Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
5:30 p.m. session
Thursday, August 17, 20006

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]
18:16:25 >> Tampa City Council is called to order.
18:16:26 The chair will yield to Mr. Kevin White.
18:16:29 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you.
18:16:33 Reverend Beverly Lane is the pastor of Bethel
18:16:38 manufacture can Methodist Episcopal church and also
18:16:42 the wife of my code enforcement director, Curtis Lane.
18:16:46 If you will rise while she gives the invocation.
18:16:49 And remain standing for the pledge of allegiance,
18:16:51 please.
18:16:54 >> O God, who is able to blanket our city, fair it may
18:17:04 be, a city of justice, where none should prey on
18:17:07 others, a city where vice and poverty shall cease.
18:17:17 Grant us a city of brotherhood for all success shall
18:17:20 be founded on service.
18:17:27 Grand us a city where there is nobleness.
18:17:29 Grant us a city of peace where order shall not rest on
18:17:32 force.
18:17:33 Bless this council and all assembles so we may all be
18:17:38 of one heart and of one soul united in one holy bond
18:17:42 of truth and peace.
18:17:43 Amen.
18:17:46 (Pledge of Allegiance).
18:18:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
18:18:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
18:18:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
18:18:07 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
18:18:07 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
18:18:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
18:18:09 I would like to put on the record tonight Mr. Shawn
18:18:12 Harrison will not be here.
18:18:13 He's traveling on family business.
18:18:15 Now let's go to Heather Lamboy.
18:18:25 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
18:18:29 >>GWEN MILLER: And councilwoman Saul-Sena will also
18:18:31 not be here tonight.
18:18:32 Okay.
18:18:34 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Thank you.
18:18:35 I would like to review the agenda.
18:18:37 I e-mailed you the legislative aides the copy of the
18:18:40 agenda and the changes that have been requested by
18:18:43 petitioners and staff.
18:18:44 Item number 4, the petitioner has requested a
18:18:47 continuance.
18:18:49 It's Z 06-47.
18:18:51 The petitioner is requesting for September 2th.
18:18:55 Now that is the evening for a budget hearing.
18:18:58 Just so you know, there are only three new cases that
18:19:00 are being scheduled for that night.
18:19:02 And one continuance currently.
18:19:05 It is up to the council as to whether they want to
18:19:07 schedule anything else on that night.
18:19:10 >> So if we put this on tonight you won't put anymore.
18:19:13 >> Well, there are other requests for September
18:19:15 28th.
18:19:18 A total of four.
18:19:22 >> Is that a zoning map?
18:19:24 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Yes, it is.
18:19:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 5:01 is the budget and there will be
18:19:29 a time break between that and 6:00 for the start of
18:19:32 the evening meeting.
18:19:34 It is scheduled for 6.
18:19:37 >>> There is a total of four cases.
18:19:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Want to put four more.
18:19:42 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved 79 is there anyone here to
18:19:45 speak on the continuance of item number 4?
18:19:47 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm the agent for the petitioner.
18:19:52 We are respectfully requesting the 28th of
18:19:54 September.
18:19:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Did anyone in the public come to speak
18:19:58 on item number 4?
18:19:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:20:00 >> So moved.
18:20:01 79 to continue item 4 until September 28 at 6 p.m.
18:20:05 (Motion Carried).

18:20:05 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 5 the petitioner has
18:20:13 requested to withdraw.
18:20:14 Letter.
18:20:16 >> We can accept that.
18:20:18 >> So moved.
18:20:18 >> Second.
18:20:19 (Motion carried).
18:20:19 >> Item number 6.
18:20:21 This case, this is 06-57.
18:20:25 This must be requested as a plan amendment.
18:20:28 The first plan amendment hearing that the applicant
18:20:31 got was march, the first hearing in march.
18:20:35 Therefore the petitioner is requesting a continuance
18:20:37 to April 12, 2007.
18:20:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Perfect!
18:20:42 [ Laughter ]
18:20:47 >>CHAIRMAN: Anyone in the public that came to speak on
18:20:49 item number 6?
18:20:50 You can speak on the continuance.
18:20:51 That's the only thing.
18:20:53 Do you want to speak on the continuance?
18:20:56 Do you object or agree?

18:20:58 >>> We object to the whole thing.
18:21:01 Chris Martinez, speaking on behalf of my in-laws, we
18:21:08 objected to the last continuance.
18:21:09 We object to the entire issue.
18:21:11 We object to the continuance.
18:21:15 We think we should end it.
18:21:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:21:18 Anyone else that wanted to speak?
18:21:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue.
18:21:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want top say anything,
18:21:25 particularly with regard to notice?
18:21:27 Thank you.
18:21:31 >>STEVE MICHELINI: This is one that cannot be heard
18:21:33 because there is great confusion and disparity between
18:21:38 repeatedly approved DRIs and actions that have been
18:21:43 taken by Tampa council and the Tampa Bay counseling on
18:21:50 this site.
18:21:50 Land use doesn't match up.
18:21:52 So the applicant is caught up in quite a morass that
18:21:55 we are trying to fix by taking it to land use
18:21:57 amendment.
18:21:57 It's quite an unusual circumstance.

18:22:00 But I wanted to say that even though this is being put
18:22:05 far out, it's because we are reviewing, or we
18:22:09 submitted to the city years and years of approvals of
18:22:12 commercial activity on this site.
18:22:19 Commercial approvals on this site.
18:22:21 >> Mr. Pressman, how many times has this been
18:22:23 continued?
18:22:25 >>> By memory, it's either the second or third time.
18:22:28 >> By memory or by fact?
18:22:30 >>> By memory.
18:22:31 It I believe it's two or three times.
18:22:33 Again, the applicant is caught up in the -- the
18:22:35 applicant is caught up in the process.
18:22:37 The applicant is -- is caught up in a disparity
18:22:43 between what's been approved.
18:22:44 In fact, just looking at this on the overhead, we
18:22:48 really need to get into this.
18:22:51 I think it's important to make the council members
18:22:54 aware that this body has voted for approvals on a
18:22:57 number of cases for commercial activity on the site.
18:23:01 Yet the land use doesn't match up. The applicant is
18:23:03 caught up in the process.

18:23:05 We are not causing it.
18:23:06 They are caught up in the process.
18:23:08 >>
18:23:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Pleasure of council?
18:23:10 >> I move to give them one more shot.
18:23:12 Especially since they have a plan amendment.
18:23:14 So obviously there's some big issues involved which we
18:23:16 don't need to get into tonight.
18:23:18 I move to continue to April 12th but contingent on
18:23:24 signage and mailing.
18:23:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could have that representation
18:23:27 by the representative.
18:23:28 Is that agreed to with regard to notice?
18:23:31 With regard to renoticing, as Mr. Dingfelder said,
18:23:33 what was that again, Mr. Dingfelder?
18:23:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Continuance would be moved
18:23:40 contingent upon full renotice, signage and mailing.
18:23:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that agreed to?
18:23:46 >>> Whatever Mr. Dingfelder says will be done.
18:23:51 In all seriousness.
18:23:53 Petitioner agrees to renotice?
18:23:56 >>> Yes.

18:23:57 >> Can we have a motion and second to continue to the
18:24:01 12th, 2007.
18:24:02 (Motion carried).
18:24:04 >>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
18:24:05 That causes a problem.
18:24:06 Because I think that's a long continuance.
18:24:08 I will not be here then obviously for one reason or
18:24:11 another.
18:24:11 And so here we go except to maybe bring it to the
18:24:15 next --
18:24:19 >> It's a procedural mat jeer it is a procedural
18:24:21 matter.
18:24:22 Mr. Shelby, I don't mean to cause some problems but
18:24:24 I'm concerned because I'm not sure that I support the
18:24:29 yet again continuance by his recollection, and at the
18:24:34 same time I'm shifting that responsibility to whoever
18:24:35 is going to sit in this seat in April.
18:24:38 That's a problem for me.
18:24:40 So do you want to wait, so it's fair.
18:24:52 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 8.
18:24:53 File Z 06-70, petitioner is requesting this case be
18:24:57 rescheduled to December 14th. The amendment fee

18:24:59 has been paid.
18:25:00 There are technical issues that petitioner would like
18:25:02 to address, requesting a continuance.
18:25:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is petitioner at least willing to
18:25:16 put this out again?
18:25:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 8.
18:25:21 >>> It has to be renoticed.
18:25:24 >>JOHN LAROCCA: Agent for the petitioner.
18:25:27 John LaRocca.
18:25:28 Notice for petitioner.
18:25:29 We will renotice.
18:25:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue number 8 to the 14th.
18:25:34 All in favor?
18:25:37 Question on the motion?
18:25:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: How many continuances is this one?
18:25:45 >>GWEN MILLER: It cannot be heard.
18:25:51 It's never been before us before.
18:25:53 >> Thank you.
18:25:54 Item number 9.
18:25:56 Z 06-81.
18:25:57 This case cannot be heard as the adjacent party must
18:25:59 become party to this rezoning request.

18:26:02 The properties were previously joined, and staff has
18:26:07 determined that the rezoning request requires it in
18:26:13 order to be illegal.
18:26:15 October 26th first available.
18:26:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:26:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Open the public hearing.
18:26:25 >> So moved.
18:26:26 >> Second.
18:26:26 (Motion carried).
18:26:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:26:28 wants to speak on the continuance of number 9?
18:26:30 Okay.
18:26:31 The motion to continue.
18:26:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to October 26, 6 p.m.
18:26:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue to
18:26:39 October 29, at 6.
18:26:41 (Motion carried).
18:26:44 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item 10.
18:26:46 This petition cannot be heard because no affidavit was
18:26:48 filed.
18:26:49 Z 06-83.
18:26:51 Petitioner is requesting the case be refiled to

18:26:53 September 28th, in Tampa Heights.
18:26:55 And would like to have it as soon as possible.
18:26:58 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to continue till September
18:27:02 28th.
18:27:03 >> Second.
18:27:04 (Motion Carried).
18:27:04 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 11 also cannot be heard.
18:27:08 File Z 06-86, due to contractual obligations
18:27:11 petitioner is requesting to be rescheduled to
18:27:14 September 28th.
18:27:17 >> So moved.
18:27:18 >> Second.
18:27:18 (Motion carried).
18:27:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, do we want to go back
18:27:28 to Mr. Press man's issue that Mr. White is here?
18:27:31 Or no?
18:27:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 6.
18:27:38 Asking for a continuance to April the 12th, 2007.
18:27:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is the second continuance.
18:27:53 >>> Todd Pressman: The based on the land use
18:27:56 amendment, disparity between multiple votes that this
18:28:02 body in past has approved.

