:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:19:38 >> Second.
18:19:38 (Motion carried).

18:19:39 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, since Cathy Coyle, no
18:19:44 fault of the petitioner, I certainly would agree to
18:19:49 that request.
18:19:50 >>> I did ask for July 13th.
18:19:53 Apparently that's a bad morning.
18:19:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Not a night meeting?
18:20:01 >>> There is not a night meeting July 20th?
18:20:04 >>GWEN MILLER: July 20th at 10 a.m.?
18:20:07 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's fine with me.
18:20:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public here to
18:20:13 speak on item 4?
18:20:17 We have a motion and second.
18:20:18 To speak on 4?
18:20:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you can speak to the continuance.
18:20:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Opposed to continue or what?
18:20:25 >>> Actually, I have a question about number 1.
18:20:28 >> We'll come back to that.
18:20:30 Let us fun I shall 4, please.
18:20:32 We have a motion and second to continue item 4 to July
18:20:36 22nd at 10 a.m.
18:20:38 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
18:20:42 Opposed, Nay.

18:20:43 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I have a request from the audience
18:21:08 about number 1.
18:21:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 1 was withdrawn.
18:21:12 It's gone.
18:21:13 It's off the docket.
18:21:14 It was withdrawn, number 1 was withdrawn.
18:21:23 He asked to withdraw.
18:21:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Technically they are going to build
18:21:32 it per the previous rezoning.
18:21:33 >>GWEN MILLER: They don't have to come before council.
18:21:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.
18:21:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Moreda will explain to the you.
18:21:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If anybody is here for item number 1,
18:21:44 number 1 is removed from the agenda.
18:21:46 Ms. Coyle, I believe number 3 needs a waiver of the 13
18:21:49 day rule before county proceed.
18:21:51 >>GWEN MILLER: That's correct.
18:21:52 Did you want to Rae order the agenda by the way?
18:21:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other to take off?
18:21:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's the only other one.
18:22:00 I would ask that 5, 6 and 7 be moved to the end with
18:22:03 number 11.

18:22:04 If we could, we'll go through number 4.
18:22:09 >>GWEN MILLER: And 3?
18:22:11 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm sorry, number 3.
18:22:17 And then number 9.
18:22:22 And then number 8.
18:22:27 No, 10.
18:22:27 I forgot about 10.
18:22:28 The Planning Commission is here.
18:22:30 Would you like to hear about the EAR first or like to
18:22:33 hear about the zoning case first?
18:22:34 >>GWEN MILLER: So we are going to do 3, 9 and 10.
18:22:39 That's what we are going to do first.
18:22:41 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tony Garcia is saying 3, 10, 9, 8.
18:22:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And I believe before we proceed on
18:22:51 number 3, I believe Ms. Coyle council needs to waive
18:22:54 the 13 day rule.
18:22:55 Did you want to give an opinion as to whether you are
18:22:58 prepared to proceed on that?
18:23:00 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We'll be asking to you waive
18:23:01 the day rule.
18:23:03 They did submit it the Monday after the deadline.
18:23:05 We have no objection to it.

18:23:06 We were able to review the, and to move this forward
18:23:10 because it's been continued.
18:23:12 Staff has no objection.
18:23:22 I apologize.
18:23:23 There are nine.
18:23:26 I'm thinking of these cases from before.
18:23:28 Did you waive the rules?
18:23:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Not yet.
18:23:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Waive the rules for number 3.
18:23:35 >> Second.
18:23:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Moved and seconded to waive the rules
18:23:38 for number 3.
18:23:39 (Motion carried).
18:23:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The public hearing is -- now we are
18:23:46 going to hear it, move to open?
18:23:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:23:49 >> Second.
18:23:49 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open
18:23:51 number 3.
18:23:52 (Motion carried).
18:23:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you wish to swear in the
18:23:55 witnesses at this time?

18:23:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:23:57 Anyone in the public that's going to speak on item 4,
18:24:02 6, 7 -- open them all up at the same time?
18:24:07 Everyone then.
18:24:10 All the way through number 11.
18:24:12 If anyone is going to speak to any of those items,
18:24:14 would you please stand and raise your right hand?
18:24:18 Item 4 through 11.
18:24:19 If going to speak to any of those items.
18:24:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Include item 3.
18:24:25 Number 3 as well.
18:24:28 (Oath administered by Clerk) item 3 is open.
18:24:39 Mr. Shelby.
18:24:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ski that all written communications
18:24:43 open to the public that have been available in the
18:24:45 office be received and filed in the record at this
18:24:47 time.
18:24:48 >> So moved.
18:24:49 >> Second.
18:24:49 (Motion carried).
18:24:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Secondly, please if any member of the
18:24:52 council has had any verbal communications, any ex

18:24:55 parte communications with any petitioner or any member
18:24:58 of the public in connection with any of the petitions
18:24:59 that are going to be heard tonight, please disclose
18:25:01 the identity of the person, group or entity with whom
18:25:04 the verbal communication occurred and the substantive
18:25:07 verbal communication before the vote, and, ladies and
18:25:10 gentlemen, please, I put a little placard to remind
18:25:13 you, when you state your name please reaffirm you have
18:25:15 been sworn for the record.
18:25:16 Thank you.
18:25:19 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
18:25:20 I have been sworn.
18:25:22 This petition is to rezone the property at 607 to AP
18:25:27 PD zoning district to create two buildable lots for
18:25:32 structures. The site measures 45 by 110 currently by
18:25:36 plat.
18:25:36 45 feet lot, the lots are five feet short of the RS-50
18:25:40 minimum.
18:25:40 Therefore the need for the PD.
18:25:42 The standard setbacks for RS-50 are as follows: 20
18:25:46 feet in the front, 20 in the rear, 15 at the side.
18:25:52 15-yard, side yard between 5 and 10-foot 7 and the

18:25:56 rear yard will be 44-foot 9 inches, 44.9 feet rather.
18:26:03 There are trees in the rear of the property as well.
18:26:05 The homes along Excelda range between 15 and 20 feet.
18:26:12 The ribbon driveway.
18:26:15 There is a home on the site that will be removed.
18:26:18 You will note on the Elmo, this is Habana to the east.
18:26:25 The site is here.
18:26:28 Cass street to the south.
18:26:30 On the aerial that was provided you will note this
18:26:35 shaded in yellow is actually the West Tampa overlay,
18:26:38 just outside, one block outside.
18:26:42 This is a picture -- this is the home across the
18:26:50 street.
18:26:55 To the north.
18:26:56 Next door.
18:26:59 Also across the street.
18:27:03 This house is on the same block just to orient you.
18:27:10 It's on the corner diagonal from the property.
18:27:15 These are from a block to block and a half radius that
18:27:18 has been built new.
18:27:20 And then some that are under construction.
18:27:25 Then some with the garage that is attached.

18:27:29 These will have a detached garage.
18:27:32 And they will be built in two.
18:27:35 You will note in the report on the bottom of page 1,
18:27:37 and all of page 2, there were originally objections.
18:27:40 They were technical objections.
18:27:42 And the notes that were required to be objections have
18:27:45 been added to the site plans.
18:27:47 Both objections have been lifted.
18:27:49 And with the waiver, for the 13-day rule, as far as
18:27:52 staff is concerned, there is no further issues with
18:27:55 this plan.
18:28:04 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:28:05 I have been sworn.
18:28:07 A couple of additional comments to add along to Ms.
18:28:12 Coyle's comment.
18:28:13 Regarding -- this is largely within the boundaries of
18:28:16 the park neighborhood association.
18:28:19 There are three predominant land use categories for
18:28:22 this area.
18:28:23 Dark brown is residential 20, orange is residential 10
18:28:25 of which the subject site consists of, and of course
18:28:29 CMU 35 directly to the north.

18:28:32 Regarding a little bit wider context of the area,
18:28:37 cypress to the north, the other major thoroughfare to
18:28:40 the south is Kennedy Boulevard, about seven blocks
18:28:42 south of the subject site, MacDill Avenue lies to
18:28:45 the west, Armenia lies to the east.
18:28:51 For a little bit more, I guess context very
18:28:54 specifically, this is the bakery just to the north of
18:29:00 Cypress Street.
18:29:01 As Mrs. Coyle stated to you there is a variety of
18:29:04 architectural styles which she has depicted from the
18:29:09 photograph.
18:29:09 Via photographs.
18:29:10 So you can see there are a variety of architectural
18:29:13 styles in the area and there has been a continuous
18:29:16 development in the area.
18:29:17 Planning Commission staff has in a objection to the
18:29:18 proposed request.
18:29:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:29:27 >>> Jason Landahl, I have been sworn in.
18:29:33 The intent was to subdivide the property to two
18:29:37 single-family homes.
18:29:38 I think you saw the proposed photographs.

18:29:42 The exteriors will be somewhat different.
18:29:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I wanted to thank you for planning
18:29:53 on detached garages.
18:29:54 I think that's much more --
18:29:58 >>> Well, they are supposed to be West Tampa overlay
18:30:01 district just a block away, with the overlay concept.
18:30:05 >> Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak
18:30:07 on item number 3?
18:30:09 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
18:30:10 >> Second.
18:30:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
18:30:12 (Motion carried).
18:30:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's really great when
18:30:19 somebody is not in the overlay district but near that
18:30:22 you are still designing as if you had to respond to
18:30:25 those guidelines.
18:30:30 Move an ordinance rezoning property within the general
18:30:32 vicinity of 607 north Excelda Avenue in the city of
18:30:37 Tampa, Florida from zoning district classifications
18:30:41 RS-50 to PD planned development providing an effective
18:30:45 date.
18:30:45 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.

18:30:46 (Motion carried)
18:30:49 Ms. Coyle, which one did you say next?
18:30:52 Item 10?
18:30:53 >> So moved.
18:30:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open
18:30:56 item number 10.
18:30:57 (Motion carried).
18:31:05 >>> Good evening, council.
18:31:08 Thank you very much for bringing us to the front.
18:31:11 Michelle Ogilvy, Planning Commission staff.
18:31:15 I have been sworn, Mr. Shelby.
18:31:18 Before you this evening is the evaluation and
18:31:20 appraisal reports for the Tampa comprehensive plan,
18:31:25 which is a requirement of state law, which provides us
18:31:27 an opportunity to pause and reflect where we have
18:31:31 been, where we are, and where we are going with our
18:31:34 comprehensive plan.
18:31:37 The comprehensive plan and to judge its effectiveness.
18:31:40 State law also requires that state issues of local
18:31:44 concern that are explored in the process along with a
18:31:48 total of 17 tasks which make up the 214-page document
18:31:53 we are asking you to adopt and transmit this evening.

18:31:58 It's wonderful to be at this place now, because we
18:32:01 started this in October 2003, and I think many of you
18:32:05 were there up in north Tampa when we began.
18:32:10 Your work frame which we started our seven countywide
18:32:15 meetings, our special 50 meetings, into the local
18:32:18 issues for Hillsborough County.
18:32:20 Tampa then took that work, and with the help of a
18:32:24 study in which you had participated again, in the fall
18:32:27 of 2004, we framed the local issues for Tampa which
18:32:31 you approved in July of 2005.
18:32:34 Overall, the agency evaluation and appraisal report
18:32:37 shows that the existing comprehensive plan is
18:32:41 significantly out of date and needs to be restructured
18:32:44 to meet the challenges of our future.
18:32:46 The plan needs to include a community-wide focus,
18:32:49 integrate elements of planning that have not been
18:32:52 included in the comprehensive plan in the past, and
18:32:56 the plan needs to emphasize neighborhood livability,
18:33:00 access, children, arts and culture, and all the other
18:33:05 major issues of local concerns such as the
18:33:09 transportation exception area, which you are going to
18:33:13 be talking about soon, and schools.

18:33:17 Several components of the comprehensive plan will also
18:33:19 need to be updated to reflect the new requirements of
18:33:22 the growth management law.
18:33:25 Projections suggest that by 2025, Tampa will be the
18:33:28 home to 425,900 people.
18:33:33 Such changes will affect the demand for housing, the
18:33:40 community services, residential preferences, the
18:33:43 amount and type of recreational opportunities, and the
18:33:47 size of our labor force.
18:33:49 The overall theme of livability will allow to us
18:33:52 rethink the planning for the City of Tampa from a
18:33:55 people perspective.
18:33:57 Livability about the quality of life, and allows us to
18:34:01 ask the question, what do we want to keep, and what do
18:34:05 we wish to change as we move forward?
18:34:09 Tampa is a unique city in the Tampa Bay area, as
18:34:12 you're well aware.
18:34:14 It's a major metropolitan city.
18:34:16 It is vibrant, multicultural, it has prosperous
18:34:20 industrial areas, educational and business centers,
18:34:26 that attract investment, and draw great attention from
18:34:31 all corners of the globe.

18:34:32 We will join Charlotte, Denver, San Diego, and
18:34:36 Jacksonville if we follow the community of access to
18:34:41 pursue.
18:34:42 On May 22nd, 2006, the Planning Commission
18:34:46 reviewed the EAR, found to the be sufficient, and has
18:34:50 passed it to you to adopt and transmit to the
18:34:53 department of communicate affairs.
18:34:55 And this concludes my presentation.
18:34:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:35:01 wants ton speak on item number 10?
18:35:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
18:35:07 >> Second.
18:35:07 (Motion carried).
18:35:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Move the resolution.
18:35:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:35:12 >> Second.
18:35:12 (Motion carried).
18:35:12 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open number 9.
18:35:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
18:35:20 (Motion carried).
18:35:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
18:35:24 I will be brief on this.

18:35:25 This is a request to extend the temporary abatement
18:35:28 ordinance for the area within the land use boundary
18:35:35 areas to a bait the comprehensive plan amendment,
18:35:38 special use requests, within the clear zone and the
18:35:40 APZ 1 zone outside of the runway area from MacDill
18:35:44 Air Force Base.
18:35:45 It's an extension of six months, and it is to
18:35:47 implement -- to implement the study recommendations
18:35:52 which will involve comp plan amendments, map and
18:35:57 chapter 27 zoning text amendment.
18:36:03 Do you have any questions?
18:36:08 Okay.
18:36:09 Can you move it?
18:36:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:36:12 wants to speak on item number 9?
18:36:16 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:36:19 We have just presented the recommendation for the
18:36:22 extension of the abatement to the Planning Commission
18:36:24 and it was unanimously approved by Planning Commission
18:36:26 at our last meeting this past Monday, two weeks ago.
18:36:29 Thank you.
18:36:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public want to speak

18:36:32 on item it?
18:36:33 >> Move to close.
18:36:34 >> Second.
18:36:34 (Motion carried).
18:36:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita, do you want to read that
18:36:39 one?
18:36:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: Sure.
18:36:44 Move an ordinance amending ordinance number 2005-215
18:36:49 which placed an abatement upon the acceptance and or
18:36:52 processing of applications for rezoning, special use
18:36:54 permits and amendments to the Tampa comprehensive
18:36:57 plan, including future land use map amendments, for
18:37:00 real property or portions thereof located within the
18:37:03 clear zone and accident potential zone 1 in the
18:37:06 vicinity of MacDill Air Force Base, extending the
18:37:08 application to ordinance number 2005-215 for an
18:37:13 additional six months, February 5, 2007, to allow
18:37:17 sufficient time to finalize the findings of the joint
18:37:20 land use study, and necessary regulatory and
18:37:24 nonregulatory measures, prohibiting the process of
18:37:28 such requests within those zones, creating an
18:37:31 exemption for the city initiated measures, directly

18:37:33 related to the implementation of the findings of the
18:37:35 joint land use study, providing for severability,
18:37:39 repealing all ordinance or parts of all ordinances in
18:37:41 conflict therewith, providing an effective date.
18:37:46 >> We have a motion and second.
18:37:47 All in favor say Aye.
18:37:49 Opposed, Nay.
18:37:49 (Motion carried).
18:37:50 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open number 8.
18:37:53 >> Second.
18:37:53 (Motion carried).
18:37:54 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
18:37:59 So we are finally here, chapter 27 amendments.
18:38:02 The interim amendments, the first step.
18:38:05 I did pass out the matrix that was delivered to you
18:38:08 through e-mail.
18:38:09 And you did receive the ordinance back at the
18:38:12 beginning of May, as well as on the back.
18:38:16 It's a fairly hefty ordinance.
18:38:17 I think it turns out to be around 78 or 80 pages long.
18:38:23 First, I want you to note we did meet extensively with
18:38:27 various members of the public.

18:38:29 We did meet with the builders association, the zoning
18:38:34 commission that was appointed, met individually with
18:38:37 several people.
18:38:38 We did have three council work sessions, in the
18:38:42 Mascotte room.
18:38:43 And several directors meetings at the construction
18:38:47 services office with the builders association as well.
18:38:54 The proposed changes are trying issues that have been
18:38:59 directed over the last two and a half years by council
18:39:02 issues that we have had administering the regulations
18:39:06 that we have currently.
18:39:08 Several of them are clean-up items for reference to
18:39:10 department names.
18:39:13 Single-family residential designed standards, semi
18:39:17 attached design standards, attached design standards,
18:39:20 which are essentially setting a bare minimum design
18:39:23 standard essentially for affordable housing.
18:39:25 And I can get into that more.
18:39:28 You are going to hear things from both sides tonight
18:39:31 from the neighborhood and from the builders
18:39:33 association.
18:39:34 It came out at the Planning Commission hearing as

18:39:36 well.
18:39:36 I'm not sure if any of you came into that.
18:39:41 Other portions of this amendment are for CPTED
18:39:45 standards trying to implement them city-wide.
18:39:46 We did receive the lighting standards from CPD.
18:39:52 Throughout the city for commercial properties and
18:39:54 larger multifamily tracks.
18:39:58 There are amendments to the site plan controlled
18:40:00 districts for PD especially.
18:40:04 Due to many issues that we have, like tonight, there
18:40:06 are procedural changes, site plan requirement changes,
18:40:10 the 3-D modeling requirements that you're asking,
18:40:13 specifically for 8 stories or more, developments
18:40:16 talked about are high-rise.
18:40:24 I can certainly go through each of them.
18:40:26 There are all standards that came directly from that
18:40:28 department as well.
18:40:31 In discussion with the Planning Commission, at the end
18:40:33 of that hearing, there were no direct policies cited
18:40:37 that were found inconsistent.
18:40:38 However, they did make a motion to find the changes
18:40:42 inconsistent with the comp plan.

18:40:44 I did receive the report from Tony Garcia.
18:40:47 And if you look at the report, the policies that are
18:40:49 noted in their statement for inconsistencies are the
18:40:55 exact policies noted in his finding of consistency.
18:40:58 So I didn't actually attend the meeting.
18:41:02 I was out of town for a joint land use study.
18:41:07 Gloria was in attendance along with Cate O'Dowd and
18:41:10 her conversation was them, there were no direct
18:41:12 citations of policies at the end, finding
18:41:15 inconsistent.
18:41:16 I looked through the report and lad at the policies
18:41:18 that they found.
18:41:19 The first one made in the report is the development
18:41:22 shall not exceed the densities and intensities
18:41:25 established within the land use element.
18:41:27 We are not addressing any additions to F. A. R.
18:41:33 requirements, floor area ratio, not addressing any
18:41:35 density requirements through this amendment at all.
18:41:38 So that's one technically doesn't apply to the
18:41:40 amendment that is we are asking for.
18:41:41 Each land use plan category shall have a unique set of
18:41:45 zoning districts but may be permitted within the land

18:41:47 use plan category adopted in the zoning code.
18:41:50 Also we are not asking for any additional uses or
18:41:55 additions to the use table.
18:41:57 Developments must meet or exceed the requirements of
18:41:59 all land development regulations, including but not
18:42:02 limited to zoning, subdivision, land and signage.
18:42:06 And I want to stress, meet or exceed the requirements.
18:42:09 What we are doing here is establishing bare minimum
18:42:12 requirements as far as we can see it.
18:42:16 Front door requirements and rear door requirements for
18:42:18 single family houses.
18:42:19 I can certainly get into that more as that discussion
18:42:22 comes up.
18:42:24 Recognize the importance of stable neighborhoods
18:42:26 through social and economic health of the city,
18:42:28 carefully consider this one implementing the city's
18:42:31 codes.
18:42:33 Improving the minimum design standards for affordable
18:42:36 housing.
18:42:36 And once again establish CPTED throughout the city for
18:42:41 lighting standards for commercial properties directly
18:42:43 from the Tampa Police Department and solid waste

18:42:45 standards for additional buffering and screening
18:42:48 requirements, for as you know, areas of -- it can be a
18:42:54 little not appealing to look at, like dumpsters, that
18:42:57 are not screened properly, that are sitting out in the
18:42:59 middle of the road.
18:43:02 Continue to use policy 2-B-7, continue to use the
18:43:06 general design considerations for single-family
18:43:08 attached residential units, and predominantly
18:43:10 single-family detached residential areas.
18:43:13 At the end of that, it says more visually and
18:43:17 functionally compatible, once again, minimum design
18:43:20 standards for front doors, rear doors, carports and
18:43:23 garages.
18:43:24 I want to reiterate that.
18:43:26 And I can read them verbatim out of the amendment and
18:43:29 explain how they will apply.
18:43:31 Policy B-5-5, neighborhoods serving commercial and
18:43:35 residential office uses that serve the daily needs of
18:43:38 residents designated for residential development shall
18:43:41 be considered, provided the activities ever compatible
18:43:44 with surrounding existing planned residential.
18:43:47 I will reiterate, CPTED standards, lighting standards,

18:43:51 solid waste standards, does not apply for building
18:43:53 design for neighborhood, commercial, or office
18:43:56 standards.
18:43:57 What we are doing here for minimum design standards is
18:43:59 strictly residential.
18:44:01 And once again, we are adding the criteria and the PD
18:44:07 standards for site plan control zoning districts, so
18:44:10 that staff has a better ability to review these plans
18:44:12 and these developments to give you the tools to make a
18:44:14 better decision.
18:44:16 That's the bottom line.
18:44:19 The page 3 of their report, encourage the
18:44:21 redevelopment and revitalization of rundown and or
18:44:25 underutilized conditions same as the previous policy.
18:44:29 Finally, D-2.4, existing regulations planned
18:44:32 development zoning districts may be modified to
18:44:35 include recognition of development criteria, differing
18:44:39 from comparable Euclidean districts.
18:44:42 That's exactly what we are doing.
18:44:44 The process is negotiable.
18:44:46 And the balance application of reasonable development
18:44:48 standards should be put in within those standards.

18:44:52 And we believe wholeheartedly that's what we are
18:44:54 doing.
18:44:58 I can go through the majors with you.
18:45:00 I would like to -- approximately a third of these are
18:45:05 directly from council motions.
18:45:07 Many others are through discussions with different
18:45:09 council members, members of the public, basically
18:45:13 staff going through these planned developments with
18:45:14 you, and understanding the issues that have come up
18:45:17 over time.
18:45:19 Many of the others, like I said, back to the Tampa
18:45:21 Police Department, through solid waste, there are a
18:45:24 couple amendments from the transportation department
18:45:26 dealing with our visibility standards.
18:45:28 Because they are adopting new regulations for their
18:45:32 technical manual.
18:45:33 We don't want the codes to conflict.
18:45:35 I am available for any questions.
18:45:37 You will once again hear from both sides.
18:45:40 We believe these are excellent amendments and a very
18:45:43 good first step, because we will eventually be
18:45:46 rewriting the entire code.

18:45:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the purposes of the record,
18:45:50 Ms. Coyle, you have been sworn?
18:45:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I have been sworn.
18:45:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez.
18:45:58 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I'm glad that you clarified that,
18:46:00 because I was kind of confused when I saw the report
18:46:04 from the Planning Commission, and the executive
18:46:07 summary from the staff said that it is consistent, and
18:46:09 then when I went and I looked, and the Planning
18:46:12 Commission report was inconsistent, and I believe I
18:46:15 called your office to find out about it, but it still
18:46:19 didn't tell me what the differences were.
18:46:21 So I'm glad that you were able to tell me.
18:46:23 I think the changes that we have done are good.
18:46:28 It's pretty much everything that we have asked for.
18:46:32 The City Council has.
18:46:33 And as I said, I think that we will listen to both
18:46:38 sides.
18:46:38 But I think at the end of the day we're on the right
18:46:42 track as far as this is concerned.
18:46:44 So I thank you for clarifying this.
18:46:46 Thank you.

18:46:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to recognize what a huge
18:46:52 amount of work this is.
18:46:53 And this is only the glitch bill.
18:46:57 But I know that we have gone -- we have spent years
18:47:02 and months in meetings and discussions, and this is
18:47:06 through the compilation of the things that nag at us
18:47:10 at every zoning meeting because there are undotted
18:47:14 I's, uncrossed T's, but before us is an effort to
18:47:19 clarify the rules that we have requested that you do
18:47:21 for us.
18:47:22 And I'm pleased that we are at this point.
18:47:24 I always wish we could find a fast forward button.
18:47:27 But I'm glad we are here now.
18:47:29 >> It's only been two and a half years.
18:47:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
18:47:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Cathy, thanks for all your hard
18:47:36 work on this.
18:47:39 What I'm curious about is, in our public participation
18:47:43 part of this, it's typically your norm to go out to
18:47:49 the industry as well as to the neighborhoods,
18:47:51 typically through had T.H.A.N.
18:47:54 So has that process been followed all the way up until

18:47:59 today?
18:48:00 >> T.H.A.N. appointed a zoning committee to meet with
18:48:02 me, and method I met at Margaret Vizzi's house for
18:48:07 about three and a half years.
18:48:09 We had a meeting at Moore's house for I thought the
18:48:12 same time.
18:48:12 >> When was the most recent?
18:48:14 >> Within the last two and a half weeks, I believe.
18:48:18 And we met with the builders association in Cindy
18:48:21 Miller's office with their appointed representative.
18:48:24 We met on two separate occasions during her director's
18:48:27 meeting at the Construction Services Center.
18:48:29 One, I was brought in for the joint land use study
18:48:34 when it went to chapter 27.
18:48:37 One Gloria Moreda discussed the changes to chapter 27.
18:48:40 They also attended, I believe, two of the council
18:48:42 workshops as you recall they were present.
18:48:45 And we did stay afterwards, Gloria and I did stay
18:48:47 afterwards, to get some of their recommendations.
18:48:49 And you will note the matrix there are one or two of
18:48:55 them directly from them as well.
18:48:56 >> With the exception of this letter in our packet

18:48:59 from Joe miller from Ballast Point, I read all my
18:49:04 e-mails, I read all my letters, and I don't recall
18:49:07 hearing from anybody about this.
18:49:08 Now maybe there's some confusion.
18:49:10 But I want to straighten it out for all time's sake.
18:49:13 This is a change of our code.
18:49:17 And because it's a change of our code, anybody and
18:49:20 everybody -- it's a legislative process.
18:49:22 And everybody can lobby us, contact us, call us, talk
18:49:26 to us, at any time about changes to our code.
18:49:28 Mr. Shelby, would you confirm that?
18:49:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
18:49:32 As a matter of fact, I just spoke with Ms. O'Dowd
18:49:34 about that.
18:49:34 It is improperly mislabeled as quasi-judicial.
18:49:41 There's a legislative function that council is
18:49:43 considering tonight.
18:49:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I'm afraid perhaps people got
18:49:46 confused about that because so often we are in the
18:49:48 quasi-judicial mode and everybody stays away from us
18:49:52 properly so and doesn't talk to us because they can't.
18:49:55 So I don't know.

18:49:56 I just wanted to clarify that for future reference.
18:49:59 Whenever we are changing our code, we are fair game.
18:50:02 And please call us and contact us in advance.
18:50:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can say, if I may, that when I do
18:50:10 E mails these changes out it's the first one out in
18:50:13 October 2005, the full ordinance, and amendments
18:50:15 thereafter, but it was about 67 pages at that point.
18:50:18 I e-mailed to everyone that's in my e-mail bank which
18:50:23 is a lot of people, attorneys that I deal with,
18:50:26 developers in my e-mail bank.
18:50:28 That's where it's gotten out.
18:50:29 And I have put the different meeting dates and council
18:50:32 meeting dates on the newsletter that we put out in our
18:50:38 news letters that goes to interested parties.
18:50:41 About every two weeks.
18:50:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Did you want to comment?
18:50:45 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:51:03 I have been sworn in.
18:51:04 I would like to convey to you all what occurred at our
18:51:07 regular meeting on June 12th.
18:51:08 Of course, Ms. Alvarez has already stated obvious, the
18:51:12 Planning Commission, the finding of any consistency

18:51:15 with the proposed changes to chapter 27.
18:51:18 I have handed out to you -- and it's not an all
18:51:21 inclusive list, it's just about five different items
18:51:25 of a variety of questions that the Planning
18:51:26 Commissioners had directed regarding the changes to
18:51:30 chapters 27.
18:51:32 Again that's just very brief outline of what the
18:51:36 issues were that they had brought forward.
18:51:39 In addition to that, there was some public comment
18:51:42 regarding some concerns regarding chapter 27 changes.
18:51:47 Most of the issues that were brought up were actually
18:51:49 handled directly by Ms. Moreda, who was there that
18:51:52 evening, representing Ms. Coyle, who was I believe on
18:51:56 another -- in Orlando on a related item, I believe, so
18:52:01 she wasn't able to attend that meeting on Monday.
18:52:04 But Ms. Moreda did a fine job of coming in and
18:52:08 representing us that day on answering a lot of
18:52:13 questions directed by the Planning Commission.
18:52:14 Basically I'm conveying to you the Planning Commission
18:52:17 recommendation finding it inconsistent with the
18:52:18 comprehensive plan.
18:52:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?

18:52:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As part of the motion, for denial,
18:52:27 or recommendation, whatever you want to call it,
18:52:30 recommendation for denial, whatever, there was nothing
18:52:33 else added onto the motion.
18:52:36 We don't think it's consistent with the comprehensive
18:52:37 plan because of X, Y and Z.
18:52:41 They just heard testimony throughout the night, there
18:52:43 was a motion?
18:52:45 >>> Based on public testimony that evening, and I
18:52:48 guess they had all reached a consensus that they still
18:52:53 had uncertainty regarding the questions that they had,
18:52:55 and they had ample opportunity to discuss a lot of
18:52:57 things from Ms. Moreda.
18:52:59 And she can also attest to you a lot of the questions
18:53:02 that were much more than what I just outlined for you
18:53:07 on that one sheet.
18:53:12 >> I guess in the future it might be helpful, perhaps,
18:53:17 to ask the Planning Commission to perhaps be more
18:53:20 specific in a motion like that, you know, when we have
18:53:23 90-something pages of document here, they had problems
18:53:27 with all 90-something pages, or to be more specific in
18:53:32 that motion.

18:53:34 >>> Understood.
18:53:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:53:36 wants to speak on item number 8?
18:53:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again this is a legislative matter
18:53:46 and I incorrectly stated that people had to be sworn.
18:53:50 It's not necessary.
18:53:50 >>JIM SHIMBERG: Holland and Knight, 100 North Tampa
18:53:55 Street, here in a different capacity tonight, I'm
18:53:57 chairing the Tampa Bay builders association government
18:54:00 affairs committee this year.
18:54:01 And as Ms. Coyle stated, this is a comprehensive
18:54:05 change, to chapter 27, number of pages of changes, to
18:54:11 80 or 90 changes.
18:54:13 And our staff and some of our building members have
18:54:16 been working diligently with Ms. Coyle and other
18:54:19 members of staff in trying to understand the changes
18:54:21 participating in the different processes.
18:54:24 You will hear from some of them tonight.
18:54:26 My understanding is that they have made a lot of
18:54:28 progress.
18:54:28 They came to a lot of agreement.
18:54:30 But there were some issues that they did not agree or

18:54:33 did not understand, and were essentially told you need
18:54:36 to bring that in front of council.
18:54:38 That's what they want to do tonight.
18:54:40 They have some concerns from specific design standards
18:54:44 that are within the changes to chapter 27.
18:54:49 And you will hear more from them tonight.
18:54:51 There's also a couple of people that wanted to speak
18:54:54 tonight that are out of town.
18:54:56 So hopefully they'll get an opportunity at the next
18:54:58 public hearing when you have that.
18:55:00 But I think the bottom line is we are going to ask,
18:55:03 once you hear our concerns, that you agree to maybe
18:55:06 give some guidance and possibly a little bit of
18:55:11 additional work be done with staff because you make
18:55:13 this kind of comprehensive change, we would want to
18:55:15 try to have as much buy-in for everybody as possible.
18:55:18 So I wasn't at the Planning Commission meeting.
18:55:25 It might have been better if they would have
18:55:28 referenced some of the provisions they were concerned
18:55:30 about.
18:55:30 Apparently they were comfortable at the end of the
18:55:35 day.

18:55:36 So there are a number of builders associations members
18:55:40 asking to you carefully consider this and if you
18:55:41 believe that staff has any issues send it back to
18:55:45 staff and let them quickly work through it and get
18:55:47 this wrapped up.
18:55:48 Thank you.
18:55:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:55:49 Next.
18:55:56 >>> My name is Jennifer Mott singer, director of
18:55:59 governmental affairs for the Tampa Bay builders
18:56:00 association.
18:56:02 First I want to thank the City of Tampa staff for
18:56:04 meeting with us on several occasions to work out some
18:56:07 of the proposed changes to chapter 27.
18:56:11 In communication with them we found workable solutions
18:56:13 to a multitude of issues such as problems with the
18:56:16 height, potential first effects to larger residential
18:56:20 lots.
18:56:22 I think those meetings were very successful, and I
18:56:24 appreciate everyone's time that has been invested on
18:56:27 these issues.
18:56:34 The builders association does feel we have concern.

18:56:36 Our concern is that a majority of the revisions made
18:56:39 were based on personal opinions of building design
18:56:42 rather than ensuring the general welfare is protected.
18:56:46 During the public workshops, with members of council
18:56:49 present, I asked several questions and voiced my
18:56:52 concerns about what we considered to be extremely
18:56:55 restrictive design criteria.
18:56:57 And I was repeatedly told to review these issues
18:57:01 before council, and that is why I am here before you
18:57:03 tonight.
18:57:06 This is unnecessarily strict on how you park your car,
18:57:09 how you store your garbage and where your front door
18:57:13 can be.
18:57:13 If you look at the matrix you find a common theme of
18:57:17 rationale of these changes is to strengthen design
18:57:19 based regulations for Tampa's aesthetic future.
18:57:23 This takes too many choice as way from residents and
18:57:26 will certainly curtail the residential redevelopment
18:57:28 and economic development within the city.
18:57:36 It mandates that homeowners who hags an outdoor
18:57:39 storage must have an architecturally finished masonry
18:57:42 wall, and must plant a vine at an integral of every

18:57:46 ten feet.
18:57:48 How will you enforce that?
18:57:51 What happens if I can't afford that fence that you're
18:57:53 mandating that I put up?
18:57:56 As you know, it's been reported for years that
18:57:59 preservationists have determined vine may damage
18:58:05 masonry.
18:58:07 That's just one of the questions I ask.
18:58:08 In other sections of the code, the color is meant to
18:58:13 provide a clear guide line as to what is acceptable to
18:58:15 building in the community.
18:58:17 I am very confused how to comply with section 321 as
18:58:23 it relates to planned developments.
18:58:25 The section refers to planned developments with
18:58:31 phrases such as promote and encourage.
18:58:33 And they are not clear.
18:58:34 If you read subsection 7 it states that builders are
18:58:38 supposed to promote a more desirable living and
18:58:41 working environment than would be possible through the
18:58:43 strict application of minimum requirements of other
18:58:46 zoning districts.
18:58:49 I imagine developers working with staff on the planned

18:58:51 development, and their project is denied or delayed
18:58:54 due to the lack of desirable living and working
18:58:57 environments.
18:58:58 Building takes grade great pride in their project.
18:59:00 But how can we build something in the code if we can't
18:59:03 determine what that is exactly?
18:59:04 The Planning Commission did find that these code to be
18:59:09 inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, because they
18:59:12 felt these changes were more akin to the way a
18:59:15 homeowners association would restrict development in a
18:59:17 deed restricted community.
18:59:20 I was born an raised here in Tampa, and I think it's
18:59:23 beautiful, and I think we will continue to have a
18:59:25 great city.
18:59:26 (Bell sounds).
18:59:28 Council members, I urge you to let us work with staff
18:59:30 on Tampa few issues that we have remaining so that
18:59:33 this code can be followed and enforced.
18:59:36 Thank you.
18:59:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:59:37 Next.
18:59:48 >> I'm Gary brown, resident of Davis Island, also the

18:59:52 donor affairs chair of the Tampa Bay builders
18:59:54 association, also president of small single family
18:59:59 custom home builder in our neighborhood.
19:00:01 I'm going to change what I'm going to say tonight.
19:00:04 Jennifer did an excellent job of covering some of
19:00:06 these specifics that we were worried about in terms of
19:00:08 more and more design regulations.
19:00:12 If you look at any one thing in these changes, and
19:00:14 pull it out and analyze it by itself, it doesn't look
19:00:17 to be a big deal.
19:00:18 When you put them all together, it paints a pretty
19:00:22 clear picture that the City of Tampa seems to be
19:00:25 heading down a road where it wants to continue to
19:00:27 restrict property owners rights, and raise the cost of
19:00:30 building a home.
19:00:31 It doesn't address affordability, and any planner will
19:00:35 tell you that when a city refuses to address those
19:00:39 issues, you're promoting in-fill.
19:00:41 I believe that's what the Planning Commission reacted
19:00:43 to.
19:00:44 On a personal note, I have had the pleasure of working
19:00:47 with staff -- and they have been helpful -- we have

19:00:51 had quarterly meetings with Cindy Miller's L's staff
19:00:54 and in every one of those meetings we were told they
19:00:56 weren't going to discuss chapter 27 with us.
19:00:59 So Ms. Coyle was wrong there.
19:01:01 In fact, I'd like to know how I can get Ms. Coyle to
19:01:04 come to my house to talk about these issues.
19:01:08 There is a huge disconnect in this community between
19:01:13 the city and the builders association and T.H.A.N.
19:01:16 We would like to be able to work with T.H.A.N. on all
19:01:19 issues.
19:01:20 How do we do that?
19:01:22 We have asked city staff to assist us in making some
19:01:25 kind of a positive connection with T.H.A.N.
19:01:29 We're all neighbors in the same community.
19:01:32 I haven't heard what T.H.A.N. is concerned about.
19:01:34 They haven't heard what we're concerned about.
19:01:37 So I don't see how we get to this level before we
19:01:42 start to talk to each other.
19:01:43 So I would like to ask you tonight how to help with us
19:01:45 that.
19:01:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Gary, I guess I'm a little
19:01:51 confused, because I know I sat downstairs --

19:01:58 >> In the Mascotte room.
19:02:01 >>> Oh, I'm not saying that we haven't had our
19:02:03 chances.
19:02:04 We have had some agreement.
19:02:05 Don't misunderstand.
19:02:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But we had meetings.
19:02:09 >>> And whenever there was disagreements, the comment
19:02:12 was, you'll have to take it to City Council.
19:02:16 Okay.
19:02:17 That's what we are doing.
19:02:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I want to make at abundantly
19:02:20 clear --
19:02:21 >>> We are not saying everybody ignored us.
19:02:23 No, that's not the case.
19:02:25 But we have had one meeting with city staff, one on
19:02:27 one, and that was several months ago.
19:02:29 And then we tried to follow up, and the subsequent
19:02:33 meetings with Cindy Miller's staff it was always
19:02:36 deferred.
19:02:37 Itself was deferred all the way to the Planning
19:02:38 Commission.
19:02:39 So now we are in front of the Planning Commission.

19:02:42 We really don't want to be here discussing these
19:02:44 details with you.
19:02:44 We would rather work it out with staff, or T.H.A.N.,
19:02:47 or whoever.
19:02:50 Thank you.
19:02:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
19:02:52 Any questions from council members?
19:02:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to say that this has
19:02:57 been one of the most long and sunshiny processes
19:03:03 that's come before council.
19:03:04 We have had -- we have been talking about these
19:03:06 changes, these interim changes for two and a half
19:03:09 years.
19:03:09 And we had multiple meetings, and everyone is invited,
19:03:13 and everyone is encouraged to share with us e-mails,
19:03:17 or letters, or concerns.
19:03:19 And I'm sure tonight we'll have even more discussions.
19:03:22 I don't want the public who is watching us on TV, who
19:03:25 hasn't been in these myriad-long meetings to know that
19:03:29 we have had myriad-long meetings in which everybody
19:03:31 has not only been invited, they have had participated.
19:03:34 And we started out with supposedly 150 issues.

19:03:37 We narrowed them down to just a few that you will hear
19:03:40 about tonight where there wasn't consensus.
19:03:42 I mean, I really have to congratulate everyone who has
19:03:44 participated, because most of the changes, everybody
19:03:48 agrees with, and some people think are too strict and
19:03:53 some people think are too lenient, which to me is just
19:03:56 a central compromise.
19:03:58 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, I see more people wishing to
19:04:02 speak.
19:04:03 So what I would like to hear -- one, two, three, four,
19:04:06 five.
19:04:06 We have this Planning Commission concerns, proposed
19:04:10 chapter 27 changes, and there are five sections that
19:04:12 are listed in that.
19:04:14 And what I've heard from a couple of the speakers with
19:04:18 the builders association is, they agree with these.
19:04:22 But I don't know if they have spoken about any
19:04:25 additional concerns.
19:04:28 I'd like to have some sort of sheet of paper that we
19:04:31 could all reference to say: These are the specific
19:04:34 concerns that the builders association has.
19:04:37 And I don't know if we have that right now.

19:04:42 These are the Planning Commission concerns.
19:04:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Are you all lined up to speak?
19:04:48 When I say does anyone else want to speak, please get
19:04:51 up and speak so we can move our agenda.
19:04:53 If you want to speak, please come up now.
19:04:57 >>> Bill Duval, 5408 branch Avenue and I have been
19:05:00 sworn.
19:05:01 I'm here taint representing Tampa homeowners
19:05:05 association of neighborhoods.
19:05:09 I'm their president.
19:05:11 There was a brief mention earlier and I want to
19:05:14 confirm that we have a standing subcommittee called
19:05:17 zoning chaired by Margaret Vizzi.
19:05:20 She was unable to be here tonight.
19:05:22 She's away on family business.
19:05:26 But we have also with us several members that
19:05:28 participated.
19:05:29 And my purpose tonight up until about three minutes
19:05:33 ago was to simply ask that you receive and file the
19:05:40 matrix with comments on each and every item in that
19:05:44 matrix.
19:05:56 Of course, we thank Land Development Coordination for

19:05:58 putting this together.
19:05:59 We have had two changes.
19:06:06 Subject 27-98 regarding front porches, somehow, when
19:06:12 we had this discussion, there was a misunderstanding
19:06:15 that we were in favor of adding front porches.
19:06:18 However, we were not in favor of this encroaching on
19:06:21 the front yard setback with that front porch.
19:06:25 And for that reason, I just wanted to point that out.
19:06:31 And secondly was code 27-242 regarding the number
19:06:37 of -- I believe that's visitor parking, where it has
19:06:43 been suggested at .235 per unit which is a quarter
19:06:50 space per unit.
19:06:51 We think that should be at least .5.
19:06:53 If you have four townhouses you have two parking
19:06:56 spaces.
19:06:59 If you keep it at a quarter, you have four townhouse
19:07:02 was one guest, even .5 seems small.
19:07:06 But 2.57 is even smaller.
19:07:10 And the obvious reason here is any parking that spills
19:07:15 out into other neighborhoods is not a good idea.
19:07:23 The part that I was not expecting to speak on but I
19:07:25 will is access.

19:07:26 Dan has been dealing in this for years as you heard
19:07:30 from the Planning Commission earlier.
19:07:31 This process has been going on: I certainly don't
19:07:35 feel we had any unusual access.
19:07:37 It has been discussed from time to time in that
19:07:42 period.
19:07:42 And we each, as you know, the members of T.H.A.N. are
19:07:45 each present of their own association.
19:07:47 And they carry it back or not carry it back.
19:07:50 Beyond that, we can't really govern what they are
19:07:52 going to do.
19:07:53 But we do provide the information.
19:07:55 Again, I don't know that we have had any unusual
19:07:57 access other than say in general, T.H.A.N. has good
19:08:02 access to city government because we participate in
19:08:05 almost everything that goes on.
19:08:07 So it's just a matter of courtesy, we show up, get an
19:08:11 answer, go home, everything is happy.
19:08:13 So we are very pleased with the outcome of this.
19:08:16 And we do support it.
19:08:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
19:08:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm good.

19:08:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena?
19:08:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to clarify some of the
19:08:28 issues that were raised previously by the Planning
19:08:31 Commission was that one of them, residential design
19:08:35 standards, that there should be required front door
19:08:38 and back door.
19:08:40 You all agree with that, right?
19:08:42 >> Yes.
19:08:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How do you feel about outdoor
19:08:45 storage facilities being buffered?
19:08:49 >>> Well, it depends on your definition of outdoor
19:08:52 storage facilities.
19:08:53 I have seen some nice ones and I have seen some not
19:08:55 very nice ones.
19:08:57 I'm not sure code addresses the specifics of
19:08:59 aesthetics, although I did hear mention about on
19:09:03 walls.
19:09:04 Vines on walls.
19:09:05 Some of our T.H.A.N. members may be able to address
19:09:09 that better than I.
19:09:10 Because they went -- I had one of the great delegation
19:09:16 opportunities so I didn't participate.

19:09:17 I'm the messenger.
19:09:19 And they can certainly address that.
19:09:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:09:25 Next.
19:09:30 >> I'm Sally Sloan, 5206 Interbay Boulevard,
19:09:36 representing the association and I have been sworn.
19:09:39 I was on T.H.A.N. committee, and did meet with Cathy
19:09:43 Coyle, and we also met.
19:09:48 I believe did you receive the Ballast Point letter
19:09:50 from Jerry Miller, who couldn't be here tonight.
19:09:53 And I just wanted to kind of explain our objections.
19:09:56 We support the changes.
19:09:58 I think they're good.
19:10:00 And in some cases long overdue.
19:10:04 One of the changes that we have a problem with is
19:10:09 allowing the shifting of side yard setbacks in RS-50
19:10:13 and RS-60 so that one side could be 5 and one could be
19:10:18 9, just so the total is 14 feet.
19:10:21 Our board had a real problem with that because could
19:10:22 you end up with 10 feet between houses instead of 14,
19:10:27 or the two side setbacks to be on one side.
19:10:30 That's not enough.

19:10:35 We are opposed to the porches encroaching in the front
19:10:38 yard setback.
19:10:40 We really hate to see any lessening of any setbacks.
19:10:46 Most of all, lots are RS-50 and RS-60 and with the big
19:10:49 houses everything is close enough as it is.
19:10:55 The board also had a problem with pools and hot tubs
19:10:59 being elevated and with the hot tub being set back
19:11:02 only three feet from the property line.
19:11:04 They did not feel that was enough.
19:11:05 They thought it should be treated as a pool.
19:11:08 And the other really huge issue is parking.
19:11:11 We feel that should be at least half a space.
19:11:14 We have a horrible problem.
19:11:15 I can take pictures of ten cars parked illegally on
19:11:18 one lot every single day.
19:11:19 I call code enforcement.
19:11:21 Other neighbors do.
19:11:23 They're still there.
19:11:25 Next to a townhouse project that has no visible --
19:11:28 visitor parking.
19:11:29 And these are residents.
19:11:31 So, anyway, those are Ballast Point objections.

19:11:39 Other than that we support the changes.
19:11:43 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I was just going to ask, do you have
19:11:45 the specific code provisions that you're concerned
19:11:51 about W?
19:11:52 >> Yes.
19:11:53 They are on the Ballast Point letter.
19:11:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't have that.
19:12:02 >> Do you need the original?
19:12:04 >> No.
19:12:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Again, was there some confusion in
19:12:09 the neighborhood in terms of contacting us and talking
19:12:12 to us about these ordinance changes?
19:12:17 >>> No.
19:12:18 As a matter of fact, it was mentioned at T.H.A.N.
19:12:20 It was mentioned that this is not, you know, call them
19:12:25 up, go see them, but it was wide open.
19:12:28 And I also brought that up at the Ballast Point board,
19:12:33 that they have their representative, and here I am.
19:12:39 But it was made clear to those people.
19:12:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:12:47 Next.
19:12:51 >>> My name is Bob rosy.

19:12:53 And I have not been sworn in.
19:12:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You don't have to be.
19:12:58 >>> I'm the chief operating officer of New Millenial
19:13:01 homes.
19:13:03 As council members many know we are the lead being
19:13:06 builder of affordable housing within the Tampa Bay
19:13:08 area and City of Tampa.
19:13:09 Still remaining in that business in the area.
19:13:12 I'm here before you at the request of builders
19:13:15 association, and because we feel it's important to
19:13:18 express our views to the council.
19:13:20 And to understand the design concerns.
19:13:26 We focus on building starter homes for individuals.
19:13:30 The price of homes is unheard of in the marketplace,
19:13:32 it is 1,357,000 to 150,000, the majority of homes that
19:13:36 we sell within the City of Tampa.
19:13:38 There are three bedroom, two-bath, 1200 square foot
19:13:42 homes.
19:13:45 We are the large oath building of the number of
19:13:48 bungalows within the entire Tampa Bay area building
19:13:50 over 200 to respond to community issues.
19:13:53 However, I'm here to talk about the imposing of a

19:13:57 design standard.
19:14:02 It has an impact on the internal design of that home
19:14:05 to meet the needs of the customer, that home.
19:14:10 But if you have a 30-foot by 40-foot envelope to build
19:14:13 your home in, to hit your 1200 square feet, by
19:14:18 national code, by international code, by fair code
19:14:23 it's not imposed.
19:14:24 You need a secondary access.
19:14:25 We have found to make a home and meet the needs of our
19:14:31 over 1200 buyers who bought our homes.
19:14:37 Why it allows us to have ample 3-bedroom space for a
19:14:41 small family in that home.
19:14:42 Putting a door in the back, having an alleyway through
19:14:45 the home and cut into that size of a home leaves you
19:14:48 choices that are very difficult to make in that size
19:14:50 home, which is the starter home, throughout the United
19:14:54 States.
19:14:58 What it does, you have to make the tough choice of
19:15:00 having a two-bedroom home, or having a very tight
19:15:03 three-bedroom home with reduced storage space for
19:15:06 families, and a very small great room in the front of
19:15:10 that home, where the people -- congregate the family.

19:15:14 That's the trade-offs in design.
19:15:16 We have seen many designs.
19:15:17 The designs we come up with respond to what people in
19:15:20 the community want.
19:15:22 And we know we're correct.
19:15:24 We are correct because we are one of the few builders
19:15:28 that has a waiting list for people to buy our homes.
19:15:31 And we don't sell to just affordable.
19:15:33 We sell workforce housing, which are the people that
19:15:36 are the backbone of our community.
19:15:38 They are your nurses.
19:15:39 They are your policemen, your firemen.
19:15:42 A lot of teachers, in the Tampa Bay community.
19:15:45 I can tell you that when you start to mess with the
19:15:48 internal design of a home and the customers -- large
19:15:55 home, 1800, 2 that you square feet, you have the
19:15:57 ability.
19:15:58 The hardest home design if you talk to anyone, any
19:16:01 architect, any planner, it's a small home that meets
19:16:07 the needs of the family and that's the challenge we
19:16:11 face every day.
19:16:12 That's why the builders association agrees with us and

19:16:15 they asked us to come speak.
19:16:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez.
19:16:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think I have to agree with you with
19:16:22 the home that's 1200 square feet.
19:16:24 I remember years ago when I first bought -- when I
19:16:28 bought my first home it was about that size.
19:16:30 And it had a side door which went from the kitchen
19:16:34 into the carport.
19:16:36 And behind the carport was the utility room.
19:16:42 If it had a back door in there, it would have
19:16:45 eliminated space in the kitchen, which is a small
19:16:48 kitchen with a 1200 square foot home.
19:16:50 You don't get very much.
19:16:51 So I think I have to agree with you in that situation.
19:16:55 I think that maybe we can make some adjustments to
19:16:58 that by maybe saying that if it's 1400 square foot or
19:17:05 less, they could have the side door.
19:17:07 We need to talk to Cathy about that.
19:17:09 >> The issue comes in with the size of the lot and the
19:17:12 setbacks and the space that you can work in.
19:17:14 Because if we have to go to two stories, you're
19:17:16 increasing the cost of the home.