18:28:05 The land use is different.
18:28:06 So we filed a land use amendment.
18:28:07 At this point to try and make those equivalent.
18:28:12 So the applicant is caught under that bureaucratic
18:28:14 difficulty.
18:28:15 And in order to have that all meet up, we need to
18:28:19 extend the zoning until the land use amendments which
18:28:22 were filed will be heard, as we are hoping expecting
18:28:25 in march.
18:28:28 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of continuing item number
18:28:30 6.
18:28:33 All in favor of April 12, 2007, say Aye.
18:28:39 Opposed, Nay.
18:28:39 >>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
18:28:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
18:28:42 Item 7.
18:28:43 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item 6 is the wet zoning petition
18:28:46 and the request is for April 12th as well.
18:28:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:28:51 >> Second.
18:28:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that came
18:28:54 to speak on number 7?

18:29:01 >>> Martinez, same thing there.
18:29:03 Mr. White, the neighborhood is actually opposed to
18:29:05 this.
18:29:05 We have been here the past couple of times where it's
18:29:08 been continued.
18:29:09 Quite frankly, we don't feel they are going to be a
18:29:12 very good neighbor just by the nature of the business.
18:29:15 And this does not make it any better because we would
18:29:19 feel they have to go out of their way to be a good
18:29:23 neighbor and having trouble doing what they want to
18:29:26 do, so how well are they going to do when it comes to
18:29:29 time to doing things for the neighborhood, above and
18:29:32 beyond run a business?
18:29:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else?
18:29:39 >>KEVIN WHITE: This is the third request?
18:29:41 >> My recollection, they said two.
18:29:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
18:29:52 Before you do that, to have a representation by the
18:29:55 petitioner's representative with regard to notice on
18:29:57 this particular -- he represents he will make further
18:30:02 notice.
18:30:05 >> I didn't hear Mr. Dingfelder say it.

18:30:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe Ms. Lamboy did.
18:30:10 That's why I want verification.
18:30:12 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of continuing number 7 to
18:30:14 April 12th, 2007, say Aye.
18:30:17 Opposed, Nay.
18:30:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
18:30:21 (Motion Carried).
18:30:21 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 12.
18:30:30 Z 06-87.
18:30:31 That cannot be heard either.
18:30:33 Petitioner is requesting September 28th.
18:30:38 >>GWEN MILLER: No more after this.
18:30:39 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: That is the third of four cases I
18:30:43 mentioned previously.
18:30:46 That will bring you up to a total of 8 cases.
18:30:50 >>GWEN MILLER: 8 and 9.
18:31:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: There's already four on here now.
18:31:10 4, 10, 11 and 12.
18:31:15 That's four.
18:31:19 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I'm sorry.
18:31:25 >>GWEN MILLER: What's the pleasure of council?
18:31:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Number 12?

18:31:29 Move to continue to September 28th.
18:31:32 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
18:31:33 (Motion carried).
18:31:35 6 p.m
18:31:36 Number 13.
18:31:37 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Item number 13, petitioner is
18:31:40 requesting September 28th as well.
18:31:42 That's the last one.
18:31:43 >>GWEN MILLER: That's the last one.
18:31:45 Anyone here for number 13?
18:31:59 >> Mark Bentley.
18:32:00 I respectfully request the 28th as well if that's
18:32:02 not a problem.
18:32:03 It's a pretty simple case from my perspective dough so
18:32:07 I don't think it's going to eat up a lot of time.
18:32:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That means a couple hours.
18:32:12 >> September 28th.
18:32:14 >> Second.
18:32:14 (Motion carried).
18:32:14 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: That concludes the changes to the
18:32:19 agenda.
18:32:19 Thank you.

18:32:20 >>GWEN MILLER: What about number 14?
18:32:25 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: That is a case that is being handled
18:32:28 by Jimmy Cook.
18:32:29 It cannot be heard.
18:32:30 No affidavit was filed.
18:32:33 Amendment fee is paid.
18:32:35 Public hearing rescheduled to September 7th.
18:32:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Does Vermont to be removed from the
18:32:41 agenda then?
18:32:41 Is that correct?
18:32:45 >> Move to remove from the agenda.
18:32:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 14, move to remove from
18:32:49 agenda.
18:32:51 >> Anyone here to speak on 14?
18:32:53 We have a motion to remove from the agenda.
18:32:55 (Motion carried)
18:32:56 We go back to item number 1.
18:32:58 And we are going to swear in everybody at the same
18:33:00 time.
18:33:01 Anybody that's going to speak on item 1, 2, 3, 15, 16,
18:33:07 17, 18, 19, please stand and raise your right hand.
18:33:25 >>GWEN MILLER: motion and second.

18:33:28 (Motion carried).
18:33:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all written communication
18:33:33 that has been available to council be received and
18:33:38 foiled into the record at this time.
18:33:41 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second.
18:33:43 All in favor say Aye.
18:33:44 (Motion carried).
18:33:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A reminder please, if you have had
18:33:47 any verbal communication, in connection with any of
18:33:51 tonight's hearings, please disclose the following
18:33:53 prior action.
18:33:56 The person or entity and the substance of that verbal
18:33:59 communication.
18:34:01 Lastly, ladies and gentlemen, I ask when you state
18:34:03 your name, please reaffirm for the record that you
18:34:05 have been sworn.
18:34:06 There are a lot of people present tonight.
18:34:08 And if you intend to speak, it will speed things up if
18:34:11 you do that.
18:34:12 If you don't, I have to resort to taking out my famous
18:34:15 red hat.
18:34:17 In order to speed things up.

18:34:18 So if you see me waving this hat, this, by the way,
18:34:22 was a holiday gift I received: Have you been sworn?
18:34:25 To save me the embarrassment, please, ladies and
18:34:28 gentlemen, please state after you state your name,
18:34:30 that you were sworn in.
18:34:32 Thank you.
18:34:35 >>> Good evening.
18:34:35 We are hear on item number 1.
18:34:37 Dennis Fernandez, manager of historic preservation.
18:34:39 I have been sworn in.
18:34:43 I do have a PowerPoint.
18:34:45 The historic bridges over the Hillsborough River,
18:34:47 multiple properties designation which is being
18:34:49 recommended by the Historic Preservation Commission.
18:34:55 This is vehicular bridges, the Platt Street bridge,
18:34:59 Lafayette bridge, or historically Lafayette, the
18:35:01 Kennedy Boulevard bridge, Cass Street, Laurel street,
18:35:05 historically 14th street, the Columbus drive
18:35:07 bridge, historically Michigan Avenue, and the
18:35:11 Henderson bridge at Hillsborough Avenue.
18:35:15 You see the location map, the bridges are spread along
18:35:17 the Hillsborough River from the downtown core up to

18:35:23 Hillsborough Avenue.
18:35:28 This is a cover from the Polk city directories, an
18:35:34 advertisement placed in that directory which states
18:35:37 Tampa is the city of bridges. The number of bridges
18:35:40 located on their advertisement, and just an
18:35:42 interesting addition I wanted to add in there. The
18:35:44 Platt Street bridge, the bridge was constructed in
18:35:49 1926, was named after O. H. Platt, the developer of
18:35:53 Hyde Park, has a Mediterranean revival style, 8 point
18:35:59 star design system.
18:36:01 The state regards this as a very significant bridge.
18:36:04 It's the original bridge that has been in this
18:36:07 location.
18:36:08 It was designed by Joseph Strauss who also designed
18:36:12 the Golden Gate bridge.
18:36:13 It's a double Strauss design, a bridge that
18:36:20 operates -- you can see the diagram at the bottom.
18:36:23 The traditional drawbridge.
18:36:26 Strauss designed many of the bridges throughout the
18:36:28 southeast.
18:36:29 This bridge and the Cass Street bridge are sister
18:36:32 bridges.

18:36:37 The Kennedy Boulevard bridge historically known as the
18:36:40 Lafayette bridge was the last bridge constructed in
18:36:42 1913, replaced the original bridges built by Henry
18:36:46 plant.
18:36:47 It's a neoclassical revival design, has articulation
18:36:51 along the bridge tender stations and the balustrades.
18:36:59 It's considered to be one of Florida's premiere
18:37:01 historic bridges.
18:37:05 This is the oldest span bridge in the state.
18:37:08 It's constructed to link downtown at the time of
18:37:11 Franklin Street to the newly developing areas of Hyde
18:37:14 Park, has a double lead Bastille system which is the
18:37:19 engineering component.
18:37:21 One of the issues that are considered in the
18:37:22 recommendation.
18:37:26 The Cass Street bridge constructed in 1926 as I said
18:37:30 was built along the same time as the Platt Street
18:37:32 bridge, employs the same Mediterranean revival styles
18:37:35 and designs, and use it is same construction method as
18:37:39 the Platt Street bridge.
18:37:43 The original bridge on this site was constructed for
18:37:49 traffic congestion resulting from the Lafayette street

18:37:51 bridge and to supply a vehicle that had access to
18:37:55 downtown from West Tampa.
18:37:57 Once again it's that double lead Strauss design which
18:38:00 we mentioned with the Platt Street.
18:38:03 The Laurel street bridge historically known as the
18:38:06 fortune street bridge was constructed in 1927, as
18:38:11 originally named after Ann fortune Taylor who was a
18:38:16 former slave who owned the land in the area.
18:38:18 It replaced an original bridge built by Hugh McFarland
18:38:22 in 1893.
18:38:24 Its imposing design is based on utility rather than
18:38:26 architectural style.
18:38:27 There's a major renovation to it in 1959 which
18:38:31 rehabilitated the bridge to its current condition.
18:38:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where did the Laurel part come
18:38:38 from, do you know?
18:38:40 >>> No, I don't.
18:38:42 The Laurel street exists today.
18:38:45 I'm not sure exactly where that came from.
18:38:51 The bridge is a Strauss design.
18:38:55 You can see it's a bridge more utility than
18:38:58 architectural significance.