19:17:20 For that second story by over 40 to 70% depending on
19:17:23 the construction materials and quality you want to put
19:17:26 into it.
19:17:27 So we're very glad.
19:17:31 We think 1800 or beyond definitely, I can understand
19:17:34 why because you're in that next level home.
19:17:40 >> Probably something they need to work on.
19:17:42 By the way, do you have any other designs other than
19:17:45 what you have been showing us whenever they come to
19:17:47 us?
19:17:48 >>> Well, when the people -- the way our system
19:17:51 works -- and to be very honest with you -- the folks
19:17:54 that come before you, mostly the realtors who are
19:17:56 buying our lots, we start a home on a lot, we put --
19:18:04 when we get a permit we put it for sale.
19:18:06 Typically we have a customer pretty quickly.
19:18:10 If one of my sales associates was here he could tell
19:18:13 you there's a waiting list on most of our homes.
19:18:15 We then give customers an option if they want to
19:18:19 change this, change that.
19:18:20 Most do not.
19:18:21 Our most popular model that we provide, where we build

19:18:25 our home on someone else's lot who already owns it,
19:18:29 and we do a very good business with that, eight to
19:18:31 nine a month across Tampa Bay, is they still want to
19:18:34 build our 1200 with the front porch, no garage, no
19:18:41 nothing.
19:18:41 We have about 12 oh to 13 designs involving garages,
19:18:45 second stories, everything.
19:18:46 But people pick the houses they want to pricewise.
19:18:51 >> Well, I do have to admit that your designs have
19:18:53 gotten a lot better.
19:18:55 >>> Thank you.
19:18:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, I have a question.
19:19:00 So the house you're talking of, the 1200 square foot
19:19:04 house, it has a front door or side door?
19:19:06 >> No, it has a front door and side door.
19:19:09 You need that by code.
19:19:10 Has a side access and front door.
19:19:12 And it creates the ability to have those two good size
19:19:15 bedrooms in the back, and easy in and outside access.
19:19:20 You're dealing with 40-foot space in most instances,
19:19:23 from 30 fate.
19:19:24 Our side door kicks in about 15 feet.

19:19:30 And it's near the kitchen in the main access point of
19:19:33 the house.
19:19:33 >> Thank you.
19:19:34 Next.
19:19:42 >> I'm Vicki Pollyea, 1311 South Moody Avenue.
19:19:47 I have been sworn in and I don't need to be, right?
19:19:50 I didn't attend the last T.H.A.N. meeting.
19:19:53 Councilman Dingfelder.
19:19:54 So I was one of the people that was unaware that we
19:19:57 could not solicit you.
19:19:59 I missed that meeting.
19:20:00 So I did not know that this was an open thing.
19:20:03 And I think if that was the case, I missed that
19:20:10 meeting so I didn't know that.
19:20:11 I did send it out to my Board of Directors.
19:20:13 And we support T.H.A.N.'s, all of the T.H.A.N.
19:20:17 statements, especially the .25 parking spaces for
19:20:21 multifamily dwellings.
19:20:24 And in our neighborhood many of our houses have ribbon
19:20:29 driveways, and you just don't have any parking
19:20:31 options.
19:20:32 And when you build a multifamily on this lot, you have

19:20:37 to make room,.
19:20:43 Regarding the open storage, that's not a T.H.A.N.
19:20:45 concern but it is a concern for my neighborhood,
19:20:48 because we have been dealing with two empty big open
19:20:52 storage -- it has to be commercial, next residential.
19:20:57 And you know that we have been before you for 15 years
19:21:00 on this one issue.
19:21:01 And I can tell you, those dumpsters are still open.
19:21:05 They have still got rats in them.
19:21:07 They still have other trash and they have still not
19:21:10 been -- so I can see wooden fence does not last around
19:21:16 a dumpster in a commercial development.
19:21:19 And for residential development, you really need that
19:21:22 level of protection of masonry.
19:21:25 Thank you.
19:21:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:21:26 Next.
19:21:32 >> Good evening.
19:21:32 I'm Walter Johnson, I am vice-president of T.H.A.N.
19:21:37 and I was a member of the T.H.A.N.'s zoning committee
19:21:41 that reviewed the proposed changes.
19:21:44 In general, as bill Duval outlined to you, we support

19:21:49 the changes that have been proposed, except with the
19:21:52 exception of the one or two that Bill mentioned to
19:21:55 you.
19:21:56 And according to that may Ricks -- matrix, the
19:22:01 proposed changes allowed porches up to 8 feet in the
19:22:04 front yard setback originated from City Council.
19:22:08 We hope you will reconsider that request, as we
19:22:11 believe that -- I will support the concept of open
19:22:15 porches, we believe that they should be built within
19:22:18 standard setbacks.
19:22:23 With respect to the overall proposed revisions, it's
19:22:26 interesting to note that there's some 45 to 46
19:22:29 revisions.
19:22:30 Of these 15 requested by you, City Council, seven were
19:22:36 requested by city-legal and or other departments, city
19:22:40 departments.
19:22:43 Nine were requested by the builders association and
19:22:45 the remainder by land development.
19:22:47 I think Ms. Moreda and Ms. Coyle, you have a dedicated
19:22:52 team that know and understand chapter 27.
19:22:56 As they work with it every day.
19:22:57 I believe the proposed changes will assist them in

19:23:01 performing their job, and I truly believe their
19:23:05 motivation is to have a more livable and more
19:23:07 beautiful city.
19:23:08 And aspect the comments made regarding -- and with
19:23:14 respect to the meeting with T.H.A.N. and meetings
19:23:16 et cetera in private homes, keep in mind that T.H.A.N.
19:23:19 does not have an office per se so any committee
19:23:22 meetings we have will be in private homes and we are
19:23:24 extremely grateful to Ms. Coyle for coming out after
19:23:27 hours and meeting with us, and reviewing the actual
19:23:30 questions we have.
19:23:32 Thank you.
19:23:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:23:33 Next.
19:23:39 >> John wise, 3707 San Chavez street.
19:23:44 I was on the zoning committee with members and I am
19:23:47 not going to go over anything specific but I want to
19:23:49 point a couple things out.
19:23:50 We have had many meetings from kitchen tables to
19:23:52 mascotte rooms and months and months in between.
19:23:55 As I look at the rationale for change I wonder how can
19:23:58 we disagree with this, when the rationale is to

19:24:01 strengthen design based regulations, don't we really
19:24:05 need that?
19:24:06 Uniformity in the process.
19:24:08 A better defined site plan zoning to encourage quality
19:24:11 development.
19:24:12 But it's in character with surrounding neighborhoods,
19:24:14 and furthers our goal to be a livable and thriving
19:24:20 city.
19:24:20 Here are criteria for staff review and City Council
19:24:23 consideration.
19:24:24 These are things you have all asked for and I'm
19:24:26 grateful that you did.
19:24:27 I think one of the builders that spoke earlier tonight
19:24:30 said we need more planning involved, so that planners
19:24:33 aren't involved in this.
19:24:34 I think Cathy Coyle and Gloria Moreda are planners and
19:24:38 I think they do a great job.
19:24:40 I'm here to ask you to please vote on this tonight.
19:24:43 Don't put us through more meetings.
19:24:45 Don't let it get watered down.
19:24:47 I mean, really, this is something you asked for.
19:24:50 This is something that's been discussed.

19:24:52 It's been back and forth between all of the interested
19:24:57 parties.
19:24:58 I just hope tonight we can have some resolution.
19:25:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thanks, John.
19:25:07 Cathy with, all these changes in everything we are
19:25:10 doing to the chapter 27, is there a provision for
19:25:13 waivers?
19:25:15 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There are always opportunities to
19:25:18 waive.
19:25:21 >> The one we were talking about, the side door, can
19:25:24 you put waivers on those things?
19:25:26 >>> I actually have comments on many of the comments
19:25:28 that were made tonight, as essentially kind of a
19:25:31 rebuttal that I can explain because there were some
19:25:33 misunderstandings, I believe, and some
19:25:35 mischaracterizations.
19:25:38 I can go through them if you like.
19:25:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's hear from the rest of the public
19:25:41 first.
19:25:43 >>> Because I can explain.
19:25:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I was wondering if there were waivers
19:25:46 for any of these.

19:25:55 >>> There's always an ability for petitioner to get
19:25:59 from the design standard or setback or any of those
19:26:02 provisions.
19:26:02 >> That's what I wanted to hear.
19:26:05 >> Next.
19:26:14 >>> Sue Lyon, west Fairoaks Avenue.
19:26:18 I'm a member of the T.H.A.N. zoning committee.
19:26:20 And I met with anybody and everybody.
19:26:24 And I think the builders over the years know if they
19:26:26 want to talk to anybody at T.H.A.N. they can always
19:26:28 find me.
19:26:29 I'm very visible.
19:26:30 I've always been around.
19:26:35 Nobody has had as much access as we have.
19:26:39 And the reason we didn't come is they have been doing
19:26:43 a wonderful job keeping everybody apprised.
19:26:46 I have been very pleased with the work that Cathy
19:26:48 Coyle has done.
19:26:49 She's bent over backwards to explain things to us.
19:26:51 Because you know, I don't like this, I don't like
19:26:54 that, I don't like the other.
19:26:56 For me to come up and agree with most of this stuff,

19:26:58 you know, everything is not perfect, but it's never
19:27:01 going to be perfect.
19:27:06 They said it's okay, it will be fine, the builders
19:27:10 want it, and we don't have a problem with it.
19:27:12 So we're talking with Cathy.
19:27:17 We compromised until we can agree with what the staff
19:27:19 has brought up.
19:27:21 We love -- it hasn't been we love everything, this was
19:27:25 a T.H.A.N. proposal.
19:27:25 Because it wasn't.
19:27:26 It came from you all.
19:27:28 We have agreed with most of the stuff.
19:27:30 The thing about the two doors, the front door and the
19:27:32 back door.
19:27:33 I don't care where they put two doors, as long as you
19:27:36 got two doors, because if you have got a fire, when
19:27:39 you have somebody as fat as I am, they can't get out a
19:27:42 window.
19:27:44 They are going to die.
19:27:45 So you have to give them some way to get out the door.
19:27:47 And where they put it is not our choice.
19:27:50 When I see a front door and a back door, I want two

19:27:53 exits.
19:27:53 Just as a fire protection.
19:27:56 And the fire department agrees with it that we need
19:27:59 two exits.
19:28:00 That's why people die, because you can't get in to get
19:28:08 them out.
19:28:09 It's as simple as that.
19:28:10 It's not something the neighborhood group wants to
19:28:12 make free because you have got a back door.
19:28:13 You need a place to get out.
19:28:15 And as far as concrete block fence, I agree with the
19:28:21 builders, I don't know how you can keep that growing.
19:28:23 I can't keep trees alive in the city let alone vines.
19:28:26 And I'm not going out policing them.
19:28:28 I don't think the city is either.
19:28:30 But a concrete block wall will last.
19:28:33 You put up the wood fences, in no time they're gone.
19:28:38 A hurricane comes, it rots, you don't come up with it,
19:28:41 you need a concrete fence.
19:28:43 And if you build something that's an eyesore, I think
19:28:47 it's your responsibility, if you're not going to clean
19:28:50 it up, to at least put something decent around it so

19:28:53 the neighbors don't have to put up with it.
19:28:55 And I thank you for your time.
19:28:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:28:57 Ms. Ferlita.
19:28:59 >>ROSE FERLITA: This is a question to Ms. Coyle.
19:29:01 Thank you.
19:29:09 The T.H.A.N. side talked about the issue of the front
19:29:12 door and back door versus the side doctor and so did
19:29:14 the gentleman representing Millenial Homes.
19:29:16 So this is my question.
19:29:18 Rather than put somebody through some burdensome
19:29:22 variances to request that they go forward, or maybe
19:29:25 this is something to ask our attorney, I don't know,
19:29:28 is there an option tonight, Mr. Shelby, to change some
19:29:31 of the things that appear to be equally opposed by
19:29:38 both the neighborhood side and the builders' side?
19:29:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You would not be able to have a first
19:29:46 reading.
19:29:47 It would have to come back for first reading.
19:29:49 And the question is, would it have to go back to the
19:29:51 Planning Commission or not necessarily?
19:29:55 >>CATHERINE COYLE: if you reduce them I don't know if

19:29:59 it's going to change. I did discuss this with Kate.
19:30:01 And the discussion was if we could move forward at the
19:30:04 second reading and go back to first, if I can get
19:30:07 clear direction on what's changed, and then
19:30:10 essentially we would have another second reading two
19:30:12 weeks out from that next date which would be July
19:30:14 13th.
19:30:14 >>ROSE FERLITA: We are still in the middle of that and
19:30:17 I have another question too because I'm not sure that
19:30:19 I understood what Vicki Pollyea was talking about.
19:30:22 And maybe I misinterpreted.
19:30:25 She's talking about this storage protectors.
19:30:29 Are we strictly talking in these changes to chapter 27
19:30:32 of those protective barriers around dumpsters for
19:30:37 commercial?
19:30:38 Or is that also in the requirement for residential?
19:30:40 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There's two different provisions.
19:30:44 If you want, I can go through the list of things that
19:30:46 I noted.
19:30:47 One of them was the outdoor storage.
19:30:50 Ms. Pollyea discussed the dumpsters, which fall under
19:30:53 the solid waste provisions.

19:30:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: And I agree.
19:30:57 Those are unsightly.
19:30:59 We have been putting up with that forever.
19:31:01 >>> And the builders representative, Ms. Mottsinger, I
19:31:06 believe is her name, characterized 138 as if you were
19:31:11 a homeowner and had something on the side yard and.
19:31:15 The outdoor storage provision as reply to commercial
19:31:17 and industrial properties.
19:31:19 You are not allowed to have open storage of mechanical
19:31:21 equipment and large tractors and those things on
19:31:25 residential property.
19:31:27 Those regulations are specifically for where you can
19:31:30 have open storage or outdoor display area.
19:31:33 >> So if you have your garbage containers, you're not
19:31:36 required from a residential standpoint to build
19:31:39 something around as a buffer that's --
19:31:42 >>> You are under the solid waste provisions.
19:31:45 Yes, you would be.
19:31:46 >> But is that a change?
19:31:49 Because right now we are not requiring people to put
19:31:51 some sort of a decorative wall to be protective of
19:31:54 unsightliness of a dumpster, right?

19:31:56 Or not a dumpster but --
19:31:58 >>> They are required by chapter 26 currently to be
19:32:00 outside of the view from the public right-of-way.
19:32:03 Either put behind the fence, put inside your structure
19:32:06 on noncollection days.
19:32:07 That's why you continue to see those standard notes on
19:32:10 PDs.
19:32:11 They have to be outside of view from public
19:32:13 right-of-way.
19:32:13 But what they tried to do in the solid waste
19:32:16 provisions is try to build in additional buffers
19:32:19 between commercial and residential properties.
19:32:21 That's the main piece of it.
19:32:22 When you look at the table that's in there it's
19:32:24 modelled after the zoning buffer table that we have
19:32:27 for commercial to residential properties.
19:32:30 >> I'm not going to tray to make this more difficult
19:32:32 but I want to try to understand it as we mo go
19:32:35 forward.
19:32:35 Right now you have a code enforcement issue that if
19:32:37 you keep the garbage cans outside, sunset, sunrise,
19:32:42 whatever the requirements are, that you are not

19:32:43 allowed to do that.
19:32:45 >>> Correct.
19:32:45 >> You have to bring them in.
19:32:46 But say, for instance, your requirements to put your
19:32:51 cans out at a certain time, so we're not saying then
19:32:55 that a pretty buffer around it.
19:33:06 >>> If you're outside do you have to screen it.
19:33:08 That's correct.
19:33:09 There are provisions in hear for what contained of pad
19:33:11 they need to be placed on, for what kind of screening,
19:33:15 essentially visually integrated with the structure,
19:33:18 needs to be compatible with the structure.
19:33:20 You can't just throw a chain link around.
19:33:24 >> Fine.
19:33:24 But if you go to the expense, we know what the
19:33:27 expenses are these days, you have to have a brick
19:33:29 buffer around your garbage can?
19:33:32 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, that's not the interpretation,
19:33:34 at least that I got from solid waste, is that they are
19:33:36 going to do something that's compatible with.
19:33:38 You can use a solid wood fence to screen.
19:33:43 As long as it's visually buffered from the

19:33:45 right-of-way.
19:33:46 I mean, the reality of a lot of people are going to
19:33:48 store them in their house.
19:33:49 But if you do store them on the side they need to be
19:33:51 screened with something that essentially attaches to
19:33:53 the house, and is visually screening those containers.
19:33:57 >> It can be behind a fence?
19:34:01 >> Can be behind a fence, that's correct.
19:34:07 That is the current code.
19:34:08 They are hoping to adopt it in chapter 27 as well.
19:34:11 And add the table in for the buffering.
19:34:14 >>: So my question is, yes, that is the current code.
19:34:17 What is different than the -- in the suggestions you
19:34:20 have made and that the builders association has an
19:34:23 objection to?
19:34:24 >> Is there anything different?
19:34:29 Like if I put my garbage cans in the alley where it's
19:34:32 picked up, if I had to be in compliance with this new
19:34:35 regulation, change it?
19:34:36 Would I have to put some sort of buffering around it?
19:34:38 Or is it okay to stay in the alley?
19:34:40 >> You would need to put a screening around it.

19:34:43 At the end of the day, or whenever the end of that
19:34:45 cycle is, you would have to pull it back in and put it
19:34:47 behind whatever screening that you build for it.
19:34:52 That's correct.
19:34:54 This is to address -- and I can he will you.
19:34:57 You this -- I don't know if you have them in your area
19:35:01 yet.
19:35:01 >> Not in South Tampa.
19:35:02 >> I think within the next two years everyone will
19:35:04 have them.
19:35:05 It's going to be mandated.
19:35:06 So these measurements that they have in here, that
19:35:09 they have proposed, are to screen those carts.
19:35:13 Which is 4 by 4 measurement.
19:35:16 >> Then I'm more confused.
19:35:18 If you look at the alley, and we get those 4 by 4
19:35:21 carts, and I have to do something to buffer them, I'm
19:35:23 already building some sort of a container in the alley
19:35:26 behind my house to not make my garbage can so
19:35:29 unsightly.
19:35:31 But because the 4 by 4s are bigger, if I and the
19:35:34 person across from me built some sort of buffer around

19:35:37 both, that garbage truck is going to have a hard time
19:35:40 getting through there.
19:35:41 >>> If you build them in the alley, which you're not
19:35:44 supposed to do.
19:35:44 >> Well, they are out there, I don't have to buffer
19:35:49 them.
19:35:52 Let me hear from Ms. Moreda.
19:35:56 >>> I guess I'm confused by what you're asking.
19:35:58 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
19:35:59 When you're taking your solid waste containers out of
19:36:02 the right-of-way you that's not where they are being
19:36:05 required to screen.
19:36:05 It's when the collection has been completed and you're
19:36:09 supposed to take them back in out of view of the
19:36:11 right-of-way.
19:36:14 >> But that means alleys as well.
19:36:16 Unless you buffer the site where you leave it in the
19:36:19 alley.
19:36:21 >>> Yeah.
19:36:21 I don't know that you leave it in the alley, though.
19:36:24 You're not supposed to block the alley.
19:36:26 So beyond the private property.

19:36:28 And, yes, if you have it stored back there, then it
19:36:32 would require you to put a fence around.
19:36:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez?
19:36:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Your section 27-132 says all new
19:36:45 buildings, and or uses, except that's been taken off,
19:36:50 to provide facilities with the central storage of
19:36:53 solid waste within the lot.
19:36:54 Is that the commercial or is that for --
19:36:59 >>> It's all new commercial and residential but it's
19:37:01 new.
19:37:02 >> New.
19:37:02 >>> New construction.
19:37:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Then I have a question.
19:37:07 Drew Park, some of the -- I think it's Clark street,
19:37:13 one of the streets.
19:37:15 I've gone down there and they've got their dumpsters
19:37:21 on the right-of-way, because there's no room to put
19:37:25 them inside their properties.
19:37:28 Is that going to be a violation?
19:37:32 >>> It's not new.
19:37:33 It's existing.
19:37:34 >> So --

19:37:36 >>> These are not retrofitting.
19:37:38 Unless they come in for some kind of renovation or new
19:37:41 construction.
19:37:42 If they are redoing the entire site, that's when they
19:37:44 would have to comply with all the regulations that we
19:37:46 have.
19:37:48 Including this one.
19:37:49 >> Okay.
19:37:50 So does that include the container enclosure for the 4
19:37:55 by 4s that you're talking about?
19:37:58 They should be in the garages or behind a fence
19:38:00 somewhere, after you've taken them from the
19:38:03 right-of-way.
19:38:03 >>> Correct.
19:38:04 >> Okay.
19:38:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?
19:38:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: On the solid waste issue, I
19:38:11 understand 27.132 is simply a recodification of
19:38:15 chapter 26 which is already in our code.
19:38:18 Right?
19:38:20 >> Yes.
19:38:20 >> So there shouldn't be any concern with 27 .132.

19:38:26 I think the issue being raised on the dumpsters, or
19:38:30 the open containers, open storage, 27.138, you're
19:38:37 saying that only applies to commercial.
19:38:40 >>> That's correct.
19:38:40 It's not for single family residential.
19:38:42 It goes back to the -- the original use table of the
19:38:46 code where you can actually have -- which is
19:38:50 commercial, industrial property.
19:38:52 >> It's only in situation where is the commercial
19:38:55 parcel is adjacent to residential parcel?
19:38:58 >>> Yes.
19:38:59 When you read those regulations they are gourd to
19:39:01 protect and create that residential buffer from these
19:39:04 outdoor storage areas next to residential.
19:39:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So what we are doing here really is
19:39:09 just saying that if you're in that scenario, you have
19:39:13 got to use a masonry wall, and you can't use a wooden
19:39:17 wall.
19:39:18 >>> Again, this is from new development, and or major
19:39:21 renovation.
19:39:23 We are not going to go out and cite everybody because
19:39:26 they are not complying that are exist dag.

19:39:28 >> And we are also not saying if you are trying to
19:39:30 build affordable housing that you have to put masonry
19:39:33 walls up around any areas that you're going to store
19:39:36 garbage cans, because it doesn't apply to residential
19:39:39 properties.
19:39:39 Only commercial.
19:39:40 >>> Correct.
19:39:41 Not the outdoor storage provisions.
19:39:43 They don't apply for personal family.
19:39:46 >>GWEN MILLER: You want a rebuttal.
19:39:49 >>> If I could.
19:39:51 Rebuttal.
19:39:52 [ Laughter ] the visitor parking from the .25 to the
19:39:56 .5, the .25 was essentially an average.
19:40:02 You had directed transportation, I don't know, it was
19:40:05 probably a year, year and a half ago to look at
19:40:07 visitor parking rates statewide.
19:40:08 And NINA AVALO went out, I believe she looked at
19:40:16 Ft. Lauderdale, Tallahassee, Miami, I believe Orange
19:40:17 County, and this is essentially the .25 was an average
19:40:21 of those regulations of other larger cities.
19:40:24 As far as going to a .5, as far as we're concerned,

19:40:28 it's whatever council wants from that.
19:40:30 The PD standards as you recall, you directed Morris
19:40:34 and I to look at those about the same time, a year and
19:40:37 a half ago, and we went out and looked at other PD
19:40:40 regulations from some other larger cities in the state
19:40:42 and looked at how they were phrased.
19:40:45 The language to promote and to encourage, if you look
19:40:48 at the original PD language the words promote and
19:40:51 encourage are in there as well.
19:40:54 Designing of front door and rear door, it's been
19:40:58 mischaracterized as a rear door.
19:41:00 When you read the provision in the code it's really a
19:41:04 secondary ingress-egress and to be located in the rear
19:41:07 half of the structure.
19:41:08 The side door is fine as long as it's located in the
19:41:11 rear half.
19:41:12 I certainly don't mind going back and repositioning it
19:41:14 within another piece of the building.
19:41:16 Our goal was to get the two doors.
19:41:18 The thing that we have seen, that Gloria and I have
19:41:21 seen when we got on the field is there is no door that
19:41:24 we saw on the side, or in the rear, at least on the

19:41:26 corners that we were looking at.
19:41:28 And the reality of someone having to go out the front
19:41:31 door to get to their backyard didn't seem reasonable.
19:41:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: But Cathy, that's a fire regulation.
19:41:37 You shouldn't even be talking about that.
19:41:39 That should be in existence already.
19:41:40 I think the problem is the definition whereof that
19:41:42 rear door is, as long as like you said that's a
19:41:44 different interpretation.
19:41:45 That's the first time I heard it defined like that.
19:41:47 And the back part of the house but not necessarily
19:41:50 back door.
19:41:51 So back there based on what Ms. Alvarez points were,
19:41:57 and I think they were well stated, so long as it's to
19:42:00 the back of the house that perhaps on the side, then
19:42:04 we just need to clarify that.
19:42:06 So that's one point that everybody --
19:42:10 >>> It reads a secondary point of ingress-egress door
19:42:13 or doors shall be designed, installed at the rear half
19:42:16 of the structure.
19:42:18 >> Okay.
19:42:18 So that's a different interpretation, is that correct?

19:42:22 >> What our staff said, you're okay towards the back
19:42:24 of the house even if it's on the side.
19:42:26 >> Right.
19:42:27 In the rear half.
19:42:29 It could be a rear door.
19:42:30 It could be.
19:42:35 The shifting of side yards.
19:42:37 This came up when we discussed parking.
19:42:40 Where parking should be in front yards, how they are
19:42:43 going to be parked.
19:42:44 And if you recall, I mentioned that one of the changes
19:42:46 in this packet would be that the cars would have to
19:42:49 park on a hard surface as opposed to just on the grass
19:42:51 where you get the ruts over time.
19:42:55 By creating that, we also require single-family houses
19:42:58 as we have done in many of the overlays, but to make
19:43:00 sure that the driveway is offset from the front of the
19:43:03 house.
19:43:04 So the car isn't going to drive into the front door.
19:43:07 We took that as in all the overlays that we have, and
19:43:12 we were attempting to apply it city-wide as a minimum
19:43:14 design standard, and by doing that, if you look at the

19:43:17 RS-50 and 60 lots, the side yard setbacks are seven
19:43:22 feet.
19:43:23 Seven feet is not wide enough for that car to be
19:43:26 completely offset.
19:43:27 So what we built in as a compromise, we believe, was
19:43:30 the ability to shift the side yard as long as you kept
19:43:32 the 14 feet total you could vice-president no less
19:43:35 than five feet and give them nine on the other side.
19:43:38 That may even help some builders in certain situations
19:43:40 be able to shift the setbacks needed for whatever
19:43:44 design that they have.
19:43:44 So we felt that that actually was a compromise, and
19:43:47 the ability for both sides.
19:43:49 The residents to build the homes and have a better
19:43:51 design for the house as well.
19:43:54 The front porch issue, that is completely up to
19:43:58 council's discretion.
19:43:59 It was a council suggestion.
19:44:02 And the hot tub issue, I know there were certain
19:44:04 members of T.H.A.N. that did not like the hot tub or
19:44:07 the pool regulation.
19:44:09 The hot tub issue came up from the Tampa builders

19:44:13 association.
19:44:13 We took those numbers and put them in here.
19:44:15 I can certainly get someone to explain them.
19:44:17 That was our compromise was done to put that in there
19:44:21 as well.
19:44:21 Because the pool regulations are fairly restrictive.
19:44:27 If I'm invited to someone's house I'll go.
19:44:30 If I'm not invited, I won't.
19:44:32 Was never invited to Mr. Miller's house.
19:44:35 I never received an invitation.
19:44:37 So I certainly did not mean to hold out and not attend
19:44:41 or go to his house.
19:44:46 Finally, I would like to remind you that you did hear
19:44:49 about the EAR today.
19:44:51 I would like to restate that it was acknowledged, but
19:44:55 our comp plan is significantly out of date.
19:44:58 And the goal in the future is to create a more livable
19:45:00 city with a community wide focus.
19:45:03 I believe zoning wise it's to do that.
19:45:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How many total hours have you put
19:45:11 into this, Ms. Coyle?
19:45:13 >>> Oh, gosh.

19:45:14 Countless, yeah.
19:45:16 When I was on bed rest -- when I was on bed rest for
19:45:22 six months I was sitting at home with my laptop
19:45:24 crafting the first portion of this and this was in
19:45:27 early '04.
19:45:28 >> I hope it didn't adversely affect the baby.
19:45:31 >>> No, it did me.
19:45:34 >> How many meetings do you think you had on this?
19:45:37 I know we had many but how many do you think you had?
19:45:40 >> Over a dozen probably with different people, and
19:45:43 groups.
19:45:44 >> Have you changed things along the way?
19:45:48 Pursuant to those meetings and suggestions?
19:45:50 >>> Yes.
19:45:50 >> I mean, I've seen many, many different drafts over
19:45:54 the last two years, right?
19:45:56 >>> Uh-huh.
19:45:57 >> So we have been flexible.
19:45:58 We have been listening.
19:46:00 There's a lot of give and take on both sides, correct?
19:46:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
19:46:05 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So moved.

19:46:08 >> Second.
19:46:09 (Motion carried).
19:46:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
19:46:13 I think I'm comfortable with about 98% of everything
19:46:16 that's in front of us here tonight.
19:46:17 I do have some concerns that I want to raise and see
19:46:24 where we go with it.
19:46:26 And I'm going off of this one-page proposed chapter 27
19:46:30 Planning Commission concerns.
19:46:31 Because that seems to be really the only document that
19:46:34 we have got that we can sort of follow along.
19:46:37 27-98, there's T.H.A.N. objections, there's Ballast
19:46:40 Point objections, into this front yard setback issue.
19:46:45 I think we should strike 27.98.
19:46:49 27-132, solid waste is all we are doing is codifying
19:46:54 in chapter 27, chapter, what's already in chapter 26.
19:46:59 So I think we ought to leave 27-132 as is.
19:47:03 27-137, I think what we have heard is that side doors
19:47:07 are okay, and if that seems to be the consensus of
19:47:12 everyone, then as long as 27-137 says just a secondary
19:47:18 way of getting in and out, that's really what our
19:47:20 concern is for safety.

19:47:21 And as long as we address that, it doesn't have to be
19:47:24 a rear door, I think we're fine.
19:47:27 27-321 is something that I haven't heard a whole lot
19:47:31 about, that it gives me some heartburn when I read the
19:47:35 rationale for change.
19:47:37 And it says, intent of better defined site plan zoning
19:47:41 is to encourage quality development that is in
19:47:43 character with surrounding neighborhoods and furthers
19:47:45 our goal to be a truly livable thriving city.
19:47:48 I think we all can agree with that but the city is --
19:47:51 question is who decides?
19:47:52 Who decides quality development, what that means?
19:47:54 Honor decides in character, what that means?
19:47:56 I don't know what specifically what the four criteria
19:48:01 that are being added are.
19:48:02 But what you are doing here is, it sounds dangerous to
19:48:08 me.
19:48:08 It sounds -- Marty, I guess you want --
19:48:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sure Ms. Coyle will address it
19:48:14 better than I.
19:48:15 But council, that is the criteria that you use when
19:48:20 you weigh PDs.

19:48:24 And if when you make your decision, I believe -- Ms.
19:48:29 Coyle, you said you looked at other cities, worked
19:48:33 with Mr. Massey in ways of giving council criteria in
19:48:37 which to weigh whether or not the planned development
19:48:41 is compatible.
19:48:43 >>> Correct.
19:48:44 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Do you have something that lists
19:48:45 what those four criteria are?
19:48:48 >>> Yes.
19:48:51 The ordinance itself?
19:48:53 No?
19:48:54 I'm sorry.
19:48:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What page?
19:49:00 >>MARY ALVAREZ: 37.
19:49:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that of the struck-through
19:49:03 version?
19:49:16 >>> The four criteria that are added.
19:49:18 If you like, I'll read them really quick if you like.
19:49:23 I think to understand the first five are important.
19:49:26 The ones that you evaluate every time you look at a
19:49:28 PD, they are in every staff report.
19:49:30 The first one is promote the efficient use of land or

19:49:32 infrastructure, allow the integration of different
19:49:34 land uses and densities in one development.
19:49:37 That would not otherwise be provided for or allowed
19:49:40 under general zoning districts.
19:49:42 Provide a procedure which can relate to type, design
19:49:45 and layout of residential and nonresidential
19:49:48 development to the particular site, knowledge changing
19:49:52 needs, technologies, economics, and consumer
19:49:55 preferences, and allow for ingenuity and planning and
19:49:59 development of relatively large tracts under unified
19:50:03 control as well as allowing flexibility in the
19:50:05 redevelopment of older areas of the city, and assist
19:50:07 one that currently exists is encourage flexible land
19:50:10 development which will maximize the preservation of
19:50:12 natural resources, such as streams, lakes, flood
19:50:16 planes, groundwater, wooded areas, uplands, areas of
19:50:20 unusual beauty or importance to the natural ecosystem,
19:50:23 open space and historical and archaeological sites.
19:50:26 What we have added to that is promote the efficient
19:50:32 and sustainable use with careful consideration of
19:50:35 potential adverse impacts to natural on-site elements,
19:50:40 surrounding impacted neighborhoods, and cultural

19:50:42 resources.
19:50:44 When you're allowing integration of different land
19:50:47 uses, we also noted here, which encourage
19:50:49 compatibility and overall site designs, scale, both
19:50:53 internal and external to the project site.
19:50:55 What we are doing is something that modifies the way
19:50:58 you evaluate them now because you often look at what's
19:51:01 surrounding the property.
19:51:05 Encourage flexible land development, which produces
19:51:08 transportation needs, conserves energy, and will
19:51:11 maximize -- and it goes on with the current language.
19:51:14 And we added the verbiage green space.
19:51:18 And finally the four new criteria.
19:51:21 The first one is promote and encourage development
19:51:23 where appropriate and location, character and
19:51:26 compatibility with the surrounding impacted
19:51:28 neighborhoods, built environment and existing
19:51:31 geography, promote more desirable living and working
19:51:34 environments, than will be possible through the strict
19:51:36 application of minimum requirements of other zoning
19:51:39 district, promote architectural features and elements,
19:51:42 which compliment the surrounding community and enhance

19:51:45 the overall quality of development, and promote the
19:51:47 retention and reuse of building stock -- existing
19:51:51 building stock.
19:51:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I may follow up, if council
19:51:54 adopts those, the criteria upon which you would weigh
19:52:00 your planned developments that come before you.
19:52:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
19:52:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If you wanted to follow up on that,
19:52:09 Shawn.
19:52:10 >>SHAWN HARRISON: No, the other one was this last one,
19:52:13 holding public hearings.
19:52:15 I don't know how big of a deal that is in the real
19:52:17 world.
19:52:18 >>> That was Mr. Shelby's recommendation.
19:52:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can.
19:52:22 [ Laughter ] I just point out two things.
19:52:24 Number one, that is a result of -- actually that has
19:52:29 come before council in an effort to remove policies
19:52:34 which I don't think are appropriate for a
19:52:35 quasi-judicial body to deal with.
19:52:37 I should also point out -- correct me if I am wrong --
19:52:39 that decisions of the zoning administer is an appeal

19:52:44 process, to appeal the decision of the zoning
19:52:46 administrator.
19:52:47 So there is a mechanism to do that.
19:52:49 Is that correct?
19:52:50 I see the affirmative nods of the head.
19:52:52 So the code does provide for a zoning administrative
19:52:55 decision to be appealed.
19:52:57 Rather than have it come before council.
19:53:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair, I just want to speak
19:53:03 to 27-98 on the front porches.
19:53:05 Because you all probably remember when I brought up
19:53:08 this front porch issue.
19:53:09 But there are many people hear who weren't necessarily
19:53:12 here.
19:53:13 I'm not going to ask John wise to come back up front.
19:53:16 But I'll point to John's neighborhood, Virginia park.
19:53:18 My neighborhood in Palma Ceia.
19:53:20 Many other neighborhoods around the city.
19:53:24 We have been seeing large egg-box houses, and I can
19:53:28 name one or two developers in particular, and they are
19:53:31 building large big box house was two-foot front
19:53:35 porches.

19:53:36 And John, you're familiar with what I'm talking about.
19:53:40 When I brought this up, okay, and I've got six of them
19:53:43 on my street.
19:53:44 When I brought this up, the reason I brought it up is
19:53:46 I went to that builder and said why do you build
19:53:49 two-foot front porches with columns in them?
19:53:52 And he said, well, I'm not allowed to come into the
19:53:55 setback, into the front yard setback, and so
19:53:59 economically, if I build front porches, you know,
19:54:02 within the footprint, I would lose air conditioned
19:54:06 square footage, and that's what he has to sell.
19:54:08 I said, well, what could we do to enhance and
19:54:11 encourage front porches?
19:54:13 Because I think every single person out here would
19:54:16 like to see homes with front porches in the City of
19:54:18 Tampa.
19:54:19 And what the builders responded to me -- and they
19:54:23 said, well, if you could let us come into the front
19:54:25 yard setback a little bit for a reasonable size front
19:54:28 porch then we would add those because it would be a
19:54:31 good thing for our house, our houses would sell
19:54:33 better, but at the same time we wouldn't encroach into

19:54:36 our footprint and take away from the air conditioned
19:54:40 square footage.
19:54:42 That is why I suggested this provision.
19:54:45 When Gloria and I worked together -- and I'm not
19:54:48 saying it was Gloria's idea.
19:54:49 Gloria just drafted what I asked her to do. But when
19:54:56 she and I drafted this together we made sure the
19:54:57 language specifically says, you can never, ever
19:55:01 enclose that front porch.
19:55:02 It would always remain open, as a true front porch.
19:55:06 Gloria also, I think, you suggested -- and if you want
19:55:09 to confirm this, that would be great -- you suggested
19:55:12 that where we had the averaging -- and I don't really
19:55:18 understand that -- that this wouldn't impact on those
19:55:20 front yard average type streets anyway.
19:55:23 Cathy or Gloria.
19:55:26 So, in other words, you couldn't get your average, and
19:55:28 then move eight fate forward beyond that.
19:55:32 >>GLORIA MOREDA: The compromise that when you were not
19:55:35 in an overlay requiring the block average that you
19:55:37 could encroach eight feet for a porch that would
19:55:40 remain open on all three sides.

19:55:43 If you were in a block averaging could you encroach
19:55:46 four feet.
19:55:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So that's the whole intent.
19:55:51 I think it's a great thing.
19:55:53 I think we need people to be on front porches.
19:55:55 It's really a CPTED thing because it puts eyes on the
19:56:00 street in, good weather nine months of the year folks
19:56:02 are going to sit on their front porch, watch the kids
19:56:05 and be much the watch of the neighborhood.
19:56:09 I would strongly encourage us to do this.
19:56:11 I think other than the written statement from Ballast
19:56:13 Point, John wise stood up hear, and he didn't say
19:56:16 anything contrary to it.
19:56:17 Sue Lyon stood up here.
19:56:19 She didn't say anything contrary to it.
19:56:21 I think this is a good thing for neighborhoods and
19:56:23 it's really an incentive for developers.
19:56:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I agree with you, John.
19:56:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
19:56:30 I think what we see tonight is a huge amount of good
19:56:33 work, much of which has actually been the way that we
19:56:38 practiced.

19:56:38 But what I appreciate about Cathy Coyle's language
19:56:43 where it attempts to define what our thinking is, we
19:56:47 have been using these thoughts and these rationales
19:56:51 and these context creditors as we sit among ourselves
19:56:54 to discuss PDs.
19:56:58 What you are doing is making it real by including in
19:57:01 the our code and I think it would help the public as
19:57:03 well as ourselves to have these considerations
19:57:05 enumerated.
19:57:06 And I think you have done a really good job of it.
19:57:09 It doesn't mean we are going to be more arbitrary.
19:57:12 I think it actually means we'll be less arbitrary
19:57:15 because we'll have less criteria that we are looking
19:57:17 at.
19:57:17 For that reason I'm going to support that proposed
19:57:21 change.
19:57:24 >>GLORIA MOREDA: I did want to correct, I just re-read
19:57:26 it.
19:57:27 We had talked a lot about the encroachment for block
19:57:29 average.
19:57:30 But with the response from the neighborhood, I had
19:57:34 taken it out.

19:57:36 In the block average they have to abide by the block
19:57:38 average.
19:57:38 >> Which is even better for the neighborhoods.
19:57:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Who is going to read it?
19:57:45 Okay, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
19:57:55 >> Like to move an ordinance of the city of Tampa,
19:57:58 Florida making comprehensive revisions to chapter 27
19:58:01 zoning code of the City of Tampa code of ordinances,
19:58:03 amending section 27-77, official schedule of district
19:58:07 regulations, amending section 27-77, schedule 4-1
19:58:14 scheduled permitted use site district, amending
19:58:16 section 27-77, table 4-2, scheduled area, height,
19:58:21 bulk, and placement regulations, amending section
19:58:24 27-97, height regulation generally, amending section
19:58:28 27-98, permitting projections into projected yards,
19:58:34 amending section 27, lots, yards and measurements,
19:58:38 amending section 27-126, accessory structures,
19:58:42 amending section 27-127, existing porches, amending
19:58:47 section 27-132, solid waste storage area, amending
19:58:52 section 27-133, fence regulations, amending section
19:58:58 27-134-1, commercial communication tower regulations,
19:59:04 amending section 27-135, swimming pools, amending

19:59:08 section 27-136, performance standards for industrial,
19:59:13 manufacturing and processing operations, amending
19:59:15 section 27-137, single-family semi detached design
19:59:20 standards, amending section 27-137.3, single-family
19:59:25 attached design standards, amending section 27-138,
19:59:30 open storage, amending section 27-151 reserved,
19:59:35 amending section 27-177, historic district established
19:59:40 table 8-1, schedule of permitted uses, and permissible
19:59:46 special uses, amending section 27-180 table 8-3, table
19:59:50 of a inquired parking spaces, amending section 27-240,
19:59:54 visibility of intersections, amending section 27-242,
20:00:00 table 10-1, table of required parking space amending
20:00:05 section 27-245, administrative variance of required
20:00:09 parking spaces, amending section 27-246, off-street
20:00:14 parking space standards, amending section 27-267,
20:00:19 special use permits, agent or body responsible for
20:00:23 each general procedure, amending section 27-272,
20:00:26 regulations governing individual special uses,
20:00:29 amending section 27-321 amending section 27-323,
20:00:35 review procedure, amending section 27-324, general
20:00:42 regulations, amending section 27-325, RO-R 1, amending
20:00:48 section 27, 326, planned development district,

20:00:53 amending 27-327, planned developmental alternative,
20:00:57 amending section 27-328, amending section 328-29 Tampa
20:01:04 quality development, amending section 27-373, appeal
20:01:10 method, amending section 27-393, procedure for
20:01:13 amendment application, amending section 27-395,
20:01:18 receipt of application, public hearing, by City
20:01:21 Council, amending section 27-3 it 6, comprehensive
20:01:25 review of chapter, amending chapter 27-398, City
20:01:30 Council reconsideration, amending section 27-438,
20:01:35 table 18-1, schedule of permitted principle accessory
20:01:40 special uses, amending section 27-439, table 18-2,
20:01:46 schedule of dimensional regulations amending section
20:01:49 27-440, development procedures, amending section
20:01:54 27-441, development design regulations, amending
20:01:58 section 27-442, parking regulations amending section
20:02:02 27-452, official schedule of accessory special uses,
20:02:09 amending section 27-456, parking requirement, amending
20:02:13 section 27-459, overlay district, amending section
20:02:19 27-460, commercial overlay district, amending 27-456,
20:02:25 West Tampa overlay district, development design
20:02:28 standard, amending section 27-467, Parkland Estates
20:02:32 district, amending section 27-523, definitions,

20:02:36 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
20:02:39 providing for severability, providing an effective
20:02:40 date.
20:02:42 >>GWEN MILLER: You're all done, Ms. Saul-Sena.
20:02:44 You did a great job.
20:02:46 [ Applause ]
20:02:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did I mention that chapter 27 changes
20:02:50 have to be read twice?
20:02:54 [ Laughter ]
20:02:54 Just joking.
20:02:56 >> We had a motion and second.
20:02:57 All in favor say Aye.
20:02:58 Opposed, Nay.
20:02:59 (Motion Carried)
20:03:01 We are going to have a recess for five minutes.
20:23:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
20:23:38 order.
20:23:39 Roll call.
20:23:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
20:23:47 order.
20:23:48 Roll call.
20:23:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

20:23:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
20:23:54 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
20:23:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
20:23:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Council, we need to open all at the
20:23:59 same time, number 5, 6, 7, 9 and 11.
20:24:09 >> So moved.
20:24:10 >> Second.
20:24:10 (Motion carried).
20:24:10 >> I'm sorry to interrupt.
20:24:14 I just want -- council, I know there are a lot of
20:24:17 people who are in the audience tonight who weren't
20:24:19 here just awhile ago, and witnesses.
20:24:22 Several of these items that are going to be heard
20:24:25 together are quasi-judicial in nature.
20:24:27 So for the sake of sped dense I, council, that all the
20:24:31 witnesses who are going to going to be testifying
20:24:35 please reaffirm when they state their names they are
20:24:37 in fact sworn.
20:24:38 >> If you would stand and raise your right hand if you
20:24:41 have not been sworn.
20:24:45 >>THE CLERK: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
20:24:48 the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

20:24:53 >>> Again, good evening.
20:24:55 It's good to be with you on this important evening.
20:24:59 You're being asked this evening to approve the first
20:25:01 reading for four items necessary to move the heights
20:25:07 project forward.
20:25:08 A rezoning petition, vacating ordinance, the creation
20:25:11 of community development district and a development
20:25:14 agreement.
20:25:15 The first readings and public hearings are tonight,
20:25:17 and July 13th, there will be a second reading and
20:25:20 public hearing.
20:25:21 I wanted to come before you this evening as the
20:25:24 economic development administrator of the city and try
20:25:28 to set a little bit of context for the evening.
20:25:31 It's an important milestone in the history of one of
20:25:34 our community redevelopment areas.
20:25:36 And you're very familiar with it.
20:25:38 But to the viewing audience, I'll orient them.
20:25:43 This is a map, the red line showing I-275 to our
20:25:49 downtown, Performing Arts Center, where Stetson school
20:25:54 is, Blake high school, and what we are talking about
20:25:56 tonight is a portion of the community redevelopment

20:25:58 area there in yellow.
20:26:02 And we have an interesting name for that CRA, as you
20:26:05 know.
20:26:05 It's the old Tampa police station site, CRA.
20:26:10 Kind of catchy.
20:26:11 Sort of rings of government creativity, doesn't it?
20:26:20 But it is helpful in one regard, because it kind of
20:26:24 takes us back to how this started and how we got to
20:26:26 tonight.
20:26:30 In 1997, the Tampa Police Department moved out of
20:26:33 their police station within this area on the banks of
20:26:39 the Hillsborough River.
20:26:40 And in that time, that hulk of a building in its
20:26:45 deteriorating condition began to symbolize really what
20:26:48 was happening in the neighborhood all around it and
20:26:54 sort of symbolized the blight of the area.
20:26:58 A couple years later the council and CRA board
20:27:00 established this area of the CRA.
20:27:03 77 acres around this site.
20:27:05 And took the initiative to do that, to put in place
20:27:08 redevelopment tools.
20:27:09 Now importantly at this point, a TIF district, tax

20:27:13 increment financing district, had not been in place.
20:27:16 But you did designate it as an important redevelopment
20:27:18 area.
20:27:19 And that same year, in 1999, an RFP was completed.
20:27:24 And that RFP was intended to attract private
20:27:28 investment to the area.
20:27:29 There were two responses.
20:27:30 One developer was selected and worked very hard that
20:27:33 year to try to put a large-scale development plan
20:27:37 together for that neighborhood.
20:27:39 It failed.
20:27:41 Due to a number of reasons including an ability to
20:27:44 assemble all the property.
20:27:45 Did it not move forward.
20:27:47 A couple of years passed by.
20:27:50 The city made a decision at that point to demolish
20:27:53 that old police station with the idea that that might
20:27:56 open up opportunities for the private sector and
20:27:59 attract more development interest.
20:28:01 Another RFP was done, and four respondents came
20:28:05 forward, and at that time you selected Bank of America
20:28:09 as a developer for that site.

20:28:11 And they had a plan to take 14 of the 77 acres and
20:28:15 develop it into a neighborhood of about 300 units.
20:28:19 That plan was embraced.
20:28:21 They began working with the Tampa Heights
20:28:23 neighborhood.
20:28:24 At that time, the neighborhood was working on their
20:28:26 own larger neighborhood plan, and that was the plan
20:28:30 embraced by City Council in the following year.
20:28:33 But it identified importantly that this area would be
20:28:37 a particular catalyst to the redevelopment of the
20:28:42 entire Tampa Heights neighborhood.
20:28:45 2002, there was a significant event that occurred in
20:28:47 the history of this CRA, and that's the year that
20:28:51 Stetson law school purchased the old police station
20:28:54 site.
20:28:55 And now we have a beautiful law school there.
20:28:58 Since then, not much happened, despite a lot of
20:29:02 efforts on the part of -- when I say not much, a lot
20:29:05 of work was being put in by both the neighborhood and
20:29:08 Bank of America.
20:29:10 But there were challenges.
20:29:12 There was an environmental remediation process that

20:29:15 was required that was quite significant.
20:29:17 And so seven years by now had transpired since 1997
20:29:23 when the process began.
20:29:25 And that brings us to the year 2005, when the pace of
20:29:29 activity picked up.
20:29:30 And in particular, at the beginning of last year, Bank
20:29:34 of America force add partnership with the better place
20:29:38 group and traded a bigger vision.
20:29:40 No longer was it a 14-acre opportunity, but expanded
20:29:47 to the redevelopment that you're hearing about
20:29:48 tonight, a 48-acre redevelopment of 1900 units.
20:29:56 A significant knew urban park community.
20:29:58 Since then, the pace has picked up greatly.
20:30:02 You took action, very importantly, in May of last
20:30:05 year, to put in place a TIF district to allow the
20:30:09 mechanism of TIF financing to be available to help
20:30:12 support the vision of this project.
20:30:15 In September of last year, the mayor executed a letter
20:30:18 of intent with the development group to begin working
20:30:22 forward in partnership towards that step.
20:30:27 In November the partnership officially came into the
20:30:29 public arena when the developer submitted their

20:30:31 rezoning application.
20:30:33 Since then, everyone who has been working hard to
20:30:37 bring this evening to fruition, the developer has been
20:30:41 working very hard on the land assembly side to be able
20:30:45 to move forward.
20:30:46 Most significantly, they acquired arguably the most
20:30:49 important piece of real estate out there, the armature
20:30:52 works building, which they hope to turn into a
20:30:54 centerpiece for the entire development.
20:30:58 You as a council and as a CRA board approved an
20:31:01 important amendment to the CRA plan that is again
20:31:04 critical for moving this project forward.
20:31:06 And the developer, the city staff, and the
20:31:08 neighborhood had been working to forge very high
20:31:11 quality design standards, to think about how to create
20:31:15 great public spaces in this development, how the
20:31:19 infrastructure there is going to be rebuilt and how to
20:31:22 craft a financial partnership that protects taxpayers.
20:31:26 The development team will be presenting their vision
20:31:29 to you a little bit later, and our staff as well.
20:31:33 But I just wanted to focus very quickly on some of the
20:31:36 important public benefits that this project is

20:31:38 bringing to the table.
20:31:40 First of all, there's a very significant commitment to
20:31:42 affordable housing.
20:31:44 And you are very aware of our community's needs for
20:31:48 workforce and affordable housing.
20:31:50 They have committed to build a third of the riverwalk,
20:31:56 a very public important amenity planned for our city.
20:31:59 The Waterworks Park, which is currently a public park
20:32:02 there, planning significant beautification
20:32:05 enhancements to that park, to the community to enjoy.
20:32:09 There's a significant commitment to use women and
20:32:11 minority-owned businesses in their development
20:32:14 process.
20:32:19 They will be pursuing an adoptive reuse of the two
20:32:23 most important historic buildings on the site and
20:32:25 creating them as a focal point for the development.
20:32:28 There's commitment to public art.
20:32:29 And there's a commitment to providing public boat
20:32:32 slips.
20:32:34 And maybe most significantly, if they are successful
20:32:37 in creating a very distinctive urban neighborhood as
20:32:42 they have envisioned the tax base in that area, which

20:32:44 is right now approximately $4.8 million, will grow to
20:32:49 an excess of a half a billion dollars.
20:32:52 And so from all perspectives, this is a substantial
20:32:56 development opportunity before you.
20:32:59 So it's been a nine-year journey for us, with some ups
20:33:02 and downs, but a nine-year journey to attract the
20:33:06 quality development that we would like to see happen
20:33:08 at the old police station site CRA.
20:33:12 Thank you for all you have done as a council and as a
20:33:15 CRA board over the many years to help get us to this
20:33:19 point.
20:33:21 And we appreciate all of that.
20:33:23 I'm now going to have Cathy Coyle come up.
20:33:26 Cathy is going to take this through the approval
20:33:28 process.
20:33:29 Bonnie Wise is here to speak with you a little bit
20:33:32 later about the financial structure of the partnership
20:33:36 that's been created.
20:33:37 And many other staff are here in the room.
20:33:43 Because this project involves really building a small
20:33:46 city from the ground up, it has affected every
20:33:48 department in the city.