18:38:59 That large mass in the rear that's vertical above the
18:39:02 bridge is the counterweight, which swings towards the
18:39:06 back causing the bridge to open.
18:39:08 The Laurel street bridge according to the state's
18:39:10 historic inventory, the unique and imposing
18:39:13 historically important bridge across the Hillsborough
18:39:15 River.
18:39:21 The Columbus drive bridge was constructed in 1926, was
18:39:25 built as a neighborhood bridge between the two
18:39:27 communities of West Tampa, Tampa Heights, and now it
18:39:31 serves Ridgewood river and Riverside heights.
18:39:34 The approach span is done in a classical urn shape
18:39:40 style with post cast.
18:39:44 It was built as a truss bridge with a pivot pier.
18:39:48 The mechanism which rotates on a huge table.
18:39:51 This is the unique design about this.
18:39:53 Of the remaining bridges of this style, there are
18:39:55 three in the state.
18:39:56 This is the only one which is operational.
18:39:59 What's unique about it, a lot of the bridges, is it's
18:40:01 off center which is a unique engineering feature that
18:40:05 was exclusive to this particular bridge.

18:40:12 The Henderson bridge at Hillsborough Avenue was a
18:40:15 prominent local business politician briefly served as
18:40:18 mayor of Tampa. This bridge was constructed in 1939
18:40:22 and replace add wooden bridge that was formerly in the
18:40:24 area, was habilitate rehabilitated in the late 1890s
18:40:28 to become a exclusively westbound lane and bridge
18:40:34 built for the eastbound traffic.
18:40:36 The tower counterweight system allows for the bridge
18:40:39 completely opening up the channel.
18:40:40 You will see in the design, what happens is the bridge
18:40:45 lists vertically along these four corner towers.
18:40:48 It's the only one of two operable vertical lift
18:40:51 bridges in the state and the only tower-driven
18:40:53 mechanical lift bridge in the state.
18:40:55 It's considered by the FDOT to be one of Florida's
18:40:58 most important historic bridges for the rarity and
18:41:01 construction and typology.
18:41:03 The operation from fully open to fully closed takes
18:41:06 less than one minute.
18:41:11 In our 21st century oriented society the city
18:41:16 you's bridges tend to blend in with the roadways that
18:41:19 serve the community. The crossing of an old bridge by

18:41:22 motor vehicle can be a real stimulant to the senses.
18:41:25 The open metal great that office provides sunlight
18:41:29 that has announced arrival and departure to the city's
18:41:32 neighborhood and urban centers for decades.
18:41:35 The arrangement of the concrete iron, steel and
18:41:39 concrete of the structures are nothing less than an
18:41:42 architectural and engineering work of art.
18:41:44 Tampa's historic bridges punctuate the landscape as
18:41:48 active reminders of our past by their designs and
18:41:51 quality of construction, allow for their functionality
18:41:53 into the future.
18:42:06 Recommends the landmark designation for commerce,
18:42:09 industry and transportation, and under criteria C for
18:42:13 their architectural and engineering components.
18:42:15 That concludes our presentation.
18:42:16 I'll be happy to answer any questions.
18:42:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions?
18:42:21 Staff?
18:42:21 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff. The
18:42:35 commission did review the six bridges in relationship
18:42:37 to the Tampa comprehensive plan, and did vote to find
18:42:40 them consistent with the goals, objectives and

18:42:42 policies of future land use element and the historic
18:42:45 resources element.
18:42:49 I would like to have this received and filed, the
18:42:51 resolution of the Planning Commission.
18:42:53 Thank you.
18:43:03 >> Is there anyone in the public that would like to be
18:43:05 speak on item number 1?
18:43:06 You may come up and speak.
18:43:11 >>> Don TERINA.
18:43:16 The property adjacent to the Platt Street bridges, and
18:43:21 the bridge was designed in 1926, 1926 to currently.
18:43:27 We have two major thoroughfares going over this
18:43:30 bridge.
18:43:36 Traffic count was 33,812.
18:43:40 In 2010, which is only four years away, with new
18:43:44 condos, you're looking at traffic count of somewhere
18:43:47 close to 50,000 cars using this one bridge.
18:43:54 It's a premiere bridge going into Tampa.
18:43:58 The lanes are 10-foot wide.
18:44:03 We have got vehicles on the road now that are 10-foot
18:44:05 wide.
18:44:07 The county, which -- they had jurisdiction over the

18:44:11 bridge, get $730,000, what they could do with this
18:44:18 bridge, and it's in deplorable condition.
18:44:26 If the bridge is raised, which is the problem right
18:44:32 now, in fact all the bridges, if you don't use it, you
18:44:39 lose it.
18:44:41 I'm a sailor and go up and down the intercoastal
18:44:45 waterways, and bridges like John's pass bridge, is
18:44:48 being replaced by the State of Florida, this past
18:44:54 month, because this same era, and they got the same
18:44:58 conditions, the mechanisms have rusted out, and the
18:45:06 bridge is inoperable, and the bridge has to be left in
18:45:10 open position so boat traffic can go through.
18:45:17 So the county realized this and they did a $730,000
18:45:22 study on how to either rehab the bridge or replace the
18:45:26 bridge.
18:45:32 Some of the bridges in Pinellas County, this past
18:45:35 month, instead of doing a rehab, doing a study, the
18:45:43 rehab portion of it, it would cost 24,200,000 to rehab
18:45:54 but the lanes would only be --
18:45:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Take the paper off the mike.
18:45:59 Thank you.
18:46:03 >>> The lanes would be 11 feet instead of 12 feet

18:46:06 which if you have a new bridge it would have to be 12
18:46:09 feet minimum.
18:46:12 The south side.
18:46:14 It would have sidewalk on one side.
18:46:23 It doesn't meet the safety standards.
18:46:26 Overall width of the bridge will remain the same, 62
18:46:29 feet.
18:46:30 And they anticipate rehab the last 50 years.
18:46:40 They are optimistic on that.
18:46:42 If they replace the bridge, the cost would be
18:46:44 43,100,000 and includes the right-of-way.
18:46:49 (Bell sounds).
18:46:50 The lanes would be 12-foot wide, would meet current
18:46:53 code.
18:46:54 It would be two bicycle lanes, two sidewalks eight
18:46:59 foot wide, which would tie into your riverwalk.
18:47:03 >>CHAIRMAN: Sir, your time is up.
18:47:08 We have a question for you.
18:47:10 >>> Sure.
18:47:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm a little confused.
18:47:12 You say you own property adjacent to the.
18:47:14 I'm going to assume that's downtown.

18:47:18 >>> Right adjacent to the bridge.
18:47:22 The site on the property.
18:47:27 I've got commercial.
18:47:30 Ding the thing I'm confused about is, other than being
18:47:33 a good citizen and coming down to tell us about rusty
18:47:36 bridges, why do you care if that bridge is saved or
18:47:40 changed or what?
18:47:43 I would directly -- how does it directly impact your
18:47:47 property?
18:47:47 >>> Well, they would have to acquire my site.
18:47:53 >> So in other words, if they want to widen it and
18:47:56 build a now bridge, they acquire your site?
18:47:59 >>> Absolutely.
18:48:00 >>CHAIRMAN: All right, sir.
18:48:01 Thank you.
18:48:03 We do appreciate it.
18:48:04 Thank you.
18:48:06 Next.
18:48:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Speaker waiver form, Madam Chair.
18:48:17 There are four additional names, if could you please
18:48:19 just acknowledge you're here.
18:48:21 Sonya HAUF.

18:48:25 Obviously you're here.
18:48:26 Pat Benjamin, thank you.
18:48:28 Ann Tompkin is here.
18:48:30 Desiree Valdez is here.
18:48:32 Four additional minutes, please.
18:48:35 >>> My name is Sharon keen.
18:48:36 I live at 918 West Virginia Avenue, Tampa 33603.
18:48:41 And I have been sworn in.
18:48:43 I'm here representing the Riverside heights civic
18:48:47 organization in regards to historical designation,
18:48:50 especially for the Columbus drive bridge.
18:48:53 And basically, I have three sets of reasons to bring
18:48:56 before council.
18:48:57 They are historical reasons.
18:48:58 There's the reason of the public support for this
18:49:02 designation and also the impact on the taxpayer, and
18:49:06 the economic impact.
18:49:07 To begin with, they did a very good presentation on
18:49:10 the history.
18:49:11 It was completed in 1926.
18:49:13 It was actually built before the neighborhoods were
18:49:16 built.

18:49:16 So it brought about the possible -- possibility of
18:49:20 development of both sides of the bridge.
18:49:22 It's compatible in scale and design with the
18:49:26 neighborhood.
18:49:28 Just for example, if you think about it -- because I
18:49:30 know you have gone over these bridges -- when you go
18:49:32 through the Columbus drive bridge, you feel like
18:49:35 you're in the community.
18:49:35 You're part of the community.
18:49:37 Just think of the MLK bridge.
18:49:39 You feel like you're somewhere else, going up into the
18:49:42 sky, and then you come down on the other side.
18:49:44 And you feel like it has no tire to the community.
18:49:48 Downtown get that feeling with the Columbus drive
18:49:50 bridge.
18:49:50 So it is very compatible in design.
18:49:53 It is one of seven swing, approximately, swing brings
18:49:58 in the United States.
18:49:59 There may be two or three in the State of Florida but
18:50:00 it is unique in the entire United States in that it is
18:50:03 the only swing bridge that swings off center.
18:50:06 So it's a unique bridge in the entire United States.

18:50:11 So we have a lot of its history here presented before
18:50:13 you.
18:50:14 The issue is public support.
18:50:17 You know, rarely do you get this much support on a pro
18:50:22 sort of basis.
18:50:23 You usually get a lot of interest in defeating certain
18:50:25 things before council.
18:50:27 But not in supporting something.
18:50:29 You have the support at the Tampa Heights civic
18:50:33 organization, Ridgewood park, Ybor heights, Riverside
18:50:37 heights, old West Tampa, and Seminole Heights.
18:50:42 Tampa city advisory committee, the CAC committee,
18:50:49 wrote a letter in support of the designation.
18:50:52 It is supported by the West Tampa CDC, the central
18:50:54 city CDC, and it is supported by the heights
18:50:58 developers.
18:50:59 Very rarely do you see neighborhood organizations and
18:51:01 developers get together.
18:51:03 The Tampa Heights, the heights developers, believe
18:51:05 that it is compatible, also in design and scale with
18:51:08 what they are proposing.
18:51:10 The greenways trail committee was very interested in

18:51:12 the fact that the greenways trail is going to come
18:51:15 through there, the riverwalk will be close by, it can
18:51:18 be a destination on the trail.
18:51:21 You know, you can put up a plaque there and tell
18:51:24 something about the history and go look at this
18:51:27 beautiful gnaw bridge that you have rehabbed so it
18:51:28 will be a plus.
18:51:29 The cost to the taxpayer, I believe as a taxpayer, is
18:51:35 probably the most important factor.
18:51:37 The county proposed three alternatives.
18:51:40 One alternative, restoration, rehabilitation, was like
18:51:44 between 7.8.
18:51:46 Now I think with inflation it's gone up to 9 million.
18:51:49 The two new bridges were to cost 32 million and 39
18:51:53 million.
18:51:54 32 million design, 39 million for a swing bridge
18:52:00 design.
18:52:02 But the real issue here in building a knew bridge,
18:52:04 also, where it would impact the neighborhoods, is that
18:52:07 the bridge would be widened, and then that means
18:52:11 Columbus drive would have to be widened to North
18:52:14 Boulevard.

18:52:14 So here you are talking about issues of eminent
18:52:18 domain, property will have to be taken from the home.
18:52:22 I don't know if you have been up Columbus drive.
18:52:24 It is totally a residential corridor from the bridge
18:52:27 to North Boulevard, except for the intersection there
18:52:30 at Columbus drive and North Boulevard.
18:52:32 And a lot of the homes are being restored and they are
18:52:35 being taken -- people are taking pride in their
18:52:39 ownership there.
18:52:40 And this would decimate that corridor.
18:52:42 If you take property -- not you but the county takes
18:52:45 property from these homes, it will just make them
18:52:48 deteriorate and decay, and that corridor will be
18:52:52 destroyed as a neighborhood corridor.
18:52:56 Also just think about it.
18:52:57 If you widen that corridor, what happens when you get
18:53:00 to North Boulevard?
18:53:01 You go into a narrow, two-lane road so you are going
18:53:04 to bottleneck it.
18:53:05 So why should you pay, you know, in comparison in,
18:53:08 round figures, from 10 million to 40 million, spend 30
18:53:12 million more dollars for basically four blocks on one

18:53:15 side, and seven blocks, or seven blocks on the other
18:53:19 side depending on which side -- block you measure.
18:53:23 Just to bottleneck to a narrow two-lane road that goes
18:53:27 through a historic district?
18:53:28 The county at one time said, well, we can widen that,
18:53:31 Columbus drive.
18:53:34 East of North Boulevard.
18:53:35 But that will be a real pain.
18:53:36 Not only issues of eminent domain, but the issues of,
18:53:41 you know, you're going through a historic area.
18:53:45 So, you know, we think that this is really a win-win
18:53:48 situation for council, for the neighborhood, for the
18:53:53 height developers, for the City of Tampa, and we hope
18:53:57 that you would support your historic designation of
18:54:00 these bridges.
18:54:00 And especially the Columbus drive bridge because
18:54:03 that's the one that when researched closely.
18:54:05 Thank you.
18:54:11 >>> My name is Brad Henson, 4036, Riverside heights,
18:54:17 in Tampa.
18:54:26 I support the status for the bridges, especially the
18:54:29 Columbus drive bridge.

18:54:30 I don't -- the Columbus drive bridge is worthy of
18:54:36 landmark designation.
18:54:37 It's a unique operation.
18:54:39 It's important for the development of Tampa's
18:54:42 neighborhoods.
18:54:42 It's a beautiful design.
18:54:44 So I respectfully request -- oh, I was sworn.
18:54:55 Designating the bridges as historic.
18:54:57 Thank you.
18:55:03 >>> Steve markham, north Suwannee Avenue.
18:55:07 I chair the preservation committee for the Old
18:55:08 Seminole Heights neighborhood association.
18:55:13 And e-mail in support of the designation of these
18:55:17 bridges.
18:55:19 And I have been sworn.
18:55:26 I would like to read just two sentences from the
18:55:29 historic highway bridges of Florida, which is a report
18:55:32 from the department of transportation.
18:55:35 This refers specifically to the Hillsborough Avenue
18:55:38 bridge.
18:55:39 It is the only tower-driven mechanical lift bridge
18:55:43 remaining in the state, and is one of two operable

18:55:47 vertical lift bridges.
18:55:49 As a result of its technology, its association with
18:55:52 the historic growth of the Tampa area, the rarity of
18:55:56 the bridge type, the Hillsborough River lift bridge
18:56:00 represents one of Florida's important historic highway
18:56:04 bridges.
18:56:06 And we hope that you will designate it.
18:56:09 Thank you.
18:56:09 >>CHAIRMAN: Would anyone else like to speak?
18:56:19 Okay.
18:56:19 Any questions by council members?
18:56:21 Close the public hearing?
18:56:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:56:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:56:25 (Motion carried).
18:56:26 Mr. Dingfelder?
18:56:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: In honor of lind oh a, since she's
18:56:31 not here, I feel the need to gush.
18:56:38 Seriously, Dennis Fernandez as always did a great job.
18:56:43 I'm sure you probably had staff help.
18:56:46 I think these bridges are absolutely beautiful.
18:56:48 What's interesting is, we do go flying over the top of

18:56:52 them and it's sort of a continuation of the asphalt.
18:56:54 But when you see the pictures from the side and the
18:56:57 historic pictures, you realize how beautiful they are
18:57:01 and what wonderful history they do represent.
18:57:03 Mary, I guess you are going to read it but I will
18:57:05 gladly support it.
18:57:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Can I go ahead?
18:57:09 I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida,
18:57:13 designating the following parcels of property to be
18:57:16 known as the historic bridges on the Hillsborough
18:57:18 River multiple properties group, the TN Henderson
18:57:23 Hillsborough Avenue bridge, the Michigan Avenue,
18:57:25 Columbus drive bridge, the fortune street, Laurel
18:57:28 Street bridge, the Cass Street bridge, the Lafayette
18:57:31 street bridge, Kennedy Boulevard bridge, and the Platt
18:57:34 Street bridge located in Tampa, Florida, as more
18:57:37 particularly described in section 3 hereof, as a local
18:57:40 landmark, providing for the repeal of all ordinances
18:57:43 in conflict, providing for severability, providing an
18:57:45 effective date.
18:57:48 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
18:57:50 (Motion carried).

18:57:52 We need to open 2 and 3 together.
18:57:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
18:57:56 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second to open 2
18:57:58 and 3.
18:57:58 (Motion carried).
18:57:59 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
18:58:05 I have been sworn.
18:58:05 First of all, I would just like to let the council
18:58:08 know about the process that we have been, since the
18:58:12 changes to chapter 27 were adopted on July 13th.
18:58:17 The changes that were adopted on July 13th were
18:58:20 adopted exactly one month after the DRC date for each
18:58:23 and every one of these cases that you are going to
18:58:25 hear tonight.
18:58:29 Their submittal requirement for the second submittal
18:58:32 was June 30th, approximately June 30th.
18:58:35 And so they were well within the review process by
18:58:39 staff, and therefore when the ordinance is adopted
18:58:46 effective immediately, many of these petitioners had
18:58:49 to scramble to address technical issues.
18:58:54 As a result to review the plans.
18:58:56 As a result, a lot of these -- in fact, every case

18:58:58 will have some type of issues to deal with.
18:59:01 But because the petitioner is requesting a hearing
18:59:04 tonight to determine the merits of the case, and then
18:59:07 the ordinance would then be referred, actually for
18:59:11 staff to review it and address those technical issues.
18:59:14 So it's just because this was a last minute rush to
18:59:20 get all the issues addressed.
18:59:22 It was just incredibly difficult to do.
18:59:28 I'll go ahead and start my presentation for 3075 Rocky
18:59:33 Point Drive.
18:59:34 This was for three hotel sites.
18:59:41 Just to the south.
18:59:42 And the hotel is located here.
18:59:48 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property
18:59:52 located at 3075 Rocky Point Drive from RM-24 to
18:59:56 planned development multifamily to construct two
18:59:58 170-foot residential towers on the site.
19:00:01 Information that Hillsborough County aviation
19:00:03 authority has reviewed this petition.
19:00:05 The maximum law density land use for the site is 35
19:00:09 dwelling units per acre.
19:00:10 Petitioner is proposing the construction of 161

19:00:13 dwelling units, the maximum allowed.
19:00:14 And many of the areas are along the southern portion
19:00:17 of the site immediately adjacent.
19:00:21 Service parking area is located to the rear of the
19:00:23 proposed building.
19:00:25 The building has been designed in a modern style.
19:00:27 Petitioner will have a presentation on that.
19:00:29 The site is located within the coastal high hazard
19:00:31 area.
19:00:32 In the past the City Council has required mitigation
19:00:34 for the cost of hurricane evacuation shelter space,
19:00:37 with the Hillsborough County shelter mitigation.
19:00:41 A hotel population likely to quickly leave the area as
19:00:46 it currently is, whereas a permanent residential
19:00:49 property owners will likely use the resources in the
19:00:52 area.
19:00:55 The objections that are on record at this point, very
19:00:57 technical in nature.
19:00:59 The guest parking is located at the rear of the site.
19:01:03 And the petitioner collar face for me right before the
19:01:06 meeting that they would like to reduce parking from 40
19:01:10 spaces to 15 spaces.

19:01:12 As you know when I started this process the guest
19:01:14 parking provision was not in effect.
19:01:16 However, at the DRC, to let them know that the guest
19:01:19 parking provision was on its way.
19:01:21 So the petitioner now is requesting a waiver from 40
19:01:24 spaces to 15 spaces.
19:01:27 Note number 15 and 16 need to be removed.
19:01:30 Land development has that objection.
19:01:32 Guest parking should be clarified on the site plan.
19:01:37 A tree table needs to be provided actually on the site
19:01:39 plan, not on the survey.
19:01:41 That concludes staff's comments.
19:01:54 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:01:56 Mr. Shelby, I have not been sworn in.
19:01:59 >> Where were you?
19:02:00 [ Laughter ]
19:02:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We might as well do anybody else who
19:02:14 hasn't been.
19:02:17 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:02:28 I have been sworn in.
19:02:35 Ms. Lamboy has already told you about the CMU 35,
19:02:39 which is the light brown colored which is residential

19:02:43 35.
19:02:45 To give you some context, to put an aerial up, just
19:02:49 very quickly.
19:02:51 The site is on the north base of the Courtney Campbell
19:02:53 causeway as we can see from the north Rocky Point area
19:02:57 which is identified in the comprehensive plan, the
19:03:01 mixed use center.
19:03:03 It's also located within close proximity to the
19:03:06 waterfront community of Dana shores to the north and
19:03:09 just left of the veterans expressway.
19:03:11 The site is also in close proximity to the Westshore
19:03:14 business district which is one of the largest
19:03:16 employment centers as we know in the county.
19:03:18 And also identified as a mixed use regional activity
19:03:22 center.
19:03:23 I would like to point out those particular points, you
19:03:25 have two mixed use regional activity centers and you
19:03:28 have a major employment center in the Westshore
19:03:30 business district.
19:03:31 So by providing additional residential units in close
19:03:37 proximity to those areas, it is consistent with the
19:03:39 comprehensive plan as far as the location of density

19:03:44 as this for residential units.
19:03:49 It is consistent with the policies in the
19:03:51 comprehensive plan, specifically within the future
19:03:53 land use element.
19:03:58 As far as I said before, the location of these
19:03:59 particular types of uses with a mixed use regional
19:04:02 activity centers.
19:04:03 Planning Commission staff has no objection and finds
19:04:07 the use consistent with the comprehensive plan.
19:04:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Would you reiterate where this place
19:04:13 is?
19:04:14 If you are going --
19:04:18 >>> I'll give you some old context.
19:04:19 Remember causeway north and causeway south used to be?
19:04:24 Causeway and north if you go in that way and go right
19:04:27 behind, on the right-hand side, there's a little
19:04:31 peninsula and little beach right in there.
19:04:35 >> But I believe that they are going to put a hotel in
19:04:37 there right now?
19:04:39 >>> No, ma'am.
19:04:39 There is a hotel on the site.
19:04:40 They want to convert it for 161 residential units.