20:33:49 So there's representatives of public works, of parks,
20:33:52 of all the different departments hear to answer your
20:33:55 question.
20:33:57 And we hope we are able to do that today.
20:33:59 If we are not, I just want to remained you that we do
20:34:02 have a second public hearing scheduled for the
20:34:05 13th in between now and then.
20:34:08 We are confident that we can answer all of your
20:34:10 questions satisfactorily.
20:34:12 So thank you again.
20:34:14 Cathy is here.
20:34:15 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
20:34:46 I will be presenting the rezoning and vacating
20:34:51 petition simultaneously.
20:34:53 What you have, Mr. Dingfelder, in front of you
20:34:56 currently is the 97 pictures of the vacating.
20:35:01 And I didn't want to walk you through all 97 photos.
20:35:07 There they are for your view.
20:35:08 We do have the map as well.
20:35:22 This is case C06-07.
20:35:27 And we have the map in the photos of the vacating and
20:35:29 you will note that the green areas are the vacated

20:35:33 rights-of-way.
20:35:34 And the red is the rezoning.
20:35:38 The orange is the CDD and the CRA.
20:35:48 I have been sworn in.
20:35:55 To summarize, there are 13 street segments, 16
20:35:58 alleyways lying within the Tampa Heights area bound on
20:36:01 the north by Ross Avenue, the south by Hillsborough
20:36:04 River, the east by Tampa street, and the west by North
20:36:08 Boulevard.
20:36:09 Petitioner has agreed to all the utility conditions
20:36:12 and staff had in a objections.
20:36:15 And just for your acknowledgment, the right-of-way
20:36:21 totals approximately 300 that you square feet which is
20:36:24 seven acres.
20:36:35 Onto than the rezoning. The petitioner is rezoning to
20:36:39 Ross, North Boulevard, Tampa street and the
20:36:41 Hillsborough River, to PDA zoning district.
20:36:44 It is comprised of 48 acres as mark mentioned.
20:36:48 It contains the Waterworks Park, the water works
20:36:51 building, the armature works building, a large
20:36:54 segment. Riverwalk.
20:36:56 The site lies within the old Tampa Police Department

20:36:59 site redevelopment area, three documents have been
20:37:01 created for this development, which are all integral
20:37:03 parts of this proposal.
20:37:04 The rezoning site plan, division booklet and the
20:37:07 developer's agreement, which you will also be hearing
20:37:11 about tonight all of which must be approved in order
20:37:13 for this to move forward as proposed.
20:37:15 The CDD would be the fourth.
20:37:17 The developers are requesting the approval of selling
20:37:20 entitlements.
20:37:21 1900 residential units, 100,000 square fate of retail,
20:37:24 160,000 square feet of office.
20:37:26 Up to 100 boat slips, 20% which are available for
20:37:32 public use daily, yachts.
20:37:39 Free of charge.
20:37:40 And the setback ranges between 8.5 feet to 20 feet
20:37:43 based on the cross section as shown in the vision
20:37:45 book.
20:37:45 The proposed maximum building heights are 45 feet for
20:37:48 tract 1, 175 feet for tract 2 and 120 feet for tract
20:37:52 3.
20:37:55 Furthermore the developer has proposed a rear

20:37:57 orientation of the street grid which you will note on
20:37:59 the site plan the very first page, which is the aerial
20:38:04 that shows the project site in its proximity to
20:38:07 downtown, and Columbus Avenue or Columbus drive to the
20:38:10 north.
20:38:14 Let's see.
20:38:15 The proposed vacating and rededication of the street
20:38:18 grid requires major improvement to the utility
20:38:20 infrastructure which will include establishing lawns
20:38:23 for water, sewage, stormwater, as well as garbage
20:38:25 commitment to place all electrical, cable and
20:38:28 television utilities underground throughout the
20:38:30 project.
20:38:31 There are 23 grand trees that have been identified
20:38:33 on-site.
20:38:35 Six have been deemed hazardous.
20:38:37 The developer has committed to preserve three grand
20:38:41 trees in their current location, potentially another
20:38:43 two.
20:38:44 They did come to agreement today on two additional
20:38:46 trees.
20:38:50 Maybe at the developer's dis-- discretion, keep in

20:38:54 their current position or transplanted but not removed
20:38:57 permanently.
20:39:00 The developer will also be transplanting an additional
20:39:03 four trees, grand trees, and they are numbered 5, 8, 9
20:39:08 and 58 on sheet 4.
20:39:10 The developer will be providing insurance replacement
20:39:13 for all grand trees slated for removal including those
20:39:16 deemed hazardous.
20:39:17 You will note on page 2 of the staff report as well a
20:39:20 brief summary of each tab of your vision booklet.
20:39:23 There are nine tabs.
20:39:25 This booklet is establishing the basic design criteria
20:39:29 and layout for this entire project.
20:39:32 What we attempted to do is basically create a model
20:39:35 for all future PDAs, we hope.
20:39:38 But it's not just the site plan with the entitlements
20:39:40 that we do come up with, that basic design criteria.
20:39:44 So that gives council more comfort and what is being
20:39:46 proposed, and staff as well for the future review of
20:39:49 incremental plans.
20:39:52 Tab 1 is the purpose and intent of the booklet which
20:39:54 really spells out the reason why we are here and the

20:39:57 reason why the development is going forward.
20:40:00 Finally the developer's agreement provides a full
20:40:02 description of the development parameters, financial
20:40:04 obligations and binding language to which the
20:40:06 developer has committed several exhibits, have been
20:40:09 incorporated into the agreement document, which
20:40:12 detailed items such as maintenance obligations,
20:40:15 riverwalk improvements and green space calculations.
20:40:20 And I do have an answer to one of them in particular
20:40:27 which was the signage, which was the question.
20:40:30 And I did go back and look at the sign committee
20:40:32 recommendations with Gloria Moreda.
20:40:35 And the single occupant signage, is it a 50 square
20:40:40 foot Rays rate from the sign committee
20:40:42 recommendations?
20:40:43 This development subpoena proposing a minimum --
20:40:46 maximum of 32 square feet so it's more restrictive.
20:40:49 The height limitations that are shown by the sign
20:40:51 committee are 10 feet and they are showing four and
20:40:54 six feet.
20:40:55 The regulations shown in this development are more
20:40:57 restrictive than what is potentially coming before you

20:41:00 for changes to the planning code.
20:41:04 I'll walk you through briefly, starting on the north
20:41:08 end, looking down the street, you see there are
20:41:11 single-family residential to the north.
20:41:16 This is the corner of Highland, I believe.
20:41:24 I'm going down.
20:41:26 There's a varying array of architectural styles.
20:41:29 You've got some new historic character.
20:41:32 You've got some typical suburban style.
20:41:36 You've got some older homes that have been
20:41:38 rehabilitated with vinyl siding.
20:41:41 Got some more.
20:41:45 This one in particular, this is a house on the south
20:41:47 side, built in 1902.
20:41:55 This house is Highland north of oak.
20:42:01 This is the second structure on the property.
20:42:04 And that more towards the eastern side.
20:42:11 Vacating, you will note that the two rights-of-way
20:42:13 that this property is at are not being vacated, so the
20:42:17 property will maintain access to the public
20:42:19 right-of-way.
20:42:21 This is at the northern end of Tampa street.

20:42:26 And this is going down Tampa street.
20:42:28 And all these properties along Tampa are excluded from
20:42:31 rezoning.
20:42:32 Just to show you what the eastern edge is along the
20:42:36 corridor.
20:42:37 And then finally, Jimmy Cook and I went out into the
20:42:41 field and tried to find some areas, sites, where we
20:42:44 could take more innovative photos to show you what the
20:42:48 site also looks like.
20:42:49 So we walked to the back of North Boulevard, and took
20:42:55 a shot of the river, and you can see the armature
20:42:59 works and the water works building.
20:43:05 Then on top of the Blake hi school parking garage and
20:43:10 looked at the site and took a site photo.
20:43:14 Walking down the bridge and coming onto the site.
20:43:16 This is armature works building looking in.
20:43:19 And then I walked onto the site, and right around the
20:43:24 round-about would be I angled myself or I attempted to
20:43:28 have the street oriented towards downtown to get that
20:43:32 view so I could see how it's going to lay out.
20:43:35 Mrs. Saul-Sena had one question about houses being
20:43:38 relocated, some of the historic homes. I did receive

20:43:41 a memo from Dennis Fernandez today.
20:43:45 He re-reviewed it, the plan with me today and went
20:43:48 back through his notes with some of the meetings he
20:43:51 had with developers.
20:43:52 They are committed to relocating these structures.
20:43:54 And I did receive confirmation from Ms. Zelman today
20:43:57 about the houses.
20:44:00 The ones that are under their control and the ones
20:44:02 that they are relocating at their expense, just to
20:44:06 reiterate, Ross Avenue.
20:44:12 These three homes would be relocated.
20:44:17 With that, staff has no objection.
20:44:27 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
20:44:29 I have been sworn in, Mr. Shelby.
20:44:34 Regarding future land use categories, there are three.
20:44:37 As you can see on the map here, just north of the
20:44:39 river bank, RMU 100 regional mixed use 100 is the prey
20:44:44 dominant land use category.
20:44:46 There is a small sliver along Tampa street, heavy
20:44:51 commercial 24.
20:44:52 To the north of West Palm Avenue we have a land use
20:44:54 category of residential 35.

20:44:57 As Mr. Huey has already told you and you may have read
20:45:02 this entire project is contained within not only the
20:45:04 Tampa Heights community but also is a CRA designated
20:45:09 area.
20:45:11 It's strategically located just on the northern edge
20:45:14 of the central business district which is a major
20:45:16 employment center, and it will provide a significant
20:45:19 housing -- will provide a significant housing --
20:45:30 provide a significant housing element to the edge of
20:45:34 the central business district, approximately 4,000
20:45:38 population that will occur based on the current
20:45:40 population for household about 2.5, 1900 units.
20:45:45 The mixed use project which would greatly contribute
20:45:47 to the area, this is in close proximity to Ybor City,
20:45:50 the port of Tampa, and the central business district
20:45:57 as already stated.
20:45:58 This is consistent with many elements within the
20:46:00 variety of -- within the future land use element, the
20:46:03 housing element, the historic resources element, as
20:46:09 Cathy had stated also we will be adaptable to using
20:46:12 the Tampa armature works as part of this project.
20:46:18 It will be a major contributor to the continued

20:46:20 redefining of Tampa's urban form and building legacies
20:46:25 as a livable city, will also follow the tradition of
20:46:28 what we hopefully will see as your new comprehensive
20:46:33 plan as far as systematic organizing the city
20:46:38 significant future growth.
20:46:39 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
20:46:42 proposed request.
20:46:43 Thank you.
20:46:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Wise.
20:46:50 Ways wise director of revenue and finance, and I have
20:46:53 been sworn.
20:46:56 I'm here taint to talk about the project from the
20:46:58 financial aspect, and this is unlike any financing
20:47:03 that we have done at this city.
20:47:05 This of course is going to be a CRA and a CDD
20:47:09 community development district which encompasses most
20:47:11 of the developer properties in the CRA.
20:47:14 Although this financing structure might be new to the
20:47:16 City of Tampa, it has been used elsewhere throughout
20:47:19 the State of Florida, West Palm Beach, Orlando, Miami,
20:47:24 and the Panama City area.
20:47:26 I wanted you to know that it is a structure that is

20:47:30 well accepted in the bond market.
20:47:31 The idea as we were going through the whole financial
20:47:34 analysis over the past few months is that we have
20:47:36 several goals, that there would be no negative
20:47:38 financial impact on the City of Tampa on a long-term
20:47:41 basis, that there would be no financial risks to the
20:47:43 tax payers of the City of Tampa, we wanted appropriate
20:47:49 protection for future heights residents, and we wanted
20:47:52 the developers to have long-term success of financing
20:47:54 the property.
20:47:56 The plan is that CDD bonds, community development
20:47:59 district bonds, would be issued and they would be
20:48:01 partly secured by a portion of the future tax
20:48:05 increment financing revenues of the area.
20:48:08 And then also on assessment liens.
20:48:10 And the developer in this case would be really the one
20:48:15 creating the tax increment revenues over time.
20:48:18 And the city is protected in that those revenues would
20:48:22 only be turned over to the developer if they are
20:48:25 actually achieved.
20:48:27 We have gone through extensive financial analysis to
20:48:30 determine that a portion, and in this case 74% of the

20:48:34 tax increment revenues, would be forwarded over to pay
20:48:37 for the debt service.
20:48:39 And as you know, the debt service would be issued, the
20:48:42 debt service would be issued to pay for public
20:48:44 infrastructure: Water, wastewater, stormwater, public
20:48:48 roads, those types of improvements.
20:48:51 And worked very diligently to create a financing
20:48:56 structure that would be acceptable in the tax exempt
20:48:58 bond market, funded public infrastructure improvements
20:49:02 and protected city.
20:49:03 The developer hired an economist that was also a CPA,
20:49:08 that did an extensive financial model of the city's
20:49:10 budget, and projected those TIF revenues over time as
20:49:14 well as futures to the expenses and revenues.
20:49:16 In addition, the city hired its own consultant to look
20:49:19 at those numbers.
20:49:22 We hired the Robert Charles Corporation and Mary Ann
20:49:22 Edmonds, Public Resources Advisory Group to review the
20:49:30 model.
20:49:30 We spent a lot of time working with the economist, and
20:49:35 meeting with city staff, particularly police, fire,
20:49:39 public works, and parks and rec because the impact on

20:49:42 those departments would be the greatest.
20:49:44 And ware comfortable that in the long-term we would
20:49:47 meet the goals as I stated earlier.
20:49:51 We see here, we understand that we will only -- I want
20:49:55 to make it very clear, that we will only turn over
20:49:57 those TIF revenues if they are generated.
20:50:00 If for whatever reason the TIF revenues are not
20:50:03 generated, the debt service will be outstanding, the
20:50:07 city will not be responsible for that debt.
20:50:09 I just want to make that perfectly clear to you and to
20:50:12 the audience.
20:50:16 It would be the developer.
20:50:19 There would be an assessment lien on the property.
20:50:22 So that is the risk of the developer and the property
20:50:26 owners.
20:50:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That would be sort of a default
20:50:30 type of --
20:50:31 >>> Right.
20:50:32 It would be an assessment on the property tax bill as
20:50:34 other assessments, and it would go through the same
20:50:37 property tax procedure of someone not paying their
20:50:40 property taxes.

20:50:44 But the city taxpayers would not be responsible in any
20:50:46 way.
20:50:50 With that can I answer any questions that you might
20:50:52 have?
20:50:56 >>KEVIN WHITE: A quick question.
20:50:57 You were talking about the infrastructure real
20:51:00 quickly.
20:51:00 You brought up this morning in our morning meeting.
20:51:03 Just as a suggestion, maybe at the request of the
20:51:06 proposed project, we are going to have so much green
20:51:09 space, and start tearing up the road, and laying all
20:51:14 the infrastructure, the developer as far as you know
20:51:16 at this point in time, laying the pipe for reclaimed
20:51:21 water and the potential for this area since we have
20:51:24 such large green space throughout the area, and since
20:51:29 we are going to be expanding in the very near fought
20:51:32 that may be a good thing for them to look into if it's
20:51:35 not already.
20:51:38 >>BONNIE WISE: I think that is a good point and I
20:51:40 think they have been looking into that as well.
20:51:42 >> Maybe we'll hear from them on that.
20:51:44 Thank you.

20:51:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Wise, the financial aspect of
20:51:52 this is it's in the development agreement or where?
20:51:56 >> It's in the development agreement as well as one of
20:51:58 the attachments entitled the Interlocal Agreement.
20:52:02 And the form of that Interlocal Agreement would be
20:52:05 adopted between the city and the community development
20:52:07 district once it is in place. And, Sal, you being the
20:52:14 attorney of record, I belive everything Bonnie tells
20:52:17 me implicitly, but
20:52:25 I want to hear from you, too.
20:52:27 >> What did you want to hear?
20:52:47 >> How the two work together and large developments.
20:52:51 Ways wise I failed to mention we have the one who
20:52:55 actually drafted the interlocal agreement.
20:53:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do we have opinion letters of that
20:53:06 firm?
20:53:06 >> There will be opinion lead letters on the bond
20:53:09 issue.
20:53:12 Ware not there yet.
20:53:13 We haven't got tone that point.
20:53:14 >>BONNIE WISE: It's expected that the bonds would be
20:53:16 issued next.

20:53:19 >>ROSE FERLITA: Bonnie, excuse me one second.
20:53:22 Mr. Daignault, I may have misread your body language.
20:53:25 Were you come up here to make a comment?
20:53:27 You can say no.
20:53:28 You just looked like you wanted to, then you stopped
20:53:30 short.
20:53:31 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I was going to --
20:53:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: If it's quick, let's get it out of the
20:53:35 way, if that's okay with you, Bonnie.
20:53:37 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: It was with regard to reclaimed,
20:53:39 the developer has said that he was going to put
20:53:42 reclaimed pipes in the ground, and among the things
20:53:44 we're looking at for the next expansion of Star, areas
20:53:48 and opportunities to use reclaimed water.
20:53:50 So this is one of them.
20:53:51 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's what I thought you were saying.
20:53:54 Bonnie, excuse me.
20:53:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:53:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Before they get to that.
20:54:03 Is Cathy around?
20:54:12 >> While you are waiting go ahead.
20:54:13 >> This will just take a second.

20:54:15 Ed Crawford of Hart staff.
20:54:17 I am pleased to be invited to read a letter from ray
20:54:21 Miller in support of the project and I would like to
20:54:22 do that.
20:54:23 It will just take a second.
20:54:24 To council member Gwen Miller, chairwoman Gwen Miller
20:54:27 and Tampa City Council, I'm writing you in support of
20:54:29 the Tampa Heights project, or the heights project.
20:54:32 The proposed mixed use project at the north edge of
20:54:35 downtown is an example of how developers and public
20:54:37 agencies can work together to benefit.
20:54:42 By buildership to discuss the concept it will plan for
20:54:45 the project and to take comments and suggestions.
20:54:49 Subsequent to that we have had multiple follow-up
20:54:51 suggestions and meetings the last of which took place
20:54:53 only two weeks ago.
20:54:54 In addition, we have assurances of the developer that
20:54:56 the relationship will be an ongoing one.
20:54:59 The heart staff has reviewed and submitted the
20:55:02 submitted project design and confirms that it will
20:55:04 accommodate both circulator, and main line bus routes.
20:55:10 Geometries were altered at Hart's request in order to

20:55:12 accommodate buffers and certain pedestrian
20:55:14 enhancements.
20:55:16 Suggested by heart were added.
20:55:19 Bus shelters are designed to be an integral part of
20:55:21 the project incorporating the architectural style of
20:55:23 the development.
20:55:25 This is the tape of urban design that encourages and
20:55:28 facilitates the use of transit.
20:55:30 The high level of pedestrian amenities, the urban
20:55:32 density and connectivity, the mixed use elements are
20:55:36 all good hallmarks of good urban design.
20:55:39 Developer will also be using access to transit as a
20:55:42 selling point of the project, and has agreed to work
20:55:45 with Hart in the marketing transit paths to new buyer
20:55:49 and residents.
20:55:50 Raymond Miller, Executive Director of Hartline.
20:55:53 Thank you.
20:55:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Coyle, bring your book with you.
20:56:00 We were mentioning the grand trees.
20:56:04 Look at the very last page where it says tree number
20:56:07 70.
20:56:10 And it mentioned here that numbers 45, 48 and 70 were

20:56:15 going to be saved.
20:56:18 If you will look -- are you there yet?
20:56:23 >> I'm looking at mine.
20:56:24 >> 8.31.
20:56:25 The very last page.
20:56:29 I'm sorry, the very last page.
20:56:31 8.31.
20:56:40 It says the rating is 2.
20:56:44 But the description is a live oak, lightning, fungus
20:56:49 underside of tree and poor health.
20:56:51 Does that mean you are going to save a tree that looks
20:56:54 like that?
20:56:55 >>> I would have to defer to Scott Andreason.
20:57:01 This may be mislabeled.
20:57:02 It kind of contradicts itself.
20:57:03 So I would defer to him to clear you up on that.
20:57:07 I didn't actually review this section of the vision
20:57:09 back.
20:57:12 Parks Department.
20:57:22 >>> Scott Andreason.
20:57:24 Concerning tree number 70, we have with us the
20:57:31 arborist that we had in place with us.

20:57:33 I have worked with him as well as the Parks Department
20:57:37 and evaluation of the tree.
20:57:39 There's two evaluations done on the trees.
20:57:43 Done by our party by Dr. Stanley and the system that
20:57:49 he rates the trees at.
20:57:50 And he's here to explain his rating of the tree as
20:57:54 well as the city's rating of the tree.
20:57:57 Part of this in evaluating the trees on the site in
20:58:00 going through each individual tree because went out to
20:58:05 the site numerous times to discuss the tree, the
20:58:07 perimeter trees were identified as the most candidates
20:58:12 for self-preservation. This tree has to be a tree on
20:58:16 Ross Boulevard, it is the existing live oak tree, that
20:58:19 has been struck by lightning, and currently it is
20:58:23 malnourished.
20:58:25 It's been a tree that has been requested to be
20:58:27 preserved as part of the project.
20:58:29 We are preserving the tree as part of the project.
20:58:35 Once we get control of the project and develop it, we
20:58:38 are going to put some features in place such as an
20:58:41 irrigation and maintenance program on this tree to
20:58:44 hopefully bring it to a better state than it currently

20:58:47 is in.
20:58:50 Snappy notice the rating was 2.
20:58:53 I thought it said poor.
20:58:56 It just kind of surprised me.
20:58:58 Because when I was looking at the other trees they
20:59:00 looked really gad.
20:59:01 And I couldn't understand how you can save a tree that
20:59:04 lass as bad as this.
20:59:08 I just thought there was a mistake on there.
20:59:11 >>> I can have the doctor speed.
20:59:13 He's the one that rated it.
20:59:14 >> It doesn't matter.
20:59:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the record were you sworn in?
20:59:19 >>> Yes, I was.
20:59:20 Thank you.
20:59:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wanted to clarify.
20:59:23 I think the key is that's a tree that's on the edge of
20:59:25 the property so they don't need to remove it so they
20:59:27 are not going to remove it.
20:59:29 If it was on the internal part of the project they are
20:59:32 wiping out all of that because they have to move the
20:59:34 earth and change everything else.

20:59:37 If that sick-looking tree was internal to the project
20:59:39 it would be gone.
20:59:40 But they don't need to kill it because it's on the
20:59:42 edge of the project.
20:59:43 >> That tree will be gone, I can tell you.
20:59:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:59:54 >>> Rhea Law with Fowler White representing the owner
20:59:56 with the heights of Tampa, and the developer which is
21:00:01 "a better place group."
21:00:04 One of the people you don't see here tonight is Don
21:00:07 Wallace, the chairman of the board for the heights of
21:00:09 Tampa.
21:00:10 And I'm sorry to say he had a mishap with a bicycle
21:00:15 and apparently has a broken shoulder.
21:00:17 I hope he's watching on television.
21:00:19 And we wish him well.
21:00:22 In any event, I know that he wanted me to do a couple
21:00:24 of things before I started with my presentation, the
21:00:26 PowerPoint that I am going to show you in a few
21:00:29 moments.
21:00:30 The first is to recognize the existing partners.
21:00:32 Yes, I was sworn.

21:00:33 Thank you.
21:00:43 He wanted to recognize the partners because this has
21:00:45 been a long haul and there's a lot of people that
21:00:47 really believed in this project over time and wanted
21:00:49 to see it come to fruition.
21:00:52 The individuals are bill bush open with the better
21:00:54 place group, RAMIRA ALVERON, and bill Balkee with
21:01:04 Heidt & Associates.
21:01:05 Those are the individuals who are here tonight.
21:01:10 He also wanted to thank the mayor and the city staff,
21:01:13 because this as I said has been a long haul and
21:01:17 there's been an awful lot of words done to bring this
21:01:19 to you tonight.
21:01:20 And he wanted to thank the Tampa Heights and Ridgewood
21:01:26 community because they are the one that is came
21:01:27 together to determine what they wanted for their
21:01:29 community and how they can do it together as a
21:01:32 public-private partnership.
21:01:33 Finally, I will tell you that the entire team that's
21:01:36 here tonight has really pulled together, because I
21:01:39 think what we have for you is a project that is very
21:01:42 unique.

21:01:43 It will in fact eliminate the blight that is currently
21:01:46 on this site.
21:01:47 It will enrich the community.
21:01:49 It will open the river.
21:01:52 As a matter of fact, it will invite people to the
21:01:53 riverfront, to the Waterworks Park, and it will
21:01:56 benefit the city financially.
21:01:59 All those things are brought as a result of this
21:02:01 project, which you started nine years ago.
21:02:04 For those individuals who are on the team, I just
21:02:07 wanted to thank Andrea Zelman who of course is with my
21:02:13 firm and transportation, Heidt & Associates bill
21:02:19 Balkee, and Scott Andrea.
21:02:24 For the CDD.
21:02:28 And then Fowler White and Dr. C.
21:02:33 And he's the one that has put together this tremendous
21:02:36 amount of work on the trees that you see within the
21:02:39 vision book.
21:02:39 With that, I would like to go to the PowerPoint, if I
21:02:42 could.
21:02:43 I was told if I said that it magically would appear.
21:02:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There it is.

21:02:50 >>> First let me just say this is an area that was in
21:02:53 fact blighted and no question about that.
21:02:55 And it has already been benefited to rather
21:02:58 significantly by our efforts.
21:03:00 We removed the deteriorated structures, and crimes
21:03:05 have been reduced.
21:03:06 However, we still have a problem -- we also had a
21:03:12 problem or have a problem with incompatible uses and
21:03:15 finally, I'm very sorry to say this, we are having
21:03:17 trouble with theft and vandalism.
21:03:20 The bricks that are being stolen every night, which of
21:03:23 course we want to replace the brick streets.
21:03:26 This is a picture taken within the last week or so.
21:03:29 So that's something that we really need to resolve.
21:03:33 With that, the CRA boundaries are just a little larger
21:03:38 than our site but this is a great place to be
21:03:40 redeveloping.
21:03:41 This is actually the first suburban neighborhood for
21:03:44 the City of Tampa.
21:03:48 We have already talked with you the projects proposed
21:03:51 for the Bank of America that was a relatively small
21:03:53 project, some 300 units.

21:03:55 Now the Bank of America is part of a much larger --
21:03:59 which is the 48 acres, the entire site has been
21:04:02 redeveloped and Rae oriented, pulled back from the
21:04:05 river, the roadways run along the river, and I'll talk
21:04:08 about this again.
21:04:09 But when you are able to finally drive you will be
21:04:13 able to go from North Boulevard all the way to the
21:04:16 north side of the Performing Arts Center, all along
21:04:18 the river, all along park.
21:04:21 It will be another Bayshore Boulevard except it will
21:04:25 have more lush greenery and a real credit to this
21:04:28 community.
21:04:29 With that, I will remained you, this project is a
21:04:32 catalyst for the neighborhood plan that was adopted by
21:04:35 the neighborhood in 2002, adopted by the City Council
21:04:40 in 2003.
21:04:41 The heights project incorporates the goals of that
21:04:46 particular plan.
21:04:48 You may also recall that in 2005, we did a letter of
21:04:53 intent with the city administration, and there's
21:04:55 some -- the two that you have before you, the purpose
21:04:59 of the letter and intent was to identify those things

21:05:02 that could go into a development agreement and also to
21:05:04 identify the things that are necessary to protect the
21:05:07 city, some specific things that are included in our
21:05:11 development agreement that you've already heard about,
21:05:13 have to do with the establishment of the tax increment
21:05:17 financing program, the transfer of city-owned
21:05:19 property, the improvements to the infrastructure and
21:05:22 the vacation of the right-of-way, improvements and
21:05:25 maintenance of parks and urban amenities, the use of
21:05:28 condemnation for pup public purposes, affordable
21:05:33 housing,, the public arts requirements with overall
21:05:37 construction and of course the establishment of the
21:05:38 CDD.
21:05:39 So with that, what you have before you tonight is the
21:05:42 plan, which is the rezoning plan.
21:05:45 Currently, the zoning classifications on the site are
21:05:48 very intense.
21:05:49 They are CM, CG, CI, IG, RM-16 and RM-24.
21:05:55 And what we are proposing is less intense than those
21:05:59 particular classifications.
21:06:01 And all of them are controlled by the vision book
21:06:04 which I know you all have a copy of.

21:06:06 And I hope you have had an opportunity to look through
21:06:08 that.
21:06:09 I didn't realize this was actually the prototype of
21:06:14 the PDAs but I'm very proud of the work product we
21:06:17 put out there because I think it will fit the city
21:06:20 well as we go forward.
21:06:21 One thing I wanted to note about this particular
21:06:23 perspective is you see the side of the project that's
21:06:28 closest to us which would be Ross Avenue and then
21:06:31 looking towards the city, there is a drop of about 25
21:06:33 feet from Ross Avenue going down to the river.
21:06:35 And what the realignment will do is give you a view
21:06:39 corridor that now is going to be open to all those
21:06:42 individuals who are moving up and down Ross street and
21:06:44 using any of these parallel roadways.
21:06:46 That is going to be a tremendous beckoning, if you
21:06:50 will, to the riverfront, to the Waterworks Park.
21:06:54 This is actually our zoning plan.
21:06:56 And the small part is the redevelopment area.
21:06:59 But the things that are important about this is of
21:07:01 course we have Tampa street on the east side, North
21:07:04 Boulevard on the west side, Ross street along the

21:07:08 northern boundary, and then Blake which is right at
21:07:13 the corner of the bend of the road.
21:07:15 All of these things together, with the riverwalk --
21:07:19 and you can see the little dotted line coming to the
21:07:21 south -- the riverwalk actually will start at the
21:07:24 northern boundary of the Performing Arts Center and
21:07:27 proceed all the way north to North Boulevard.
21:07:29 And it is three quarters, or 64% of the project left
21:07:37 to be built of the riverwalk.
21:07:39 It is a significant amount.
21:07:40 It's almost a mile.
21:07:50 Commercial and office of 100,000 square feet, office
21:07:53 of 106,000 square feet.
21:07:54 A real opportunity for job creation in this
21:07:57 neighborhood.
21:07:57 Another one of the things that promoted in urban
21:08:00 redevelopment.
21:08:02 And finally, I talked about affordable housing, and
21:08:05 you heard that we are proposing 10% of those homes
21:08:07 that are on-site to be affordable, and 15% off site.
21:08:12 And the off-site is within the defined area.
21:08:15 So there are a number of protections necessary to

21:08:19 identify where they mate go.
21:08:22 And finally, I do want to mention that we will be
21:08:24 providing underground utilities throughout the site.
21:08:29 This will be a beautiful place.
21:08:31 It will be provided underground not only for
21:08:33 aesthetics but also for safety.
21:08:36 As for boating, as you heard, we are asking for up to
21:08:40 400 -- 400?
21:08:42 Wow.
21:08:43 That's a lot.
21:08:43 Up to 100 slips.
21:08:45 20% of which will be available free of charge to the
21:08:48 public.
21:08:50 And if we don't quite build 100, we will have a
21:08:54 minimum and I we hope to get up to 100 feet and hope
21:08:59 to have a total of 20.
21:09:00 You also heard that we have the comprehensive plan
21:09:02 designation of RS 25 and RMU 100.
21:09:07 Again the project we are proposing is less intense
21:09:09 than the comprehensive plan designation won provide
21:09:11 for.
21:09:12 A couple of other important things, landscaping.

21:09:16 We have a significant landscaping plan.
21:09:19 We are providing streetlighting.
21:09:20 We have tree and lighting.
21:09:22 The public art.
21:09:23 And the connections to the Tampa Greenways and trails.
21:09:27 And also bicycle parking because it's important that
21:09:29 you want to open this up to that kind of connectivity.
21:09:33 You need to provide it for all forms of
21:09:34 transportation.
21:09:36 As far as trees, you heard about the trees but I'll
21:09:39 quickly just reiterate.
21:09:41 The reason the trees are being removed is because we
21:09:43 are completely eliminating all of the existing
21:09:47 infrastructure that's on this site.
21:09:49 I would remind you that as you will probably know this
21:09:53 is the first infrastructure the city has, well over
21:09:56 100 years old and it has a limited useful life.
21:10:00 We will be replacing it with state-of-the-art
21:10:04 infrastructure which will be available for the next
21:10:06 hundred years, or perhaps beyond.
21:10:10 We will be transplanting 56% of the trees from the
21:10:13 site.

21:10:14 In addition to that, we will be providing some
21:10:17 preservation on the periphery of the site.
21:10:19 And we are going to do the very best we can to
21:10:21 rehabilitate the trees that are there.
21:10:23 That's not possible.
21:10:26 We have a landscaping plan that is very, very
21:10:29 significant.
21:10:29 It calls for the -- well, for the planting of 660
21:10:35 trees.
21:10:35 It is more than your code would require.
21:10:38 And as you can see, some of the trees are really in
21:10:42 very poor locations, either abutting structures, they
21:10:45 have wound themselves as round retaining walls or
21:10:48 other infrastructure.
21:10:50 And when those facilities are removed, the trees of
21:10:53 course are notary public peril.
21:10:56 What we'll be doing is either replacing those that can
21:10:58 be replaced or relocated.
21:11:01 Again the overhead utilities will go away, and we will
21:11:04 have underground utilities for the city.
21:11:08 And finally, part of the relocation and replanting
21:11:11 plan will not only take place on our site but will

21:11:15 take place off our site, along with the riverwalk, and
21:11:19 across the river on Blake high school, and I would
21:11:22 point out that by the time you beautify that site you
21:11:26 really are creating a riverwalk on the other side of
21:11:28 the river.
21:11:31 In total, we are planting 1067 trees both on-site and
21:11:36 off site.
21:11:37 And that requires the code of 1017, of what the
21:11:41 requirements are.
21:11:42 In short, this is really the fruition of years of
21:11:45 effort to redevelop this site.
21:11:46 It's a blend of the historic and of the new, it's
21:11:51 brick streets, in a reconfigured street grid,
21:11:55 sidewalks throughout, and around the entire project,
21:11:58 and adaptive reuse for those historic buildings that
21:12:01 came from armature works in the water works building
21:12:04 and also providing structures for our riverwalk.
21:12:08 The Waterworks Park.
21:12:11 The improvements to the Waterworks Park are contingent
21:12:14 upon receiving either fee simple or long-term lease on
21:12:18 the Tampa water works building.
21:12:21 And if in fact that happens, they will take the land

21:12:24 that comes up to that building and actually
21:12:27 reconfigure it and add it to the park so it can be a
21:12:30 useful part of the park.
21:12:31 We will then add to the amenities that the city has
21:12:34 planned for the park, and put in such things as
21:12:37 playground equipment, gazebos, pavement, landscape,
21:12:41 architecture, historical markers, restoration and
21:12:44 expansion of existing spring, water feature, and a
21:12:47 canoe and kayak launch site, and really a tremendous
21:12:51 improvement for that park.
21:12:52 And we have a poster over here to my right, your left,
21:12:56 which will give you an idea of the quality and design
21:12:58 of the park amenities, and the visions will also
21:13:02 contain the site plan standards.
21:13:04 Everything is of the highest quality.
21:13:06 This will be a wonderful place for the people of the
21:13:10 City of Tampa.
21:13:11 Going on to what the current Waterworks Park looks
21:13:15 like, this is the land adjacent to the water works
21:13:17 building, and we will be turning that into a park,
21:13:20 which will be beneficial, and this of course is the
21:13:23 water works building itself.

21:13:25 What we have proposed is to maintain this structure
21:13:29 intact, but to use it for public purposes such as
21:13:32 maybe a marketing center, restaurant, restrooms, or
21:13:37 other things that benefit the park recreational
21:13:40 offering.
21:13:40 The rest of the building, which is where currently we
21:13:44 have the TV station, would be allowed to have any of
21:13:47 the uses allowed under the zoning.
21:13:51 We talked a little bit about brownfield.
21:13:54 I will tell you that the one brownfield clean-up that
21:13:56 has been done to date costs over $2.9 million.
21:14:01 You will have another brownfield application come
21:14:03 before you in the very short time for the Tampa
21:14:07 armature works building and I would ask you if you
21:14:10 would look closely -- these are very expensive but
21:14:13 very important to get those areas cleaned up where you
21:14:15 don't vice-president -- into the groundwater.
21:14:22 As we are doing improvements along the sea wall, we
21:14:25 will be doing things ton improve the water quality
21:14:31 into the Hillsborough River.
21:14:32 And we can do a lot better than that.
21:14:35 And also this is the current shoreline which will have

21:14:38 either a sea wall or revetment.
21:14:42 This is the riverwalk.
21:14:43 It's 5,209 linear feet that we will be building.
21:14:49 The width, 64% of the rest of the riverwalk.
21:14:53 I'm hopeful that can be done quickly so that we can
21:14:55 move forward here, an actual plan of what that looks
21:14:58 like.
21:14:59 You see it's in three segments.
21:15:00 The southern, the Waterworks Park segment and of
21:15:03 course the Northern Area.
21:15:07 Again the heights project is dependent upon the
21:15:09 development agreement which is one of the things that
21:15:11 you will be voting on tonight.
21:15:13 And you've already heard about the things that are
21:15:16 included in that, the affordable housing, the
21:15:19 provisions for compliance with WMBE, with the equal
21:15:23 opportunity affirmative action, providing our local
21:15:26 vendors an opportunity to get involved in providing
21:15:29 material, supplies, equipment, and services.
21:15:32 We think that's important.
21:15:33 The protections on the TIF revenue, timing the
21:15:37 development, transfer of city property and also the

21:15:40 payment and performance that are going to be provided
21:15:44 on all roads, utilities, parks, Parkland and
21:15:46 infrastructure improvements.
21:15:48 We come to the Tampa armature works project building.
21:15:53 As now that was a TECO trolley barn and AP historical
21:16:00 landmark.
21:16:00 We want to make that a landmark for this project.
21:16:04 But the investment was steep and therefore it's
21:16:06 critical to our success to the community that we have
21:16:09 an adaptive reuse.
21:16:11 We are proposing to utilize the historic and top
21:16:15 provide with the redevelopment project.
21:16:19 Again we want to celebrate its historic significance
21:16:22 and be able to use it in concert with the rest of the
21:16:24 project.
21:16:27 You heard about the right-of-way vacation.
21:16:29 There's only one thing I would add to that.
21:16:31 As you look at the ordinance for approval tonight, it
21:16:34 actually doesn't permanently release the right-of-way
21:16:37 until we have platted the new streets and alleyways,
21:16:42 relocated and reconstructed the private and public
21:16:44 utilities, dedicated all the relocated streets,

21:16:47 rights-of-way, and public utility easements.
21:16:49 And in addition to that, I know there was some concern
21:16:52 that people would be able to -- we are obligated to
21:16:58 maintain traffic plans so they can access back and
21:17:01 forth and that has to be done to the satisfaction of
21:17:03 the public works department.
21:17:04 Finally, there is a community development district
21:17:07 that we ask for your approval of taint.
21:17:09 We have met the criteria under chapter 190.
21:17:12 I will just point out the establishment of this CDD is
21:17:15 consistent with the state comprehensive plan and the
21:17:18 City of Tampa comprehensive plan.
21:17:20 The area that's included within the CDD is of
21:17:23 sufficient size, and continuity, to be developed as a
21:17:27 functional community, it's economically viable, and it
21:17:32 is the best mechanism to provide to the area. The
21:17:38 establishment. District will provide entities capable
21:17:41 of taking care of the amenities that we have been
21:17:43 talking about tonight.
21:17:44 With that, we have a number of letters in support that
21:17:48 I'd like to place into the record along with some of
21:17:50 the resumes from the individuals who have been working

21:17:52 on this project.
21:17:53 And we would be more than happy to answer any
21:17:55 questions that you may have.
21:17:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
21:17:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I've got a few.
21:18:02 Why don't I wait?
21:18:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Why did you raise your hand?
21:18:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
21:18:09 Some of these are my questions.
21:18:10 Some of these are questions that have been sent to me
21:18:14 by citizens.
21:18:15 Let me see.
21:18:19 Dog park.
21:18:20 I asked this question about six or eight months ago.
21:18:22 I hope it's made its way to the developer.
21:18:25 You have 1900 urban residents.
21:18:28 And my experience has been that urban residents mate
21:18:32 not have children but they often have dogs.
21:18:35 And I'm just wondering if that has been taken into
21:18:38 consideration in regard to waterfront -- Waterworks
21:18:40 Park or any other park in the project.
21:18:47 >>> Rhea Law: Unfortunately it has not.

21:18:49 And I will tell you that Hardeman has been the
21:18:52 individual working on this design for Waterworks Park,
21:18:57 and that's not one of the things that are included in
21:18:59 the design as we currently have it.
21:19:03 >> Is that something you all never heard about?
21:19:06 Because I did mention to the staff along the way.
21:19:21 >>> Well, if it's something you want, all of the parks
21:19:23 improvements according to the development agreement
21:19:24 have to come back before the Parks and Recreation
21:19:27 Department for approval.
21:19:29 We have to come back to them at the 30% range.
21:19:33 And if that is something you wish to have, then we
21:19:35 could look at a redesign that will accommodate that.
21:19:38 >> I see it as an amenity not necessarily to the -- I
21:19:42 think it's an amenity to the Tampa Heights
21:19:44 neighborhood.
21:19:44 But I think it's definitely an amenity to your future
21:19:47 residents.
21:19:48 So I just think it's something that should be looked
21:19:53 at.
21:19:55 If it's not today that it couldn't be a dog park I'm
21:19:58 fine with that.

21:19:59 I'm hoping that you all might consider that and maybe
21:20:01 some people might think it's silly but a lot of people
21:20:04 think it's important.
21:20:08 Can the tiff assist -- it was mentioned from Hartline
21:20:12 about the circulator.
21:20:14 And we have circulators in downtown, in and around
21:20:16 downtown, the Hyde Park, et cetera.
21:20:18 Can the TIF assist with the funding of the circulator?
21:20:22 I don't know, has anybody looked at that issue?
21:20:24 >> I don't know that it's included in the CRA plan.
21:20:27 But I'm going to turn to Andrea Zelman and ask for
21:20:30 that -- ask her that question.
21:20:34 It is not included in the CRA plan.
21:20:37 >> Are we approving the CRA plan tonight?
21:20:40 >> No.
21:20:40 >> So we can theoretically amend the CRA plan to
21:20:44 include that?
21:20:45 >> We could.
21:20:51 You can amend the plan but it has to be for capital
21:20:54 improvements.
21:20:54 >> we're still looking to see if we can be more
21:21:01 flexible.

21:21:02 So we're working on that.
21:21:03 Right now, that's what the statute says.
21:21:06 We have got some exceptions for community policing.
21:21:08 We will see what we can do, to be as expansive as
21:21:12 possible.
21:21:12 >> So I think that's something we should shoot toward
21:21:16 in the future.
21:21:17 Because you have got a lot of residents there.
21:21:20 You're going to -- you're building to the accommodate
21:21:22 a circulator.
21:21:25 The city and Hartline need help with the funding of
21:21:27 the circulator.
21:21:28 So as your partners in the CRA, let's all tray to work
21:21:31 to fund the circulator.
21:21:36 >> For clarification on that.
21:21:38 The CRA plan does talk about traffic circulation,
21:21:42 including trolley, mass transit.
21:21:47 So the CRA plan amendment that we have approved
21:21:50 earlier this year.
21:21:52 >> So the key is funding as related to that.
21:21:59 Stormwater.
21:22:00 Somebody sent me an e-mail, asked me what type of

21:22:03 stormwater treatment the project would have.
21:22:05 I mean, obviously it's going to -- permitting,
21:22:09 et cetera, et cetera.
21:22:10 But I think they want to be assured that unlike most
21:22:13 stormwater that flows off the street into the river
21:22:16 directly without any treatment, that this project will
21:22:18 be better.
21:22:18 >> Let me introduce Bill Balkee.
21:22:24 >> Yes, I have been sworn in.
21:22:26 We met with city staff and SWFWMD and it's going to be
21:22:29 an interesting project that comes with stormwater
21:22:30 treatment.
21:22:31 The city has obtained grants from SWFWMD for
21:22:34 stormwater treatment device, and at each intersection
21:22:39 with the river.
21:22:40 We are going to be working with the city staff to
21:22:42 accommodate those devices, grant money.
21:22:45 We are also providing stormwater treatment for each of
21:22:47 the individuals, the parcels within the project,
21:22:51 before the parcels discharge into the stormwater
21:22:53 system we are going to build into the river.
21:22:55 And like we pointed out a lot of the riverwalk is

21:22:57 going to be revetment, by the Marriott that will
21:23:03 provide for additional stormwater treatment before the
21:23:06 water goes back to the river.
21:23:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As to the dockage, it looks like
21:23:12 the dockage runs pretty much the whole way, which is
21:23:15 fine.
21:23:17 >>> We haven't done the design on that.
21:23:18 That's only conceptual.
21:23:20 And we don't know that 100-foot -- we won't know that
21:23:25 until we actually do the design.
21:23:28 >> I have been talking to TPD recently.
21:23:30 And I think that there is a desire to make a lot of
21:23:33 that area, and then heading into downtown, more -- to
21:23:37 have more no wake zones.
21:23:39 And I'm wondering, has there been discussion among
21:23:42 your group, especially your marine engineers, whoever
21:23:46 you are going to be working with, about applying from
21:23:48 no wake zones, perhaps as a co-applicant with the
21:23:51 city?
21:23:52 >> In fact, the city will be on the dock so if you
21:23:57 wish to have a no wake zone which would probably make
21:23:59 sense, typically where you have -- there's only a very

21:24:04 small area there that is a wake zone, if you will,
21:24:10 that makes sense to fill it in.
21:24:15 >>: A in a wake zone now around the basin.
21:24:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
21:24:21 And then another concern that was faxed to me was
21:24:24 about public access for that entire waterfront.
21:24:28 It appeared to me that it's public the whole way.
21:24:31 >> That's correct.
21:24:32 >> How about when you have a boat dock.
21:24:38 What will you have, like a gate at the end of the
21:24:40 dock, so that would be locks?
21:24:43 I would think so, if it's a private dock to get out
21:24:46 the private boats, you would have to get the dock
21:24:49 locked.
21:24:49 But then the boardwalk next to the dock would be open.
21:24:54 Was that the intent?
21:24:57 >> The riverwalk will be open to the public all the
21:25:00 way along.
21:25:01 For those areas that are private docks, they will have
21:25:05 a gate to directly go out onto the dock area.
21:25:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
21:25:15 The rezoning, you mention board of director a tower

21:25:19 come out of the armature building.
21:25:21 Maybe this is a question meant for our staff.
21:25:24 Does this rezoning -- David, maybe you want to answer
21:25:28 it.
21:25:29 Does this rezoning automatically grant them the
21:25:31 ability to pull a tower out of the historic structure?
21:25:34 Or is that something that will go through the
21:25:36 architectural review process?
21:25:39 >>> The development agreement specifically states that
21:25:43 the reuse of that building will have to go through the
21:25:45 architectural review commission.
21:25:47 >> Because you mentioned the tower.
21:25:50 Was that just your desire?
21:25:52 >>> That's correct.
21:25:53 It has to be a reasonable use.
21:25:57 And to have a use that's available, one that will
21:26:00 really contribute to the community.
21:26:02 We need to make it a part of the community.
21:26:05 So we are seeing that that's going to be one of the
21:26:09 things that we'll be asking for in the future.
21:26:11 We wanted to lay it on the table for you.
21:26:14 >> So what is the language -- the documents related to

21:26:19 that structure?
21:26:25 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
21:26:26 Section 4.01 of the development agreement.
21:26:28 It talks about the fact that there's a series of
21:26:31 quasi-judicial approvals that will be required.
21:26:35 And I believe the section with respect to the A.R.C.
21:26:38 also references that nature, meaning we are not
21:26:42 contracting into a contractual zoning obligation for
21:26:46 those things that are not going to be approved for
21:26:49 this process, i.e., vacating and rezoning the CDD.
21:26:53 >> So we are not putting the A.R.C. into a corner or
21:26:56 box where they have their hands tied?
21:26:58 >>> No, we can't. That would be illegal.
21:27:00 Can't have contract zoning.
21:27:02 I think the developer, however, wants to disclose up
21:27:04 front, make sure this council is aware of their
21:27:08 intent, and hopefully this council's interest in that
21:27:13 will have whatever weight it has to the A.R.C. but
21:27:16 they are not bound.
21:27:18 >> And then how about schools, Ms. Law?
21:27:21 I don't know of anybody -- if anybody discussed
21:27:24 schools.

21:27:24 I didn't see necessarily schools on-site, their
21:27:27 contribution to schools.
21:27:30 I worry about dogs.
21:27:31 I might as well worry about children, too.
21:27:36 >>> Yes, we have been talking to the school board.
21:27:38 And they have indicated that they would like to see
21:27:40 another school in the downtown area.
21:27:44 And what they have asked us to do is work with them to
21:27:46 identify an alternate site.
21:27:48 There are a number of sites, not on ours, but in the
21:27:52 general vicinity that may become available.
21:27:55 So we have agreed with them that we will continue to
21:27:57 work with them.
21:27:59 >> Because your rezoning is coming in today, before we
21:28:03 complete all the school Connecticut currency issues,
21:28:06 are you guise grandfathered in so you don't have to
21:28:09 worry about school concurrency?
21:28:11 >>> It's my understanding that we have to meet the
21:28:12 criteria.
21:28:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: David, I think I would rather hear
21:28:26 your opinion.
21:28:27 >>> What was your question?

21:28:28 I was distracted.
21:28:30 Bill is saying yes but I don't know that I can rely on
21:28:32 that.
21:28:34 >> School concurrency.
21:28:35 I don't think we have adopted anything new.
21:28:39 >>> Correct.
21:28:40 >> This rezoning is first reading today, second
21:28:42 reading in July?
21:28:46 >>> Yes, sir.
21:28:46 >>: They don't have to help build schools?
21:28:53 >> I think they will be grandfathered in.
21:28:55 I would like to go back more carefully.
21:29:06 >> I think it's July 1st of 2007.
21:29:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess you can tell us what your
21:29:16 intent is as related to school contribution or what
21:29:19 have you.
21:29:19 You said you would work with them.
21:29:21 I think that was a little vague.
21:29:25 >>> Rhea Law: We will work with them because that's
21:29:27 what they asked us to do.
21:29:28 I would point out as it relates to schools, this
21:29:31 particular site is not going to be a generator in the

21:29:34 normal calculation that you would have for 1900 units.
21:29:37 This kind of a development is an urban development
21:29:40 with active adults, with empty nesters, those
21:29:44 individuals that don't generate the same numbers of
21:29:46 school children.
21:29:47 And so I believe that you will see that there will be
21:29:51 less contribution to the schools, maybe more to dogs.
21:29:56 [ Laughter ]
21:29:59 As for whether or not the impact fee ordinance applies
21:30:02 to us or not, I would only point out that we don't
21:30:05 really know what the ordinance might look like and we
21:30:09 would have to wait and see what that is.
21:30:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Law, you mentioned the dedicated
21:30:22 park which has the water works building, and also the
21:30:27 CTTV station there.
21:30:29 Has anything been said about that CTTV station,
21:30:32 whether it should be removed from there, or going to
21:30:35 stay there?
21:30:36 And is it dedicated park land?
21:30:39 Does it need to be removed from the dedicated park
21:30:42 land?
21:30:44 >>> The TV station, there has been talk about them

21:30:47 moving to other locations, and perhaps changing their
21:30:52 mechanism of providing services.
21:30:55 I don't know whether they are going to move or not.
21:30:57 But we certainly understand that until they move they
21:31:04 are going to stay exactly where they are.
21:31:07 If we receive either the fee simple or alternatively a
21:31:10 long-term lease on the property, we would look to have
21:31:14 that release from the park obligation but would
21:31:16 include the additional land into the existing
21:31:19 Waterworks Park.
21:31:21 >> So you don't have to do anything about the
21:31:23 dedication, the dedicated park land then?
21:31:26 We don't have to undedicate it?
21:31:31 >>> Not the Waterworks Park.
21:31:34 But for the water works building and the land that's
21:31:36 associated with that, there may very well be something
21:31:39 to release it from the park limitation.
21:31:42 But that's something that would come before you later
21:31:44 after we, you know, get it ready for presentation to
21:31:48 you.
21:31:48 >> Was there an offer made to buy the TV station?
21:32:00 Mr. Huey?