19:04:44 So instead of having it as a commercial unit, you will
19:04:46 have it as a residential unit but it will be a
19:04:49 high-rise as Ms. Lamboy said of 175 feet is a request,
19:04:54 two towers, 175 feet, surrounded by residential units.
19:04:59 There's a condo association.
19:05:01 These are all condos right here.
19:05:07 >> So where is Dana shores from there?
19:05:09 >>> This is Dan A shores.
19:05:11 And this is the county boundary actually.
19:05:13 This is right inside the city limits.
19:05:19 >> Oh, okay.
19:05:19 Thank you.
19:05:20 >>> You're welcome.
19:05:23 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
19:05:24 This rezoning will require an amendment to the Rocky
19:05:26 Point DRI, will be the sixth amendment.
19:05:29 The only thing that will be amended in the DRI is the
19:05:32 parcel that is going to be protected for the rezoning,
19:05:38 extends the buildout to December 2011 and provides for
19:05:42 the 176 hotel units to the 161 condominium units.
19:05:47 It will provide for mitigation for the residential,
19:05:54 they will have to pay an assessment fee of 216 ooh

19:05:57 unit, mitigate for space pursuant to the formula
19:06:00 that's provided by the emergency management office of
19:06:03 Hillsborough County, and they will have mitigation,
19:06:07 the Hillsborough County impact fees.
19:06:11 They are also seeking approval of 35 boat slips and
19:06:13 those will be the only changes to the DRI.
19:06:16 >> Are those conditions included in number 3?
19:06:20 >>> Yes.
19:06:22 In the amendment to the DRI, yes, they are.
19:06:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
19:06:26 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street, Tampa
19:06:39 32602?
19:06:41 >>Pleased to be here on behalf of the petitioner.
19:06:44 They are intending to develop a very significant
19:06:46 project on one of the gateways to the City of Tampa,
19:06:49 Rocky Point.
19:06:50 The project would consist of 161 condominium units, 35
19:06:53 wet boat slips, and other amenities.
19:06:56 In order to develop the property, they would have to
19:06:58 displace or demolish the existing chase swats which
19:07:01 was built in roughly 1986 and consists of 176 hotel
19:07:06 units and 22 buildings and a helicopter of impervious

19:07:10 spaces with it.
19:07:15 The project is very compatible with the surrounding
19:07:17 development.
19:07:21 To the north is the post apartments.
19:07:22 To the east are apartments.
19:07:23 To the west is the Bahama breeze restaurant.
19:07:26 And further to the west, you might recollect in the
19:07:29 latter part of the year 2000 this council unanimously
19:07:32 approved the zoning that allowed for the redevelopment
19:07:35 of the days in property, 6 and a half acres, and the
19:07:40 zoning allows for 108 condominium units, 165 feet in
19:07:44 height and 200 hotel units.
19:07:51 From an economic standpoint it's going to have a very
19:07:53 significant impact on the city.
19:07:55 Right now if you look at the tax roll associated with
19:07:57 the chase suites it's assessed at roughly $12 million
19:08:01 and generates approximately $1.2 million in ad valorem
19:08:04 overall. The city shares roughly 62,000 dollars from
19:08:07 those taxes.
19:08:10 Versus this project, the estimated fair market value
19:08:11 is $173 million which will generate over 4.2 million
19:08:16 in ad valorem and the city's share will be 1.2 million

19:08:19 versus the 62,000 derived from the chase suites
19:08:23 property which is very significant.
19:08:27 One other point I want to make here, we are in the
19:08:29 DRI.
19:08:30 And a lot of these issues in terms of hurricane
19:08:33 evacuation, et cetera, dealt with in the DRI, but from
19:08:36 an impact standpoint, we are converting 176 hotel
19:08:40 units to 161 condos.
19:08:43 It's a classic in-fill development those really
19:08:46 promoted through all different developments of the
19:08:49 comprehensive plan, the reduction, reduced impacts on
19:08:52 the city's resources in terms of solid waste, water,
19:08:55 traffic, et cetera.
19:08:59 And the hurricane mitigation worked with emergency
19:09:01 services and agreed to pay that fee based on potential
19:09:04 shelter space.
19:09:05 And I could go over the site plan with you.
19:09:08 I know you have a lot on your agenda tonight.
19:09:11 If you have any particular questions, we'll entertain
19:09:13 them.
19:09:14 We have our entire consulting team here and work with
19:09:16 her to make more of a presentation.

19:09:19 But what we have in front of you is the elevation
19:09:21 showing the two buildings right there with parking
19:09:24 underneath it.
19:09:25 One thing I want to clarify, too, on the parking
19:09:27 waiver, we have been working on a sign design,
19:09:32 something for months, so we filed with the city April
19:09:36 17, went to DRC in June, the code changed sometime in
19:09:41 July, okay?
19:09:42 So under the old code in terms of parking, we met for
19:09:48 the units and there was no requirement for guest
19:09:50 parking.
19:09:50 And, you know, the guest parking issue, I think there
19:09:54 were a lot of problems with my recollection in South
19:09:56 Tampa where people were parking off site.
19:09:59 This is a gated, secured, self-contained community and
19:10:02 that could never happen.
19:10:03 Everything is going to happen on our property.
19:10:05 But back to the parking issue.
19:10:07 Under the old code, we could meet the code for the
19:10:10 number of units, the spaces, plus the 40 guest spaces.
19:10:15 Okay.
19:10:15 Under the new code, we can meet the new code, the

19:10:20 ratio for the units.
19:10:22 It's two per unit.
19:10:23 And then we are a little deficient on the guest
19:10:27 parking.
19:10:28 So we would request a waiver from 40 to 15.
19:10:43 I have been sworn.
19:10:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Bentley with, all due respect I
19:10:55 refuse to have that characterized as such.
19:10:57 It's just a mere oversight.
19:11:01 >>MARK BENTLEY: Thank you.
19:11:04 I would like the documents received and filed.
19:11:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm looking on page 2, Mr. Bentley,
19:11:10 and page 3 of the staff report.
19:11:12 And Heather might have addressed some of these.
19:11:18 But can you clarify what you're willing to do, or what
19:11:21 you have done to address these staff concerns, or
19:11:25 staff objections in regard to the tree issues, and
19:11:34 what other objections?
19:11:37 >>MARK BENTLEY: On the tree issue, in excess of one
19:11:42 acre.
19:11:42 You have to maintain 50% of the existing vegetation.
19:11:45 On this site is the old hotel, and there's palms.

19:11:52 What we are proposing to do -- we are proposing to
19:11:54 eliminate those, and provide enhanced landscaping and
19:11:58 bigger trees, bigger diameter than your code requires.
19:12:01 >> Is that in the site plan?
19:12:02 >>> Yes, it is, Mr. Dingfelder.
19:12:04 >> What diameter?
19:12:11 Then the staff had an objection in regard to
19:12:19 calculation for the trees.
19:12:20 Did you all recalculate and come to a meeting of the
19:12:23 minds?
19:12:26 >>> I have been sworn in.
19:12:28 Yes, we did address it.
19:12:35 We have addressed that comment.
19:12:38 We had misinterpreted the code.
19:12:40 And have 50% shade trees, 50% palms, potentially.
19:12:45 And the caliper size are between 5 and 8 inches.
19:12:50 >> So when they talk about a diversity of trees, you
19:12:53 are addressing that as well?
19:12:55 >>> Yes, sir.
19:12:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I was just going to ask about the
19:13:01 mitigation on the shelter.
19:13:05 >>> Yes, ma'am.

19:13:06 >> So you pay a fee in and that takes care of it?
19:13:09 >>> That's correct.
19:13:11 We got with emergency management services and it's
19:13:15 they have come up with a formula that's based on the
19:13:18 number of persons per unit.
19:13:20 And then if they make that 25% will actually go to a
19:13:24 shelter, then they get the cost of the shelter.
19:13:26 You do the math there.
19:13:27 So we are paying their proportionate share.
19:13:30 >> Do they know where the shelter might be built?
19:13:32 You don't know?
19:13:33 >>> I really couldn't tell you.
19:13:35 Maybe someone else on the team could, Ms. Alvarez.
19:13:38 >> You know, we are putting a lot of residential on
19:13:40 Courtney Campbell causeway.
19:13:42 And people would be coming in from the west,
19:13:46 Clearwater, Safety Harbor.
19:13:51 That's been a concern, especially with the hurricanes
19:13:54 that we have had in the past year.
19:13:57 >>> You know what's kind of unique about this
19:13:58 situation, as I indicated we are reducing the number
19:14:01 of units from 176 to 161 so our traffic impact is

19:14:05 reduced, too.
19:14:06 So we are having less cars trying to evacuate, and
19:14:08 also in terms of shelter, our impact on the shelter, I
19:14:11 think is 10 people less.
19:14:13 >> The problem is they are going to have to find a way
19:14:15 to get over there.
19:14:16 They are going to use that one road that leads to
19:14:19 safety.
19:14:21 And it's just a concern.
19:14:22 >>MARK BENTLEY: Yes, I understand.
19:14:24 Thank you.
19:14:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
19:14:26 would like to speak on item 2 or 3?
19:14:29 Anyone want to speak on item 2 or 3?
19:14:32 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to close.
19:14:34 >>GWEN MILLER: motion and second to close.
19:14:36 (Motion carried).
19:14:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that you read and vote on
19:14:41 the DRI first.
19:14:42 That's item number 3.
19:14:43 And then vote on item number 2.
19:14:53 >> Since you are going to be continuing the rezoning,

19:14:55 although the DRI would be in order tonight, it's up to
19:14:57 council's discussion if you want to carry them
19:14:59 together.
19:14:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So we'll direct staff to bring back
19:15:05 when, for first reading?
19:15:06 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: The petitioner requested two weeks.
19:15:09 I can get the plans.
19:15:10 If I can get the plans by Friday afternoon, then that
19:15:14 will be no problem.
19:15:15 >>CHAIRMAN: We can read the 3 --
19:15:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think we want to.
19:15:23 >>CHAIRMAN: Read them together?
19:15:24 So what motion do we need to make?
19:15:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To move to continue both items 2 and
19:15:28 3.
19:15:29 But the thing is, you have closed the hearings.
19:15:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Didn't close the hearings.
19:15:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, we did.
19:15:38 We need to reopen the public hearing.
19:15:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe you may have to just reopen
19:15:43 the public hearing and continue it because what you
19:15:45 are going to do is come back and the council is going

19:15:47 to hear testimony that the site plans do comport with
19:15:51 what the discussion was and the notes are all in
19:15:53 compliance.
19:15:54 >>> I agree.
19:15:55 I think reopen the public hearing, continue the DRI,
19:15:59 and the zoning.
19:16:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to reopen.
19:16:05 >> Second.
19:16:06 (Motion carried).
19:16:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to continue both 2 and 3
19:16:12 until -- I never got that cleared.
19:16:15 Until when?
19:16:18 >>> Is it two weeks?
19:16:18 I'm sorry, in the evening, Ms. Lamboy, or morning?
19:16:22 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Two weeks, in the morning.
19:16:25 28th.
19:16:29 >>> Of August.
19:16:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Could weeks would be August 31st.
19:16:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: First reading so it would be 10 a.m.
19:16:38 That's my motion.
19:16:39 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
19:16:41 (Motion carried).

19:16:44 >>MARK BENTLEY: Thank you very much.
19:16:45 Have a good evening.
19:16:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 15.
19:16:51 >> So moved.
19:16:52 >> Second.
19:16:52 (Motion carried)
19:17:26 >>> The remaining petitions are all petitions, from
19:17:29 what I understand, that are going to need to be
19:17:31 continued so that a new ordinance can be drafted and
19:17:35 presented for you. The new code provision requires
19:17:37 that all of those are continued.
19:17:39 I would first recommend keep your public hearings
19:17:41 open, continue them, and they must all be continued at
19:17:44 least 14 calendar days from today's hearing.
19:17:47 So two weeks at a minimum.
19:17:50 So I can also say for the benefit of the people in the
19:17:52 audience, the new code requires that any of the plan,
19:17:58 text, be submitted to Land Development Coordination no
19:18:01 later than ten days prior to the continued public
19:18:03 hearing.
19:18:03 Thank you.
19:18:07 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.

19:18:18 I have been sworn.
19:18:19 This petition request involves --
19:18:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
19:18:31 >> Involves the property located between 12th and
19:18:35 Meridian, and Whiting on the north.
19:18:44 Council has reviewed a petition regarding this
19:18:47 particular parcel of property.
19:18:54 The vehicle try lofts property for your information.
19:19:00 I took pictures of the site from the 20th floor so
19:19:02 you could get a perspective of what the Channel
19:19:04 District is starting to look like.
19:19:06 This is the place right here.
19:19:08 This is the Victory Lofts building.
19:19:10 You can see the northern portion of the subject site.
19:19:17 Another view closer in to the Victory Lofts building
19:19:19 and then the second site was two blocks between
19:19:22 Meridian and 12th, all the way out to the south
19:19:25 adjacent to the parking garage facility.
19:19:31 And the southern portion of the site, on the southern
19:19:36 portion of the site, immediately to the south.
19:19:41 And then just for some perspective on, you know, the
19:19:48 context of Channelside here's the Kennedy development

19:19:50 in the northern portion of the district.
19:19:53 The proposed uses include office, retail, hotel,
19:20:01 multifamily residential and single-family attached
19:20:04 residential.
19:20:04 The site will contain a total of 1,178,863 square
19:20:09 feet.
19:20:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Excuse me.
19:20:12 Give us a little more context.
19:20:13 Would you remind us what we approved, what we approved
19:20:18 last year on this site?
19:20:21 >>> The project was a mixed use project that had a
19:20:24 lower floor area ratio.
19:20:26 Unfortunately I wasn't involved in that case.
19:20:28 So -- but there were several -- even though there was
19:20:31 no formal mechanism, the strategic action plan had not
19:20:35 been adopted at that point, there were several bonus
19:20:37 features involved with that particular case as well,
19:20:39 as I understand it.
19:20:40 >> Do you know what the F. A. R. was?
19:20:43 >> I would have to go look at my map but I believe the
19:20:46 F. A. R. was around 4-foot.
19:20:55 A 3.5 F. A. R.

19:21:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Do you have a copy of the report, the
19:21:02 petition to rezone?
19:21:04 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Do I have a copy of that?
19:21:07 >> Yes, do you have another copy?
19:21:09 >>> Not on me but I can make one for you.
19:21:11 >> I didn't seem to have it.
19:21:12 And Mrs. Miller didn't have it either.
19:21:14 Do you have it?
19:21:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
19:21:18 >>> The proposed floor area ratio is 4.65 which
19:21:21 translates to an additional 291,000 bonus square feet
19:21:26 density for the project.
19:21:27 The base F.A.R. allows 317 square feet.
19:21:33 As part of the staff packet to you, I attached a bonus
19:21:41 density analysis.
19:21:45 It provides the rationale for the ten to one factor
19:21:50 for the bonus density features.
19:21:57 The architectural program includes a design which
19:21:59 is -- designed as illustrated on the site plan.
19:22:07 As the buildings and architectural developments, like
19:22:12 elements found on ships.
19:22:14 To illustrate the relationship of the project to

19:22:16 adjacent properties.
19:22:18 The plan also includes several sidewalk areas major
19:22:23 feature is the connection from Channelside, all the
19:22:26 way across to Meridian, through the entire site.
19:22:31 Mid block pedestrian connection.
19:22:35 There were several concerns, working diligently with
19:22:38 staff on, solid waste objection has been removed.
19:22:43 Those comments were old as of the date of the
19:22:45 publication of the staff reports.
19:22:47 That objection has been removed.
19:22:51 The transportation objection still remains.
19:22:53 There are a couple of issues that need to be
19:22:55 addressed.
19:22:57 Petitioner will make some minor changes to a
19:23:01 transportation concerns.
19:23:02 I believe Mr. Stair's objection will be removed.
19:23:06 And there is the technical objection greater than 50%
19:23:10 tree removal from the landscape specialist.
19:23:13 And the tree table should be placed on a plan, not the
19:23:16 survey.
19:23:16 Petitioner has agreed to address that through the
19:23:20 continuance process.

19:23:24 Because this is a lengthy case, I think that's where I
19:23:28 would like to conclude my comments so Mr. Chen can
19:23:32 comment on the benefits.ding
19:23:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question.
19:23:38 This picture, it looks like -- it's hard to tell
19:23:44 exactly what I'm looking at.
19:23:45 But it looks like it's a couple of high-rise
19:23:49 buildings?
19:23:50 I guess we are going to probably see more pictures and
19:23:53 graphics.
19:23:53 So what I recall us approving the last time seemed to
19:23:57 be a whole series of mixture, low rises, mid rises.
19:24:01 I don't even know northbound F there were any
19:24:03 high-rises.
19:24:08 >>> The height has definitely increased.
19:24:10 It is consistent with what the authority allows.
19:24:12 But it is higher --
19:24:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: but in terms of what we talked
19:24:16 about, when we talked about canyon effects, and
19:24:19 stepping back, you know, stepping back from the
19:24:21 street, and all that type of thing.
19:24:25 >>> If you will look at the site plan on the cover

19:24:28 sheet, the two high-rises that are being proposed are
19:24:32 adjacent to Meridian, which has the large setback,
19:24:36 just a large street.
19:24:38 So the scale is more compatible.
19:24:41 If you look adjacent to Victory Lofts, which is the
19:24:45 upper left hand corner, those are going to be 40 feet,
19:24:49 in response to concerns raised by the neighborhood.
19:24:52 So the maximum height, the entire row is going to be
19:24:56 40 feet.
19:24:57 The other height elements will be the hotel, which is
19:25:00 on the upper right of that sheet.
19:25:02 And 331 feet, that's the highest height.
19:25:07 But as council may recall, you all recently approved
19:25:11 the place, redevelopment, which allowed for higher
19:25:16 height in the Channel District, and in response to
19:25:17 that, another petitioner is requesting additional
19:25:20 height.
19:25:21 >> It's not the absolute height that I'm preoccupied
19:25:24 with.
19:25:25 It's the street effect.
19:25:26 I'm sure we'll get into it more as we get to that.
19:25:34 >>> Mike Chen, Channel District, CRA manager.

19:25:37 And I have been sworn.
19:25:42 As Ms. Lamboy mentioned, I participated in several
19:25:44 meetings with the developer to discuss the public
19:25:48 enhancements in the context of those enhancements
19:25:51 versus the F.A.R. that they are requesting.
19:25:56 After a fair amount of discussion we came to the
19:25:58 conclusion that the enhancement that they have listed
19:26:01 hear for those values are not subject to challenge.
19:26:06 We find a comfort level with what they are proposing
19:26:09 and the values associated with them.
19:26:12 I would also point out that the value of the public
19:26:15 enhancement that they have included for consideration,
19:26:19 it seems the value that they would need to qualify for
19:26:25 the F.A.R. that they are requesting, and then kind of
19:26:30 as an aside to that there are a number of other
19:26:32 amenities that are included in their design, site
19:26:36 plan, so forth, that could qualify for public
19:26:39 enhancement that are not even listed per their value.
19:26:44 With that he would came to the conclusion that the
19:26:47 developer and inclusion of the public enhancements
19:26:51 fulfills the intent of the approved strategic action
19:26:54 plan and its formulas for F.A.R.