21:32:02 Huh hue the discussions we have had along with Ms. Law
21:32:06 that can happen there unless the cable TV operation
21:32:10 has another home.
21:32:11 So the idea is that they would work to facilitate and
21:32:16 find the location and pay for that transition, but it
21:32:19 would be on that basis that that building do could be
21:32:22 made available.
21:32:24 So that's the limit of our discussion at this time.
21:32:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
21:32:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As to the water parks park
21:32:36 building, I think it needs to be abundantly clear for
21:32:39 the record.
21:32:40 It's my understanding that maybe you want to explain
21:32:42 the condition a little more in detail, Rhea.
21:32:45 It's my understanding that the conditions that if the
21:32:50 city does not relinquish control of that Waterworks
21:32:53 Park building out of the parks system that the
21:32:56 developer's obligation to do the proposed Waterworks
21:32:58 Park goes away.
21:33:03 >>> That's correct.
21:33:03 >>KEVIN WHITE: Just a question on the Waterworks Park
21:33:10 issue.

21:33:12 TPD was asking, was there going to be any type of
21:33:16 statuesque or memorabilia recognizing that that was
21:33:20 once the TPD location, anything of that nature?
21:33:24 I don't know if there's anything planned in there, or
21:33:28 maybe a proposal or something that may be thought of?
21:33:33 It was just brought to my attention.
21:33:38 Just a request for consideration, not anything other
21:33:40 than that.
21:33:40 And if there was, they would like to know about it.
21:33:45 >>> Well, thank you.
21:33:46 We have not considered that.
21:33:47 And we will.
21:33:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
21:33:58 wants to speak on item 5, 6, 7 or 11
21:34:04 If you want to speak on 5, 6, 7 or 11, it's not time
21:34:09 to come speak.
21:34:10 If you are going to speak, please come up and line up
21:34:12 and start speaking so we can move our agenda.
21:34:15 Don't sit there and wait till everybody decides.
21:34:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder to move things along,
21:34:22 there's a sign to remind you, please state if you have
21:34:24 been sworn so I don't have to interrupt you.

21:34:26 Thank you.
21:34:27 >>> Ralph Shuler, 21 north Jefferson street.
21:34:31 I have been sworn.
21:34:33 I lived in Tampa Heights for eight years, have been a
21:34:36 former president of central heights for two years
21:34:40 about three, four years ago when this development
21:34:43 first came from its infancy.
21:34:47 I basically moved to Tampa Heights because of this
21:34:49 particular parcel of property.
21:34:51 I did a thesis in graduate school as an architect, and
21:34:55 said, this piece of property, any other city in
21:34:57 America would have been redeveloped 20 years ago.
21:35:00 I thought this would have happened five years ago.
21:35:03 It's taken a very, very long time.
21:35:05 I'm anxious to see it happen.
21:35:07 I'm anxious to see it move along.
21:35:10 Honestly, I thought we would be here a year ago with
21:35:12 the current people but I know city government moves
21:35:14 kind of slow and I'm the kind of guy who is not real
21:35:17 patient.
21:35:18 But I think the patience, everyone here is very
21:35:22 comfortable with this development, very comfortable

21:35:24 with the group of players that are here, very
21:35:26 comfortable with the myopic nature of something like
21:35:31 this and how the daily think is there, and certainly
21:35:34 can't agree on everything before it's been done.
21:35:36 But I think certainly can't be any more precise than
21:35:40 what we have been.
21:35:41 And I would hope that you guys would vote to approve
21:35:45 this tonight, and keep this project moving, and to
21:35:49 make Tampa Heights become the next great urban
21:35:52 neighborhood.
21:35:52 Thank you.
21:36:00 >>> I have been sworn in. Dan McGUREN, chairman of
21:36:03 SunTrust bank but here as chairman of friends of the
21:36:06 riverwalk.
21:36:06 As you heard, this development will add 35% of the
21:36:10 total 2.4 miles of the Tampa riverwalk.
21:36:14 This will go such a long way in helping us bring this
21:36:19 public-private partnership to fruition.
21:36:22 You've heard about the boat docks.
21:36:24 You heard about the public access.
21:36:27 This 2.4 miles, 15-fat wide corridor that links our
21:36:30 cultural amenities, our parks, brings access to the

21:36:35 river from the land and from the water with the boat
21:36:39 docks but additional ones from the friends of the
21:36:41 riverwalk.
21:36:42 I mean, this is a beautiful part of our city that will
21:36:47 become really a great part of the city for a long,
21:36:51 long time.
21:36:52 Bill Bishop and Don WALLICK are outstanding citizens.
21:36:57 I'm very familiar with his other projects.
21:36:59 He builds very high quality projects.
21:37:01 And the last point is, what a smart development for
21:37:04 our region, for our community, having all this housing
21:37:08 close to where we have all our jobs.
21:37:11 Takes pressure off our infrastructure.
21:37:14 It's really a great project promoting smart growth.
21:37:16 And the friends of the riverwalk, as chairman, we
21:37:18 highly recommend this project for your approval.
21:37:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:37:21 Next.
21:37:25 >>KEVIN WHITE: You're in second place if Bank of
21:37:27 America moves out, right?
21:37:29 >> My name is Rhonda brewer, 305 east Park Avenue in
21:37:37 Tampa Heights.

21:37:37 And I have been sworn in.
21:37:39 I just wanted to say that when I moved to Tampa over
21:37:43 nine years ago, there were several options of housing
21:37:45 that I could have chosen to live in.
21:37:48 And I saw Tampa Heights as a diamond in the walk
21:37:51 literally.
21:37:51 I saw the potential and the opportunity.
21:37:55 And so as a renter, I lived in Tampa Heights back in
21:37:59 the late '90s.
21:38:01 And after several years of scratching and savoring my
21:38:05 money I was finally able to purchase my first home in
21:38:08 2004.
21:38:09 I have been committed to this neighborhood for several
21:38:11 years.
21:38:14 We have endured crime.
21:38:15 We have endured drugs and prostitution.
21:38:18 When I walk along Palm Avenue, to get my exercise with
21:38:23 broken glass, people living actually on the vacant
21:38:28 lot, and it can be sometimes scary.
21:38:32 And I now have a potential child on the way.
21:38:36 And I dream of the day that I can walk down Palm
21:38:42 Avenue and see the beautiful buildings and have access

21:38:46 to the parks and all the amenities.
21:38:48 And I would be very proud to raise my family in this
21:38:51 neighborhood.
21:38:52 I support this project and this development team.
21:38:55 And I hope that you will, too.
21:38:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:38:59 Next.
21:39:03 >> William sessions.
21:39:09 I have been sworn in.
21:39:10 I'm for the project.
21:39:11 It's a wonderful project.
21:39:12 Also, I want to know if they are going to put another
21:39:15 dog park in the area.
21:39:22 Also, just like Bayshore, if we can align the sidewalk
21:39:33 along there. I know it's a wonderful project and I
21:39:35 love it.
21:39:35 Thank you.
21:39:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:39:36 Next.
21:39:41 >> Good evening.
21:39:42 My name is Lydia green, 3406 north Eva Avenue.
21:39:48 This is wonderful for me, and for many of us who have

21:39:54 worked for a long time on Tampa Heights.
21:40:04 Mark talked about going back to 1997.
21:40:06 My memory however goes back a little further than
21:40:08 that, almost 25 years.
21:40:10 We have also heard comments about Tampa Heights being
21:40:12 a diamond in the rough.
21:40:14 Moving into Tampa Heights over that length of time, we
21:40:18 saw Tampa Heights as a diamond in the rough, and
21:40:25 trying to get to this point where we are today.
21:40:29 We remember when Mayor Greco was running for office,
21:40:31 and the policemen had supported him, having meetings
21:40:35 in the home of Tony ULA who was our president back
21:40:40 then, and talking about what would happen to the
21:40:43 riverside after he had promised the police department
21:40:48 a new home.
21:40:49 And later on in the administration there was
21:40:54 discussion about the river area becoming a gated
21:41:00 community and we were in an uproar about that and did
21:41:02 everything to change that idea.
21:41:07 Ten years ago if you look in the south you saw where
21:41:11 we wrote let towers City Council, we printed our
21:41:15 boards that we drug around everywhere that we could,

21:41:21 David foster was doing his masters at the University
21:41:23 of South Florida and used this area for his masters
21:41:26 thesis.
21:41:29 Project.
21:41:30 Had all kinds of plans and designs for the area.
21:41:34 Looked at other communities and saw what they had done
21:41:36 with the water area, and knowing that we had this
21:41:40 great treasure right here, and how it could benefit
21:41:48 us, over the years, as Mr. Huey, we decided we needed
21:41:54 to do something for our community, we had to get our
21:41:58 historic district, we had to create our neighborhood
21:42:01 plan, when we didn't have anyone listening to us.
21:42:04 We did D that ourselves.
21:42:06 Today, we have, besides myself, the president of the
21:42:10 civic association.
21:42:12 We had two of the past presidents who are here
21:42:15 supporting this project.
21:42:18 We have board members from the civic association who
21:42:21 are in the audience.
21:42:21 We also have members of the Tampa Heights police
21:42:26 department site here, showing their presence, but are
21:42:33 supportive of this.

21:42:34 One of the big things that I'm most excited about is
21:42:36 that we talk about our entire Tampa Heights plan.
21:42:42 Not only will this impact the area that it is on going
21:42:47 south, we see absolutely as impacting the north part
21:42:50 of the community, developers have already talked to us
21:42:55 about seeing how we can be creative about making sure
21:42:59 we implement all of Tampa Heights, and that we don't
21:43:02 end up having an all-gated community, to look
21:43:11 different from the rest of us.
21:43:12 But I want to encourage you to let you know that we
21:43:19 are very supportive.
21:43:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:43:20 Next.
21:43:21 Next?
21:43:27 >>> My name is Shaq Azulu, I have been living in Tampa
21:43:31 Heights for 26 years.
21:43:33 I have seen a lot of changes take place there.
21:43:37 I'd like to extend my gratitude, my sincere gratitude
21:43:41 for the time I am going to be allowed to speak so I am
21:43:44 going to be as quick as possible because way need to
21:43:46 say is going to take a lot more than the three
21:43:48 minutes.

21:43:48 But I'll tray to keep it beyond that.
21:43:51 I mean within the confines.
21:43:55 From everything that I have heard tonight, and from
21:43:58 what I've read in today's paper, I would guess I'm
21:44:02 going to be the fly in the ointment.
21:44:05 So I'm going to apologize to some of the City Council
21:44:08 members who might not like what I'm going to say.
21:44:12 And I would also apologize to some of the developers
21:44:15 and the members of the Tampa Heights civic
21:44:19 association, of which I am also a member of.
21:44:23 I have a deep concern that just a handful of people
21:44:28 are making decisions -- let me give out this letter
21:44:33 first.
21:44:34 I forgot to give this out.
21:44:56 (Oath administered by Clerk) so getting back into what
21:44:59 I was trying to comment on, there's a lot of people
21:45:03 who are uninformed on what's going on.
21:45:06 I have tried to inform some of my neighbors and some
21:45:11 of the people in the immediate community.
21:45:15 I don't feel like I'm betraying the civic association,
21:45:20 because my issues have been raised a number of times.
21:45:28 To me, I feel, as a member of this civic association,

21:45:34 it's our duty to make sure that the majority of the
21:45:40 community is alerted on what's going on.
21:45:44 You can't have less than a hundred people, less than
21:45:49 1%, 9,000 people live in Tampa Heights, and you only
21:45:54 have maybe 80 to 100 people show up at the meeting, if
21:45:57 that.
21:45:59 I'm being very generous.
21:46:02 I believe that it's on our shoulders to make this a
21:46:10 potent organization, an association.
21:46:14 We are obligated to the City Council to be count on
21:46:20 the things that might be questionable.
21:46:25 Also, the council is obligated to us for your
21:46:31 expertise, for your resources, and for your ways of
21:46:38 being able to communicate with the developers and
21:46:41 other parts of the city that need to be talked to.
21:46:45 So I would urge the City Council at this time to
21:46:49 please, just slow down a little bit.
21:46:53 There's a committee being formed right now that want
21:46:56 to speak to you and address some of these things.
21:46:59 Thank you for your time.
21:47:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:47:01 Mr. White.

21:47:01 >>KEVIN WHITE: I just want to make a couple comments
21:47:05 to what you said.
21:47:07 One of the things that I want to commend you for is
21:47:11 you do get involved as some of those other 80 people
21:47:15 that you are saying roughly out here, because I get
21:47:18 your e-mails, we talk occasionally when you have
21:47:21 issues in the Tampa Heights area.
21:47:24 But the unfortunate reality is that 80 -- the minority
21:47:33 speaking for the majority in most cases, because these
21:47:36 are the people who are active, who take part in take
21:47:40 participation within a neighborhood.
21:47:41 And we see that in every neighborhood association
21:47:45 throughout the city limits of Tampa.
21:47:48 Everyone that gets involved.
21:47:49 I commend you for your involvement.
21:47:51 I commend you for your commitment to your
21:47:54 neighborhood.
21:47:55 I commend everyone else that's out here.
21:47:58 Some can't make it tonight because of obligations,
21:48:00 can't make it because of work and other things.
21:48:03 But still, all things being equal, this room should be
21:48:07 packed, it should be full in the Mascotte room and

21:48:10 should be full downstairs either in support or
21:48:12 opposition.
21:48:13 But we also see that when numbers are very low, most
21:48:18 of the neighborhood associations and most of the
21:48:22 homeowners and residents in the neighborhood are
21:48:25 really in support of.
21:48:27 And when the residents are in huge, huge opposition,
21:48:32 that's when we normally see a large hue and cry down
21:48:35 here.
21:48:36 And as far as slowing down for this project, I don't
21:48:39 know the particular organization that you're talking
21:48:42 about that's being formed, or that's currently in
21:48:47 process.
21:48:48 And I think they are a little late for that.
21:48:51 Now they can still make their concerns known.
21:48:55 But this project has been long coming.
21:48:59 There have been dozens of public notices, I'm sure
21:49:04 this neighborhood association has been alerted on
21:49:06 every -- at every turn, continuances, or amendments.
21:49:13 I don't know what else to tell you other than the fact
21:49:15 that I don't see where we could even begin trying to
21:49:21 slow the train down right now.

21:49:24 But you as a neighborhood resident, your concerns are
21:49:28 absolutely taken into consideration.
21:49:32 But this is a wonderful project.
21:49:35 And --
21:49:37 >>> By all means, I am not trying to stop it in the
21:49:39 tracks.
21:49:40 What I'm trying to say is that in my belief -- and
21:49:43 there are other residents in the community who believe
21:49:46 that we as an association have not done a thorough job
21:49:52 on alerting them.
21:49:53 >>KEVIN WHITE: And that's fine.
21:49:56 And that's not necessarily up for debate but I am
21:49:59 going to make this comment and then I'm going to be
21:50:01 done.
21:50:02 But also we as government, as the developers, and our
21:50:05 staff, and as the community that's been involved and
21:50:10 noticed, we have an obligation to try to move forward
21:50:14 as we have done our due diligence, and these books,
21:50:20 several meetings of the public notice, all the public
21:50:22 notices, and the meetings that you attend, as well as
21:50:25 the meetings that we have to attend, that I understand
21:50:29 what you're saying.

21:50:31 But unfortunately at this point in time, as one
21:50:35 council member, don't agree with that statement at
21:50:38 this point in time.
21:50:40 >>> Thank you very much for your tame.
21:50:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:50:43 Next.
21:50:46 >>> Good evening.
21:50:47 Mary Honender, Palm Avenue, and I am also one of the
21:50:53 past presidents of the Tampa Heights civic
21:50:54 association.
21:50:55 I just briefly want to take this opportunity to thank
21:50:58 Bill Bishop and the heights group and Don Wallace and
21:51:02 the Bank of America group.
21:51:03 I think they have done their due diligence.
21:51:06 They have spent a tremendous amount of time not only
21:51:09 notifying us, the community, about their vision, but
21:51:12 in addition spent time soliciting information from us
21:51:16 so their vision could become our vision.
21:51:18 I am in full support of the project.
21:51:20 And I think it is something that will make this city
21:51:24 just a model.
21:51:25 And so I would appreciate your support, also.

21:51:28 Thank you very much.
21:51:30 >> Were you sworn in?
21:51:31 For the record?
21:51:32 >>> Yes, I was.
21:51:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you would just state that when you
21:51:35 give your name.
21:51:36 Thank you.
21:51:38 >>> My name is James chitman, 307 east Gladys street
21:51:41 in Tampa, Florida.
21:51:43 And, no, I have not been sworn in.
21:51:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else who wants ton speak, if you
21:51:49 have not been sworn, pleas stand and raise your right
21:51:51 hand.
21:51:53 (Oath administered by Clerk).
21:52:01 >>> Obviously the project is not all things to all
21:52:04 people.
21:52:04 But it's probably about as close as it can get.
21:52:13 Yes, it does bring the neighborhood and community a
21:52:15 lot of amenities, dog parks, public docks, whatever.
21:52:19 But it is also going to help the larger city as a
21:52:23 whole, with 2,000 housing units being there, and each
21:52:27 one of them having families, and all of them being so

21:52:29 close to downtown, where so many people work, then who
21:52:33 knows, maybe restaurants might open downtown, and
21:52:36 theaters might open downtown, and it might be a place
21:52:39 where you can go get something to eat Monday through
21:52:42 Friday.
21:52:43 And I think that would be nice, something a lot of us
21:52:46 would like. Anyway, I don't have too much to say
21:52:49 except I like the project.
21:52:50 Most of us like the project.
21:52:51 I think it benefits the city as a whole, not just the
21:52:54 community.
21:52:55 And I'm with everyone else who thinks that maybe it's
21:53:00 just time to move on and pull out all the stops of
21:53:03 construction along the way.
21:53:05 Thank you very much.
21:53:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:53:08 Next.
21:53:10 >> Good evening.
21:53:13 Madam Chairman, City Council members, honorable City
21:53:17 Council members, I'm very grateful to you.
21:53:20 I have lived in the Tampa Heights area for quite some
21:53:24 time.

21:53:27 >> Name.
21:53:28 >>> Julia Jackson.
21:53:31 I live at 2006 Highland Avenue.
21:53:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have been sworn?
21:53:38 Yes?
21:53:38 Thank you.
21:53:39 >>> I lived there when you talked about the old police
21:53:42 station.
21:53:44 I look at it as the old jail house before it was a
21:53:47 police station.
21:53:48 It was a jail house.
21:53:50 So I'm looking at it at that point of view.
21:53:54 My question -- I have a question about closing of the
21:53:59 streets.
21:54:03 You're thinking about closing Palm Avenue.
21:54:05 And I'm very much in consideration of the closing of
21:54:08 the Palm Avenue, because its direct route to
21:54:14 Boulevard, which carries you to the schools.
21:54:17 I'm looking in terms of emergencies of children.
21:54:20 And it is quite a bit of traffic that goes up and
21:54:24 down, quite a bit of vehicles go up and down, closing
21:54:28 that street would carry a little bit longer getting to

21:54:31 any emergency of children and schools in that area.
21:54:37 Closing some of the alleys that they have already --
21:54:42 the ones -- my question was that at this point, the
21:54:51 naming of the different streets that they are going to
21:54:54 close would be feasible to close these, and not have
21:54:57 that straight down the Boulevard area, that they would
21:55:02 have to go around.
21:55:07 Other than I have no questions.
21:55:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner will answer when she comes
21:55:12 back up.
21:55:13 >>> I thank you, ma'am.
21:55:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:55:15 Next.
21:55:20 >> I'm Hart, 2302 Central Avenue and I have been sworn
21:55:23 in.
21:55:24 I just really want to make you folks aware that the
21:55:28 developer and Bill Bishop and his group have really, I
21:55:32 think, gone an extra mile in meeting with the
21:55:35 neighborhood, addressing any concerns we had, and we
21:55:38 had a number of them up front a couple of years ago.
21:55:41 And he really was right there, was very thoughtful,
21:55:45 and thought through a solution and I think to my

21:55:49 knowledge addressed pretty much as we have seen there
21:55:51 hasn't been too much opposition addressed, all the
21:55:54 concerns that the neighborhood had.
21:55:56 And the residents, individual residents had.
21:56:03 There's a comment made about a dog park.
21:56:06 And I just wanted us to have a little input on that.
21:56:09 The Parks Department and the developer both had
21:56:13 meetings for our civic association.
21:56:16 And solicited input.
21:56:18 And that was not something that the neighborhood had
21:56:24 any thoughts about, or any initiative.
21:56:27 There's no discussions as far as the dog park.
21:56:30 That doesn't mean it's still not a good idea with 2000
21:56:33 more units going in.
21:56:35 But there was input solicited, and there really wasn't
21:56:39 any generated as far as the dog park is concerned.
21:56:42 And there is an effort by some folks up near Plymouth
21:56:46 park which is in Tampa Heights to try to create a dog
21:56:49 park up there.
21:56:50 I just wanted to mention that.
21:56:52 I think it's a great idea.
21:56:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.

21:56:59 >>> Good evening, citizens of City of Tampa.
21:57:01 My name is Paul Gordon Goodman, 9027 Lake Sunset
21:57:06 Drive.
21:57:06 I think most of the concerns that I would have is
21:57:09 property title holder in the middle of this project.
21:57:13 On Palm Avenue.
21:57:15 It's probably been answered by the petitioner
21:57:17 concerning the closure, and I've talked with Ms.
21:57:21 Jackson.
21:57:22 I think she'll understand, what I heard at the end of
21:57:24 the discussion was that the right-of-ways will be
21:57:26 open, until the new street grid is implemented, and
21:57:30 then it will be concurrent, that there would be a new
21:57:36 street grid at the same time that the old
21:57:37 rights-of-way are vacated, but the infrastructure to
21:57:41 go away, et cetera.
21:57:42 I don't really have any major objections about getting
21:57:45 rid of the old infrastructure.
21:57:46 Some of the major lines have already been laid, new
21:57:50 line into Highland Avenue, the old 2-inch main from
21:57:55 the original water works before the city bought it,
21:57:57 and the sewer is going under the river, et cetera.

21:58:00 That stuff is already in place.
21:58:01 I would really like to read something from "Better
21:58:08 Place" written in 1994, Mr. Bishop's developments,
21:58:13 were probably founded with some of these ideas,
21:58:14 et cetera.
21:58:14 Page 216 and 217 out of that book, it says: A
21:58:22 specific plan has the ability to show in much greater
21:58:25 detail than the usual planning and zoning document,
21:58:27 the character of the development should take, it
21:58:32 may -- how tall the buildings will be, meet the
21:58:35 street, what uses will be housed there, et cetera.
21:58:39 The specific plan lays out an urban design vision for
21:58:41 the area.
21:58:42 The property is covered by the plan, need not be under
21:58:45 a single ownership.
21:58:46 They could belong to several owners, cooperate in
21:58:49 bringing the plan to fruition.
21:58:51 For about a quarter century, planners have shied away
21:58:54 from developing a fiscal vision for communities.
21:58:56 That is an additional reason for the uncoordinated
21:59:02 work of common commercial areas in the suburbs and
21:59:05 regional or state governments needs to pay greater

21:59:08 attention to urban design, there needs to be a vision,
21:59:11 a place for look and feel once development occurs.
21:59:15 communities that are satisfying to walk and drive
21:59:17 through in part because many of the buildings face the
21:59:19 streets and roads making travelers feel they are
21:59:22 someplace not just in a transit between destinations.
21:59:25 Government should try to infuse a sense of -- into the
21:59:30 roads along the residential subdivisions that are
21:59:31 planned instead of encouraging developers to build
21:59:34 residential subdivisions with their backs to the
21:59:36 arterial.
21:59:36 Why not encourage housing to be built facing the road.
21:59:39 In old communities, houses, apartment buildings, often
21:59:43 face the roads making those roads feel uninhabited.
21:59:47 Travelers feel they are a community, not relegated to
21:59:50 leftover space between subdivisions, but government
21:59:52 adopt a policy of building through roads of frequent
21:59:56 interval, traffic would distribute itself more evenly
21:59:58 and most of the through roads would not be unpleasant
22:00:02 to live along.
22:00:03 Construction of boulevards with trees and other
22:00:04 landscaping in the median would create an attractive

22:00:08 atmosphere for certain roads.
22:00:09 Where the traffic is heavy, the houses need to be
22:00:11 placed more distant from the road and municipalities
22:00:13 might encourage developers to use a single design
22:00:16 tactic.
22:00:17 It has been successful in portions of many older
22:00:19 communities, create a large ribbon of grass and trees
22:00:22 along the edge of the major roads and then build a
22:00:25 minor street or smaller street with houses at its far
22:00:28 side facing residential streets.
22:00:30 The landscape buffer and the road, built in this
22:00:34 manner, are enjoyable to travel.
22:00:37 >> Paul, I think you just killed our court reporter.
22:00:40 [ Laughter ]
22:00:43 Anyway, this goes on and talks about -- this
22:00:46 development --
22:00:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up.
22:00:48 Time is up.
22:00:49 >>> I'm sorry.
22:00:51 >> What I'm saying, you know me.
22:00:53 I would be attacking those if there was something.
22:00:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you so much.