19:26:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chen, when we were working with
19:27:07 you and your staff and we developed some of these
19:27:09 concepts, the credits for the F.A.R. -- well, let me
19:27:17 point council out to what I'm talking about.
19:27:19 Wilson Miller has given us analysis and the date
19:27:23 August 10th.
19:27:29 >>> I think that's the latest version.
19:27:31 >> And on this August 10th sheet, on page 1, it
19:27:35 says that included in their bonus credit is 974,000
19:27:42 for general maintenance of the expanded pedestrian
19:27:46 area, and 273 000 dollars of credit for general
19:27:52 maintenance of another pedestrian area.
19:27:58 And I don't have any recollection whatsoever of us
19:28:01 ever being told or agreeing to maintenance of these
19:28:06 areas as part of the bonus provision.
19:28:10 >>> Okay.
19:28:10 This is actually something that evolved out of taking
19:28:14 the plan from AP theoretical plan with recommendations
19:28:18 to creating definitions associated with what will
19:28:22 eventually be enforceable codes.
19:28:26 The plan, as it was being designed, the concept of
19:28:30 ongoing maintenance had been discussed in a number of

19:28:33 venues with that.
19:28:35 And there was some discussion during the days of the
19:28:38 drafting the plan that the TIF might actually bear the
19:28:43 cost of maintenance in these public areas that would
19:28:47 be associated with projects.
19:28:49 We found that we, the city staff, found that
19:28:54 objectionable, that we did not feel it was appropriate
19:28:56 for TIF moneys to be used for -- higher standards of
19:29:01 maintenance and amenities than the general community
19:29:04 might have.
19:29:06 So that left the issue of the maintenance of some of
19:29:11 these enhancements and so forth, that somewhat without
19:29:14 definition associated with planning.
19:29:20 Now as we reviewed these with the developer, I will
19:29:23 tell you, these two areas are among those that we had
19:29:26 the most discussion about.
19:29:28 We came to the conclusion that we could accept this as
19:29:31 value because this is not -- stating it in the more
19:29:38 positive, the dollars attributed to this value is a
19:29:41 fairly minor portion, a minor percentage of their
19:29:45 estimate of their overall maintenance.
19:29:51 >>> It's a million dollars.

19:29:55 >> Yes, but that's over a very long period of time.
19:29:57 >> That's not spelled out on here.
19:29:59 How many years?
19:30:02 >>MICHAEL CHEN: It was a 30-year estimate of that
19:30:08 cost.
19:30:09 >> Sometimes ten?
19:30:12 >>> Yes.
19:30:12 >>: So they get the -- that's a strange amount.
19:30:16 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Again, this was one of the areas that
19:30:22 we discuss add great deal.
19:30:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can see if you have a capital
19:30:26 improvement, and you get to multiply it out times ten
19:30:29 because it's a capital improvement.
19:30:32 But I don't understand how you get to that Do that to
19:30:35 be the same thing for a yearly thing.
19:30:40 >>> Well, it was reconciled --
19:30:42 >> Not operating expenses.
19:30:44 Not a capital improvement.
19:30:45 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Again, first of all the district does
19:30:50 not have an overall SSA or CDD or other type of
19:30:56 community based funding source for this to be taken
19:31:00 care of across the way.

19:31:02 We find it objectionable to use TIF funds for that
19:31:07 type of use.
19:31:11 And I guess capital improvement would be a good
19:31:17 question there.
19:31:18 But clearly the maintenance of that, because these are
19:31:21 areas -- this is maintenance in areas that are
19:31:24 designated for public -- free public access.
19:31:28 This is not maintenance of their areas that would be
19:31:30 restricted to access.
19:31:36 Again, we gave this a lot of consideration before we
19:31:38 arrived at a conclusion that we could accept that.
19:31:50 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:31:53 I have been sworn.
19:31:59 We are all very familiar with the location of this
19:32:00 particular site which is on the western periphery of
19:32:04 the Channel District area, along one of the major
19:32:08 thoroughfares within the Channel District along
19:32:12 Meridian Avenue, newly built Meridian Avenue, which
19:32:16 can be clearly seen from other major venues within the
19:32:20 central business district, as you can see, which is
19:32:22 what this makes, the central business district.
19:32:26 The request -- and every former team, Mr. Dingfelder,

19:32:33 was under different ownership so you have a new --
19:32:37 they had a whole different concept of what they wanted
19:32:39 to offer the Channel District.
19:32:40 When you look at the physical context of how they want
19:32:44 to go ahead and orient the site, Wayne's category,
19:32:50 mixed use, for the Channel District, what's nicely
19:32:57 existing there a lot of underutilized property, a lot
19:33:00 of warehouses and of course vacant property.
19:33:03 We go to the height issue and what they are bringing
19:33:05 into the site and your significant height masses will
19:33:09 be associated along Meridian and the southern part of
19:33:12 the project.
19:33:13 Let's not forget currently under construction The
19:33:15 Towers of Channelside which are one of the tallest
19:33:18 structures that you do have just to the south.
19:33:21 So as far as the complex between what they are
19:33:23 offering to put here and what you currently approve
19:33:25 which is two 30-story towers to the south, is
19:33:30 compatible with what they are putting to the south.
19:33:33 You also have this parking garage which services, of
19:33:35 course, Channelside.
19:33:38 And in the aquarium, even though the aquarium does

19:33:42 have its own parking lot, many people that will
19:33:46 probably use this -- this is strictly hypothetical on
19:33:49 my part -- L -- but you can see where this will become
19:33:52 a second sense of place within the Channel District,
19:33:54 as it is a significant site, I think being
19:33:58 approximately, what, six acres in size.
19:34:02 This is going to be a significant development for
19:34:04 Channelside and will be something that we'll be able
19:34:06 to link this southern part, which is actually isolated
19:34:11 Channel District is going to be isolated to a certain
19:34:14 degree because this huge project is going to go up
19:34:16 over here which is -- this is going to create its own
19:34:20 sense of place, which is the reason why I think a lot
19:34:23 of negotiations that have gone on between city
19:34:26 administration and the developer that's concentrated
19:34:29 on a lot of the amenities that they refer to, which is
19:34:32 bonus, the public open space, depicted by outdoor
19:34:37 cafes, plaza fountain, pedestrian areas, mid block
19:34:42 pedestrian detect connector, art ist display cases,
19:34:47 water feature in the plaza and of course the increased
19:34:49 public art.
19:34:50 So they in essence, by having a project of this

19:34:53 magnitude, need to create their own sense of place and
19:34:56 have their option for the people who live in the area.
19:34:59 As Ms. Lamboy stated to you, this is in proximity to
19:35:02 the Victory Lofts over to the northeast on the site.
19:35:05 Of course that's a much lower density and a lot lower
19:35:09 as far as mass is concerned.
19:35:10 They are -- the applicant has come in and talked with
19:35:14 the residents and listened to their concerns as far as
19:35:18 what they will be putting -- consists of high end town
19:35:24 homes, it will be similar to scale and mass to what is
19:35:27 currently existing there in the environment.
19:35:30 It is consistent with the future land use element as
19:35:34 far as the applicability of the CDBG boundaries.
19:35:40 The request as stated was for 774 residential units
19:35:44 and 115 thousand square feet of retail commercial
19:35:47 office use.
19:35:49 The proposed F.A.R., the 3.5, as you heard Mr. Chen
19:35:55 say, has been negotiated with the city administration,
19:35:59 the city administration does feel that the proposed
19:36:03 request for 4.6 based on what the bonus amenities were
19:36:08 that had provide been provided to garner that 4.61 is
19:36:12 satisfactory as far as the administration is

19:36:14 concerned.
19:36:14 And the land use category there and the environment of
19:36:18 the area and what the applicant is offering for the
19:36:21 site, we find it consistent with the comprehensive
19:36:23 plan and do not object to the proposed request.
19:36:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I have a question for Ms. Lamboy,
19:36:29 whenever she gets up there.
19:36:38 Ms. Lamboy, the report shows that some of the
19:36:41 departments have some conditions and so on.
19:36:47 One of them that I'm looking at -- well, first of all,
19:36:50 did any of these conditions are they gone?
19:36:56 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Yes, petitioner has addressed all
19:36:57 the conditions they can.
19:36:59 They can't modify the plans yet though.
19:37:01 Because the plan date is what it is now.
19:37:04 But they have agreed to all of the issues raised by
19:37:07 staff.
19:37:09 >> That includes the urban design managers concern on
19:37:13 this?
19:37:14 >>> That's correct.
19:37:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Everything else has been taken care
19:37:21 of.

19:37:21 Okay.
19:37:22 >>> There are some graphical changes that we'll have
19:37:24 to encourage but I think they have agreed.
19:37:28 >> I think this site, this project is going to be an
19:37:33 asset to this community.
19:37:34 And I'm looking forward to it coming to fruition.
19:37:40 >>> If I can make a clarification, with the discussion
19:37:42 that's occurring with the legal staff and let nowie
19:37:44 was out there, the code changed recently with
19:37:49 reference to the bonus provision for the entire rest
19:37:52 of the city, and those things were clarified for plan
19:37:56 developments as well as anything in the Ybor City zone
19:38:01 district.
19:38:02 However, code has not been changed with reference to
19:38:04 the comprehensive plan provision, the central business
19:38:11 district periphery which allows provisions.
19:38:13 Remember, there's no rationale for it.
19:38:15 And that rationale is sort of pinned down on the
19:38:22 action plan and we had several meetings reviewing a
19:38:25 proposed ordinance which we are going to be bringing
19:38:27 to council.
19:38:28 Petitioner is aware of this and that's why we

19:38:30 fashioned everything consistent with that code.
19:38:32 So the petitioner is meeting the code even though it
19:38:34 hasn't come to the council yet for consideration.
19:38:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
19:38:48 >>> Richard Davis, 220 Madison street, suite 512, here
19:38:53 this evening on behalf of Sembler developments of the
19:38:58 choir project.
19:38:59 I'm accompanied tonight on behalf of Sembler by Mr.
19:39:03 Darian Johnson and gene defreeze.
19:39:06 Michael English is here to speak to the comprehensive
19:39:08 plan and strategic action plan issues.
19:39:11 Stephani gains is here to walk you through design of
19:39:15 the project and the vision of the project and
19:39:17 hopefully we can respond to some of those issues that
19:39:19 came up in the initial comments.
19:39:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you or anybody on your team have
19:39:24 the strategic action plan that we tentatively did
19:39:28 something with?
19:39:29 I don't know if we approved it or not.
19:39:31 We sure looked at it a long time.
19:39:37 >>> Councilman Dingfelder, I did.
19:39:39 I have it in my material.