22:00:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
22:01:01 >>> Rochelle Gross, 1804 South Habana.
22:01:05 I have been sworn in.
22:01:05 I'm a business owner in Tampa Heights and I have to
22:01:09 tell you that the project is so exciting on so many
22:01:11 different levels, I can't think of another project
22:01:15 this size that is going to offer such a contribution
22:01:20 from so many different levels and so many different
22:01:22 areas, not just to Tampa Heights but to the City of
22:01:24 Tampa, the amount of riverwalk that the developer is
22:01:28 redeveloping, the Waterworks Park, hopefully the water
22:01:31 works building, the density levels will only support
22:01:34 what we are trying to do in downtown, and how we want
22:01:38 to see our downtown, the infrastructure, and this
22:01:43 developer has, like other people have said, they have
22:01:46 met with us from the very beginning, they have come to
22:01:48 every single civic association meeting, whenever we
22:01:52 bring up things, they always address them, they have
22:01:56 expressed an interest in renovating the two historic
22:01:59 buildings, in a manner that we're happy with, and I
22:02:04 support it.
22:02:04 I hope you do, too.

22:02:05 Thank you.
22:02:14 >> My name is Tony Williams and I'm the owner of
22:02:17 Williams Landscape Management.
22:02:19 I have been sworn in.
22:02:20 And we are a minority business enterprise, been doing
22:02:23 business in the city for over 20 years.
22:02:26 And I been working on this project for the last two
22:02:30 years as a minority contractor, clearing vacant lots
22:02:34 and cleaning up the homes, and all of the stuff that
22:02:39 has been left behind by those folks, working hand in
22:02:43 hand with the police department, code enforcement.
22:02:46 I think this is a win-win situation for everybody.
22:02:49 I think everybody wins.
22:02:51 I'm sure the city benefits.
22:02:54 The people in the area benefit.
22:02:56 And small business certainly have benefited.
22:03:00 I do quite a bit of work for the county.
22:03:03 I work with the housing authority.
22:03:05 And I think these folks have really gone the extra
22:03:07 mile to see that they are putting small business
22:03:13 people, including the small businessman.
22:03:15 We have had a real hard times.

22:03:19 I think the biggest obstacle with the small business
22:03:22 people is we have a real hard time with cash flow and
22:03:25 funding, and these people have really gone the extra
22:03:28 mail to see that we get paid on time, even the
22:03:32 turn-around, if we go 15 days without getting paid,
22:03:39 it's really a long period of time.
22:03:42 They have been real supportive.
22:03:43 I really support this project.
22:03:44 And I think it will really benefit the small business
22:03:47 people.
22:03:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:03:48 Next.
22:03:52 >>> I have been sworn in.
22:04:02 I haven't been sworn in.
22:04:03 (Oath administered by Clerk)
22:04:06 Yeah.
22:04:06 My name is Denise Cobb.
22:04:10 The reason I'm here, I'm just going to read something,
22:04:17 to put it back on the City Council that make decisions
22:04:20 for all the people and not just for some of the
22:04:23 people.
22:04:23 And grievousness, which they have prescribed,

22:04:36 determined by the need from judgment and to take away
22:04:41 the rights from the poor, my people, that they may
22:04:51 rob, and that -- and what will you do in the day of
22:04:56 visitation, and in the desolation which shall come
22:05:01 from afar and to whom will you flee for help, and
22:05:05 where will ye leave your glory?
22:05:09 With God's name, without me, they shall bow down and
22:05:16 they shall fall under the slain for all this his anger
22:05:20 is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out.
22:05:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:05:35 >>> Thank you.
22:05:35 I just have a couple of comments if I could respond to
22:05:37 some of the comments made or answer some of the
22:05:39 questions.
22:05:42 One had to do with sidewalks and whether or not they
22:05:44 would be available.
22:05:45 Well, yes, we'll be doing sidewalks both internally to
22:05:47 the project and externally to the project.
22:05:49 And of course the riverwalk is the ultimate sidewalk
22:05:52 of the universe, and it will be available for all
22:05:55 kinds of recreational uses.
22:05:58 Mr. Azulu was concerned about a handful of people

22:06:01 making decisions and I just wanted to point out that
22:06:04 during the course of this project, which has been over
22:06:09 two years -- two years, we have had over a hundred
22:06:12 meetings, individual meetings, with the community, you
22:06:14 know, meetings with the city, and meetings with other
22:06:18 stakeholders.
22:06:20 It has been very intensive initiative to tray to get
22:06:23 the information out, and to see what people wanted to
22:06:26 see for this community.
22:06:27 And I'm delighted to say that you heard from most
22:06:31 people today saying this is it, this is what they were
22:06:33 looking for, and this is what we are trying to bring
22:06:35 to fruition.
22:06:36 We did send out 268 notices for tonight's hearing.
22:06:41 So that's quite a few for all of those that are in the
22:06:46 surrounding area.
22:06:47 And in the book we gave you a few moments ago, this is
22:06:50 unsolicited, we received a letter from Shannon Edge
22:06:53 which complimented Mr. Bishop on the outreach to the
22:06:58 community and the fact that it's somewhat
22:07:00 unprecedented.
22:07:01 So we were delighted to be able to do that.

22:07:04 Ms. Jackson asked about the temporary closing for
22:07:06 redevelopment, and, yes, there will be temporary
22:07:09 closings of some of these roadways.
22:07:12 We are required to have alternate roadway access to be
22:07:16 able to manage the traffic back and forth.
22:07:19 It has to be done in conjunction with city oversite.
22:07:22 But when we get finished, the network that we will
22:07:25 provide will have over 30% more functional capacity as
22:07:29 a result of the construction and realignment of these
22:07:33 roadways.
22:07:34 So we are going to have a much better roadway system
22:07:36 which will handle the traffic in a better way.
22:07:40 Finally, Mr. Goodman did ask about that, and he said a
22:07:45 few things which are very true about this project.
22:07:48 This has been a project -- creating a sense of place
22:07:54 and we are daylighted to be here tonight.
22:07:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by Mr. Dingfelder and
22:07:59 Mr. White and Ms. Ferlita.
22:08:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have park staff fighting in
22:08:05 the -- I mean in the back.
22:08:07 Actually, Steve and Karen both.
22:08:10 Can I ask you a question?

22:08:15 If you can get out of there.
22:08:25 >>> Karen Palus, I have been sworn.
22:08:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Specifically, I was going to ask
22:08:33 Steve Graham about the grand trees.
22:08:36 Steve, I know you have been working on these grand
22:08:38 trees issues for quite awhile.
22:08:41 And I would just like to hear a quick summary of your
22:08:45 professional opinion about the efforts.
22:08:53 >>> Steve Graham, parks and recreational department,
22:08:56 wave worked with the applicant petitioner, and their
22:08:58 consultants.
22:08:59 There are 23 grand trees on-site.
22:09:02 Approximately six of them are in poor condition.
22:09:05 So taking that away, there are maybe half of the trees
22:09:10 that we are able to come up with a reasonable
22:09:14 reconciliation or solution, either preserving on the
22:09:19 perimeter or transplanting, and for development of
22:09:21 this nature that provides such a diversity of
22:09:24 amenities, I think that's probably a pretty good deal.
22:09:30 >> And you will continue to monitor -- the ones that
22:09:32 are transplanted or even the one that is stay behind
22:09:35 under construction, around construction, you will turn

22:09:37 continue to monitor those during construction and
22:09:40 after construction?
22:09:41 >>> Absolutely.
22:09:43 Ms. Alvarez commented earlier about one of the
22:09:45 perimeter trees that had been struck by lightning.
22:09:48 I did see that tree today, and that tree has declined
22:09:51 some.
22:09:53 And the reason that tree was selected is it didn't
22:09:55 always la like that.
22:09:56 I don't know how recently lightning strike was.
22:09:59 It has deteriorated.
22:10:00 But it was selected because of the perimeter tree and
22:10:03 the perimeter tree had the most opportunity for
22:10:07 preservation so it makes sense on paper.
22:10:09 You're right, some things don't translate when you go
22:10:12 into the field and look at them at a later point in
22:10:15 time.
22:10:15 But it's our hope that through their expertise, and
22:10:18 Dr. Castanas, if they can't, I think they are
22:10:26 committed to provide replacement trees.
22:10:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two issues that came up earlier, my
22:10:34 questions, that I think ultimately will end up back in

22:10:37 your lap in regard to the no-wake zone.
22:10:40 Ms. Law indicated that the city would be the one that
22:10:42 would apply for the docks, and would we also hopefully
22:10:46 apply for no-wake zones in that area?
22:10:50 >>> We typically that handle that in our office for
22:10:53 those areas we are responsible for.
22:10:55 >> So do we go to the state and ask them for no-wake
22:10:58 zone?
22:11:00 And then the other question is related -- I don't want
22:11:04 to kick a dead dog.
22:11:07 But you will continue to look at that as a viable
22:11:10 issue?
22:11:10 I think for 1900 urban residents, I think it's
22:11:14 something if it didn't come up in discussion with the
22:11:15 neighborhood, I think it should.
22:11:18 >>> We mentioned it after we had an assessment and
22:11:21 shared that.
22:11:22 It wasn't something that had come forward with the
22:11:24 community but we'll continue that engagement and
22:11:28 determine if that's appropriate.
22:11:29 >> How big a park is Waterworks Park?
22:11:33 >>> Total acreage I don't know off the top of my head.

22:11:35 >> Bill is indicating three acres.
22:11:38 So that's a possibility, maybe have a small dog run
22:11:41 there.
22:11:42 Okay.
22:11:43 Thank you.
22:11:45 That's all I had for you guys.
22:11:46 Thank you.
22:11:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita?
22:11:48 >>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Law, maybe you can answer this.
22:11:55 I don't have many questions.
22:11:56 While you are coming up one of the concerns that I had
22:11:57 when we met with Mr. Huey and Mr. Shelby met with me,
22:12:01 because he is on the sign committee that I am
22:12:04 chairing, we were concerned about getting into issues
22:12:07 and just coming up with next week, I was glad to hear
22:12:10 when Cathy Coyle gave us an update, whether it goes
22:12:15 forward or not that's another issue.
22:12:17 The second question I had, or have several questions,
22:12:20 and I don't mean to belabor that tonight because I
22:12:22 think it's minor compared to the whole issue.
22:12:24 Ms. Wise called me this morning to see if I had some
22:12:27 concerns about some financial situations, seemed to be

22:12:31 happy to talk to me during the day.
22:12:34 So Bonnie, I think that there's going to be the
22:12:37 ability if you will call me or I will call you to
22:12:39 clarify some things I don't clearly understand, but I
22:12:42 don't need to direct them to Ms. Law or to the
22:12:45 petitioner.
22:12:46 The only other thing I have pending here, Ms. Law,
22:12:49 that I'm concerned a little bit about, to kind of
22:12:52 recant what petitioner's position is on the
22:12:56 development agreement, the amended one, and 5.1.2
22:13:00 about affordable housing.
22:13:02 I'm concerned if it's going to be too scattered, if
22:13:04 it's going to be off site ultimately, if it's going to
22:13:08 be mixed off site, mixed on-site.
22:13:11 Give me a brief idea of what it says you may do.
22:13:15 >>BONNIE WISE: Okay.
22:13:16 We are obligated if we provide for the affordable
22:13:18 housing to provide 10%.
22:13:24 We are required, if we go off site, to provide 15%, or
22:13:28 whatever proportion thereof.
22:13:31 Now, off site isn't just anywhere.
22:13:33 Off-site is defined as North Boulevard, west of

22:13:37 Nebraska, south of Columbus, and north of I-275.
22:13:41 And in order to do that, once we identified a
22:13:44 location, we would have to come back and get approval
22:13:48 of the city for that alternate site, it would have to
22:13:51 be evidenced by letter and attendant development plan
22:13:54 that's signed by the mayor upon recommendation of
22:13:57 additional housing development director.
22:14:02 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's what it said and that's what I
22:14:04 wanted you to recant because if isn't limited to those
22:14:09 boundaries --
22:14:10 >>> It is intended to be in this area.
22:14:13 >> In a problem.
22:14:13 That's the only thing I wanted you to clarify.
22:14:15 Thanks.
22:14:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez.
22:14:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Talking about the affordable housing,
22:14:26 when talking about the 10% or the 15%, whatever it is
22:14:29 you're supposed to do, is that at the end of the
22:14:32 project?
22:14:32 Or is it within the project itself as it's being built
22:14:37 out?
22:14:40 >>> The affordable housing -- I have to refresh my

22:14:45 memory.
22:14:54 It's actually an exhibit to the development agreement.
22:14:59 So if you will give me one second here.
22:15:05 The affordable units must achieve the financial
22:15:08 closing and permitting prayer to issuance of a
22:15:10 construction permit for the vertical project included
22:15:15 for the 750 residential units.
22:15:18 So that's the first 110.
22:15:20 And the next 40 has to occur before the 1100 units.
22:15:25 So we have time frames in order to complete that.
22:15:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The other question I have is for Steve
22:15:33 Graham.
22:15:33 Thank you, Ms. Law.
22:15:34 >>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Alvarez is worried still about
22:15:36 that sorry tree, I can tell.
22:15:38 [ Laughter ]
22:15:38
22:15:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No.
22:15:42 And she brought it up.
22:15:51 Since you brought it up, Steve, in the note you said
22:15:55 that you asked to preserve number 32 and 35.
22:15:59 And it said that both of them are perimeter grand

22:16:03 trees, and that we have assessed in good condition and
22:16:08 feel preservation could occur with minor revisions.
22:16:11 Have they talked to you about those two trees?
22:16:14 >>> Absolutely.
22:16:14 Those are the two that they brought up earlier.
22:16:17 And they said they would like the option of either
22:16:20 preserving them in place, or transplanting them.
22:16:24 So either of those two options would be acceptable to
22:16:27 us.
22:16:27 >> Okay.
22:16:28 Because they were to be removed without any
22:16:30 transplanting or anything according to the book.
22:16:34 >>> And I think that I have the rate two numbers.
22:16:45 So that's something they have agreed to do.
22:16:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Good.
22:16:48 I feel like Linda Saul-Sena tonight.
22:16:51 I'm learning from her.
22:16:53 [ Laughter ]
22:16:53
22:16:55 >>KEVIN WHITE: I didn't know if there was any further
22:16:57 questions.
22:16:57 I was going to move to close the public hearing.

22:16:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One more question.
22:17:01 It was -- on the -- if there's 1900 units and there's
22:17:11 a 10% requirement of 190 units for affordable housing,
22:17:15 right?
22:17:16 If you choose the off-site option, and this is sort of
22:17:20 a technical question.
22:17:21 If you choose the off-site option does that mean you
22:17:23 can still build 1900 units on-site and 190 units
22:17:27 affordable units off site?
22:17:37 >>> Off site meaning they have to build 15% if it's
22:17:40 off-site.
22:17:41 So 50%.
22:17:43 >> That's 270 units off site but do they still get to
22:17:46 build 1500 units on-site?
22:17:50 >>> A calculation of market rate units.
22:17:53 So that actually creates more affordable units at the
22:17:56 end of the day.
22:18:01 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close the public hearing.
22:18:03 >> Second.
22:18:03 (Motion carried).
22:18:04 >>KEVIN WHITE: First of all, I'd like to make a couple
22:18:08 comments about the developer.

22:18:10 As we see more and more petitions coming before us as
22:18:15 a council, we see more and more quality developers
22:18:18 that are coming before us as well.
22:18:23 This particular developer has taken great strides in
22:18:29 notifying, rectifying, going back to the drawing
22:18:32 board, we refining, redesigning all of the guidelines,
22:18:37 taking into consideration all of the neighborhood
22:18:39 concerns.
22:18:41 I also want to commend them on their commitment to the
22:18:44 community input, the community involvement, that the
22:18:49 density and growth pattern of development that makes
22:18:52 this so compatible with this part of town, as well as
22:18:56 integrating it as part of our downtown component, and
22:19:00 lag at the urban design and retail mixed use component
22:19:05 that is also involved with this project.
22:19:08 The affordable housing component is also -- is to be
22:19:12 commended, although it's required.
22:19:15 But I think they are going over and above the
22:19:18 requirement, and every aspect of this project, which
22:19:21 is also commendable.
22:19:23 I can't tell you how pleased I am not for once but
22:19:31 continuing more and more that developers see when they

22:19:35 involve the community in which they are going out
22:19:40 soliciting community input, this is what we have.
22:19:43 We have people only about 10 to 15 speak because
22:19:48 everyone is in support of and we are not here until
22:19:51 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning rebutting back and forth
22:19:54 and then having to come back and potentially asking
22:19:59 for continuance after continuance after continuance,
22:20:02 because the neighborhood's consideration hadn't been
22:20:06 looked at.
22:20:08 I also would like to commend the developer once again
22:20:10 for looking at the women and minority participation in
22:20:18 this project.
22:20:20 Some of you may not know, that's one of the things
22:20:22 that I always push forward.
22:20:25 We have our WMBE program.
22:20:27 And I appreciate the small businessman that came
22:20:30 forward and said that this developer is wholeheartedly
22:20:34 committed to them and he's had a great working
22:20:36 relationship, and hopefully that working relationship
22:20:39 will continue, as well as you'll see other minority
22:20:42 participation, women and minority firms also included
22:20:45 in this.

22:20:47 And with that being said, Madam Chair, I don't know
22:20:50 which is the order.
22:20:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Not yet.
22:20:52 Not ready yet.
22:20:55 >> I'll be in full support of the project.
22:20:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is the most beautiful project
22:21:05 that might have ever come before City Council and the
22:21:07 neighborhood loves it.
22:21:08 This is just shy of a miracle.
22:21:12 It is a model for future development.
22:21:14 It's a gift to our community.
22:21:16 It's respectful of the river.
22:21:18 It's respectful of the historic structures and
22:21:21 respectful of the beautiful trees.
22:21:23 And I am so excited what it's going to give to our
22:21:30 community.
22:21:30 I am very excited to be here this evening.
22:21:32 I think this is really a historic evening.
22:21:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm never nearly as gushy as Linda.
22:21:47 >>MARY ALVAREZ: You're about as long or longer.
22:21:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Vacating streets, it's sort of the
22:21:55 good news bad news.

22:21:56 I hate to vacate them.
22:21:59 The good news is they are giving us a lot of streets
22:22:01 back.
22:22:02 And they are going to be nice brick streets with
22:22:04 sidewalks on both sides and they are going to be
22:22:05 greatly improved.
22:22:09 The bad news is, we are losing a huge number of trees.
22:22:12 We are losing a huge number of grand oak trees.
22:22:15 The good news is they are transplanting some of the
22:22:17 oak trees, grand oak trees, and they are transplanting
22:22:21 and replanting more than a thousand trees, according
22:22:25 to Ms. Law, more than they have to.
22:22:27 I'm really upset about the loss of Palm Avenue.
22:22:30 I'm really upset about that.
22:22:32 As somebody who worked in Ybor City and lived in South
22:22:34 Tampa I used Palm Avenue regularly.
22:22:37 It's a nice straight shot from Boulevard across Ybor
22:22:40 City.
22:22:40 And, yes, there will be a way to get through this
22:22:43 development but it won't be nearly as convenient and
22:22:45 fast as going across Palm Avenue.
22:22:47 But the good news is that they are paying for

22:22:50 improvements to Columbus, which I'm sure will benefit
22:22:52 a lot of people.
22:22:55 With that, I don't have any more bad news.
22:22:57 All the rest is gad news.
22:22:58 The good news is, it's not a gated community.
22:23:01 I think Mr. Bishop and most of us worked on Greenfield
22:23:06 and gated communities and now he's trying something
22:23:08 completely different.
22:23:09 And I commend him for that completely.
22:23:12 The good news is, as far as I can tell, this is the
22:23:15 first new urbanism project within the city limits.
22:23:19 It's a place where people will live, work and play, in
22:23:23 a pedestrian friendly environment, with homes facing
22:23:25 the streets, and functional alleys.
22:23:28 It is truly about new urbanism.
22:23:30 And that's what Tampa needs to be about in the future.
22:23:33 The good gnaws is, about affordable housing, 10-15
22:23:37 percent will be affordable housing in this project or
22:23:40 nearby.
22:23:40 The wonderful news -- and I wanted to thank him for
22:23:47 his work on the riverwalk -- but the good news is the
22:23:49 city will get a mile of riverwalk from this project,

22:23:52 and that is absolutely fantastic.
22:23:53 It's a huge shot in the arm for downtown, for the
22:23:57 mayor's riverwalk project and for all the citizens of
22:23:59 Tampa.
22:24:01 Bonnie Wise discussed about the financial aspects of
22:24:03 this project.
22:24:04 That's a huge issue.
22:24:06 But she not only evaluated it herself, but she was
22:24:09 smart enough to bring in outside folks, brought in
22:24:12 outside counsel, financial experts, to make sure there
22:24:16 was no risk to the citizens of Tampa.
22:24:19 This project is risk adverse to the citizens of Tampa.
22:24:22 And that's critical.
22:24:23 Otherwise, I wouldn't vote for it.
22:24:25 New Waterworks Park, I think it's extremely fantastic
22:24:29 not only for the new residents who are coming there
22:24:31 but also for the residents who already live in Tampa
22:24:34 hates.
22:24:34 And finally I just want to say that I think that this
22:24:37 will infuse new energy for Tampa Heights.
22:24:40 And Yale be proud to vote for it.
22:24:45 >>ROSE FERLITA: After listening to Mr. Dingfelder I

22:24:46 don't know if I can remember anything I have got
22:24:48 written down hear but I'm going to try.
22:24:50 Mr. Bishop, quality project, quality developer, and
22:24:54 I'm full in full support.
22:24:56 Good luck to you and congratulations.
22:24:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we are going to read so you all can
22:25:02 get out of here.
22:25:03 We are going to start with number 5.
22:25:05 Mrs. Alvarez.
22:25:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Before I read, I am going to say that
22:25:12 I looked high and low for things to disagree with.
22:25:15 And I really couldn't find but just a few things.
22:25:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: That tree.
22:25:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez, read.
22:25:23 [ Laughter ]
22:25:23
22:25:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I really want to thank you, Mr.
22:25:26 Bishop, for taking all this time, your patience, your
22:25:33 preservation --
22:25:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Read.
22:25:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Whatever.
22:25:37 You did a great project.

22:25:38 We are happy you are going to do it and I'm happy to
22:25:40 read this ordinance.
22:25:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that a yes?
22:25:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That's a yes.
22:25:45 An order vacating, closing, discontinuing, abandoning
22:25:47 certain rights-of-way all that portion of certain
22:25:50 rights-of-way contained within the proposed heights
22:25:52 community development district generally located south
22:25:54 of Ross Avenue, west of Tampa street, the north bank
22:25:58 of the Hillsborough River and east of North Boulevard
22:26:01 in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida,
22:26:04 the same being more fully described in section 2
22:26:06 hereof subject to the reservation and certain
22:26:10 covenants and restrictions and conditions as set forth
22:26:12 herein providing an effective date.
22:26:15 Congratulations.
22:26:15 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
22:26:17 All in favor say Aye.
22:26:18 Opposed.
22:26:19 (Motion carried).
22:26:21 >>KEVIN WHITE: Number of.
22:26:22 Move an ordinance establishing the Tampa hates

22:26:26 district community development district for parcels of
22:26:30 land generally located on the eastern shore of the
22:26:32 Hillsborough River east of North Boulevard south of
22:26:35 Ross west of Tampa street north of interstate -- west
22:26:38 of Tampa street and north of interstate highway 4
22:26:42 comprising 53 acres more or less said district to be
22:26:46 located entirely within the boundaries of the City of
22:26:48 Tampa more particularly described in section 2 hereof
22:26:50 pursuant to chapter 190 Florida statutes, providing
22:26:53 for severability, providing an effective date.
22:26:55 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion an second.
22:26:57 (Motion carried).
22:26:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 7.
22:26:59 Mr. Harrison.
22:27:00 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I move an ordinance rezoning
22:27:01 property in the general advice interest of Ross Avenue
22:27:03 to the north, North Boulevard to the west, Tampa
22:27:06 street to the east, Hillsborough River, Doyle Carlton
22:27:13 drive to the south from RM-16, residential
22:27:17 multifamily, RM-24, residential multifamily, CN,
22:27:22 commercial neighborhood, CG, commercial general, CI,
22:27:24 commercial intensive, and IG, industrial general, to

22:27:27 PD, planned development mixed use residential, and
22:27:30 commercial, providing an effective date.
22:27:31 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
22:27:32 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:27:34 Opposed, Nay.
22:27:35 (Motion carried).
22:27:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, just a reminder to
22:27:39 council.
22:27:40 Mr. Territo, did you want to address number eleven?
22:27:44 >>SAL TERRITO: Yes.
22:27:45 Number eleven you do not take any action tonight
22:27:48 plus -- in this T next meeting July 13th at
22:27:51 10 a.m. when you will be hearing -- having the second
22:27:54 hearing on this and then taking action on that
22:27:56 particular item.
22:27:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:27:59 >>DAVID SMITH: Just one correction for the record.
22:28:01 I was told by Cathy that when we read the ordinance we
22:28:06 said PD rather than PDA.
22:28:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: The one I just did?
22:28:11 >>DAVID SMITH: The rezoning.
22:28:18 >>> Stand corrected, that is PDA.

22:28:28 It should be PTA.
22:28:30 You read it correctly.
22:28:31 Did you not make an error.
22:28:33 So we'll get it corrected.
22:28:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:28:39 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Everything I just said except insert
22:28:44 PDA.
22:28:46 >> Move to receive and file all documents.
22:28:49 (Motion Carried).
22:28:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One other item.
22:28:53 Mr. Daignault had asked me to make sure that we put
22:28:57 this off -- to make sure we scald a presentation of
22:29:00 the Gandy transportation study for sometime after we
22:29:03 get back from break.
22:29:05 Steve, how long do you think, about 15 minutes?
22:29:10 Half hour?
22:29:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Five minutes?
22:29:13 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: He's saying 30 minutes so we'll
22:29:22 give him 15.
22:29:24 Do you want top do that on the 27th?
22:29:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 11:00 o'clock.
22:29:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We'll do that because we have a

22:29:39 consultant coming in.
22:29:44 >>> Into the lunch hour and we'll be done.
22:29:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 11:30 on the 27th.
22:29:49 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
22:29:49 (Motion carried)
22:29:49 Anything else to come before council?
22:29:51 We stand adjourned.
22:29:55 Till July 13.
22:29:57 [ Applause ]
22:31:18 (Tampa City Council meeting adjourned)
23:13:11