19:39:41 >> Does anybody else have one?
19:39:43 >> if you like.
19:39:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If I could borrow it for a second.
19:39:48 It's been awhile since we looked at it.
19:39:50 I would ask Mr. English but he's on the other side.
19:39:58 >>> Going back to my introduction.
19:40:00 Our consultant team this evening will address a series
19:40:03 of issues.
19:40:05 Speaking first will be Stephani Gaines who will speak
19:40:09 to the architectural designs, and vision
19:40:12 considerations, following the testimony will be
19:40:15 Michael English to speak to two considerations,
19:40:17 comprehensive plan consistency, as well as compliance
19:40:20 with the strategic action plan, the document which you
19:40:24 all are currently looking at.
19:40:26 Finally, Darion -- Darion Johnson will speak to the
19:40:31 process the developer has worked through working with
19:40:34 your staff, with residents in the area to achieve a
19:40:39 plan which is consistent with the newly adopted
19:40:41 strategic action plan.
19:40:43 With that, I would like to introduce Stephani Gaines.
19:40:46 We to have a considerable amount of material for you

19:40:49 this evening for you to review as the presentations
19:40:53 occur, and in fact Jennifer willman will be handing
19:40:57 that out.
19:40:57 Included in that material are a series of graphics, as
19:41:00 well as resume ifs to be participants tonight from our
19:41:03 consultant team.
19:41:05 So I would ask, we have sufficient copies for each
19:41:07 council member, as well as for the clerk's office, as
19:41:10 well as Mr. Shelby.
19:41:21 >> Stephani Gaines, 1213 east 6th Avenue.
19:41:27 I have been sworn.
19:41:29 And with me, acting as Vanna White, is Patti Ramos
19:41:41 ifson, also some of the creative work that you see
19:41:44 tonight.
19:41:45 You certainly have seen a lot of projects come up in
19:41:47 the Channel District in the last few years.
19:41:48 And we have been fortunate to be involved with several
19:41:50 of those.
19:41:51 Some of them have been more challenging than others
19:41:54 and they have all been significant.
19:41:56 This project is, we feel, has a singular significance
19:42:03 that maybe some of the others don't have, in the

19:42:08 timing of the project, its specific location, and in
19:42:11 particular its sheer size.
19:42:21 I wanted to come up with a different word other than
19:42:25 size because it's scary.
19:42:26 But size is relative.
19:42:28 Almost four full blocks.
19:42:29 About six acres.
19:42:31 And the only thing that's really scary about the
19:42:33 concept of size is first of all the similar team of
19:42:38 architects and engineers and planners who worked extra
19:42:41 hard to put together the material tonight.
19:42:45 And secondly the only other challenging thing about
19:42:47 this size is I have been the one selected to walk you
19:42:50 through the project, and have you grasp the entire --
19:42:54 all the elements in a short amount of time.
19:42:56 So I am going to get started doing that.
19:43:06 Patty will have the site plan there as well as some
19:43:09 rendering.
19:43:09 All of the illustrations that I will show tonight are
19:43:14 in this package that we handed out.
19:43:20 So we'll start with the overall plan, and before, let
19:43:30 me just do this.

19:43:32 You have you have seen Heather and planning staff show
19:43:38 you this site.
19:43:40 So now I'm going to confuse you and turn it here to
19:43:43 the left.
19:43:44 Now north is pointing left.
19:43:46 So we can redefine it.
19:43:51 And surrounding the appointment on Monday.
19:43:53 Here is Meridian.
19:43:55 So the property fronts Meridian.
19:43:57 At 12th street here, Whiting, and Cumberland.
19:44:06 I am actually going to draw on this plan.
19:44:08 We thought it was important for you to kind of follow
19:44:10 through this process, and because it's very important
19:44:15 that this project has -- relates to its location, and
19:44:22 its surroundings.
19:44:24 Of course, it's important to do that.
19:44:26 But this one, we think, has much more responsibility
19:44:33 in that way.
19:44:37 It's practically four city blocks.
19:44:39 Although here it's -- this is the star ship property.
19:44:45 And this is the channel -- The Towers of Channelside
19:44:49 here.

19:44:50 With the towers physically located here and here.
19:44:56 And Meridian of course to the north, the Meridian
19:45:02 project, Meridian street Avenue here.
19:45:11 The main organizing tools in this -- in the project,
19:45:15 or for the project, is the southeast corner, which is
19:45:19 a real gateway corner, and we have worked hard to
19:45:24 design the project so that you are drawn into the
19:45:27 project from this corner by way of opening, dropping
19:45:34 the building down to this level.
19:45:37 So we have on the corner a very active retail plaza
19:45:46 with a small building floating in that plaza which
19:45:49 will draw people into the project, and in particular
19:45:55 pedestrians.
19:45:59 That will lead to the central core.
19:46:00 Now the central core has always been party to the
19:46:06 proposal, has always been an important part of the
19:46:08 plan.
19:46:08 In fact it led to the original name of the project,
19:46:11 Ybor square, not because of the shape but because it
19:46:13 is indicated to be a town square.
19:46:16 And we really believe this is something we can really
19:46:19 not only contribute to our project, but to the entire

19:46:27 community.
19:46:28 All the way across is this pedestrian link that was
19:46:30 mentioned before.
19:46:32 So here we have the square.
19:46:34 And then pedestrian access just south of the two lots.
19:46:39 And then across the north edge of the port authority
19:46:45 park, out of view, all the way to Channelside Drive,
19:46:51 where the streetcar stops.
19:46:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where was the roundabout
19:46:59 previously?
19:47:00 >>> The original roundabout was on a very -- right in
19:47:05 here, right in this area.
19:47:14 I believe we were adding an intersection here but the
19:47:19 street did not go all the way through 12th street.
19:47:21 >> So it was more a T?
19:47:24 >>> It was a T.
19:47:25 It did have vehicular circulation around it and you
19:47:27 will see when we get into the more detailed plans that
19:47:30 the -- we removed the circular circulation around
19:47:36 that.
19:47:47 Again talking about the magnitude of the size, we
19:47:49 really think this is an important issue.

19:47:52 We have the opportunity to create a real strong impact
19:47:55 on the -- not just this project but on the entire
19:47:59 community.
19:47:59 And my kids will be really disappointed.
19:48:04 I couldn't remember that, you know, Spider-Man's
19:48:08 uncle.
19:48:08 I can't remember Spider-Man's name.
19:48:10 When he met Spider-Man.
19:48:12 His uncle said to him where with great power comes
19:48:15 great responsibility.
19:48:16 And I really believe that this project because of its
19:48:19 size does have not just an opportunity to create
19:48:23 significance, but it has a responsibility to react to
19:48:29 the neighbors and to really make a significant
19:48:32 contribution to the community.
19:48:46 In responding to the surroundings, as mentioned
19:48:48 before, these are the tallest buildings adjacent to
19:48:51 our property.
19:48:51 And we have located our tallest building here.
19:48:57 The other denser buildings, taller buildings are, one,
19:49:00 along Meridian, and the project is adjacent to Victory
19:49:05 Lofts where we have 20 three-story townhouses.

19:49:18 Now we are going to go to this closer view.
19:49:20 Again, you have this in your package.
19:49:44 Again I am going to start at that important southeast
19:49:49 corner, or southwest corner of the property.
19:49:53 And you can see in more detail this very active
19:49:57 pedestrian retail and restaurant plaza, which we had a
19:50:06 small scale building, three story, retail on the
19:50:09 ground level, and restaurant, the next bridge to what
19:50:15 we are calling our signature building, which the
19:50:17 entire frontage here is retail as well on the lower
19:50:21 levels, as is the lower level of this residential
19:50:26 building, which is set back from the street as well.
19:50:31 This leads us into the central core.
19:50:35 And as you can see, there is no vehicular traffic
19:50:37 around this.
19:50:39 It is strictly pedestrian.
19:50:40 We had an interactive -- lots of cafes, enriched
19:50:49 landscaping and paving.
19:50:53 Again, across the north side of our property, and the
19:50:58 south side of Victory Lofts, to 12th street which
19:51:04 will then tie all the way across to Channelside Drive.
19:51:09 So we have the three-story buildings.

19:51:11 We have this building which is -- we nicknamed it our
19:51:15 signature building.
19:51:17 It's a double volume retail restaurant, has three
19:51:23 levels of parking, and then it has 12 levels of
19:51:27 residences above, equalling an 18-story building.
19:51:33 The tallest building again is retail and commercial on
19:51:36 the ground floor, and 27 levels of residences above
19:51:41 that, equalling 29 levels.
19:51:44 The hotel building is an eleven story building.
19:51:48 It is a detached building from the residential.
19:51:52 It's eleven stories starting at the ground.
19:51:54 Hotel lobby.
19:51:55 And restaurant on the ground floor.
19:51:59 It is a five story parking structure located on a
19:52:04 long -- along 12th street.
19:52:07 And the 8-story parking structure here serves retail
19:52:10 on the ground floor, and six levels of -- six or seven
19:52:16 levels of the parking for the residences.
19:52:19 The retail accesses this garage off of 11th
19:52:23 street.
19:52:24 And the residential at 12th street and ramps up to
19:52:29 the upper levels.

19:52:30 We have access to the hotel and the hotel parking from
19:52:34 the 11th street and 12th street.
19:52:36 And the reason for that is that we have structured the
19:52:39 property, the access in and out so that we can
19:52:44 literally close off the street here and all the way to
19:52:49 Cumberland for wonderful outdoor street activities,
19:52:55 arts festivities and music events.
19:53:01 In addition is this mid block pedestrian access which
19:53:05 connects us now following through all the way from
19:53:09 Channelside Drive, out to Meridian.
19:53:14 Now to the north of the property, we have reel
19:53:18 realigned -- right now there's an awkward intersection
19:53:22 at Whiting, where 11th does not align across the
19:53:27 street.
19:53:28 We have realigned that portion on the north side of
19:53:31 our property to the direct opposite of the north edge
19:53:38 there.
19:53:38 So that will relieve that awkwardness.
19:53:42 And again, along Victory Lofts property, we have
19:53:46 removed not only have we reduced the density
19:53:49 dramatically, but we have separated ourselves from
19:53:53 Victory Lofts, between 50 and 75 feet, and have these

19:53:58 three-story town homes structures here, which each has
19:54:03 a front entry, steps like an old brownstone.
19:54:08 They also have -- they have one-car garages within
19:54:11 them and they have their second floor parking space in
19:54:14 a covered area here, we have got additional
19:54:18 landscaping.
19:54:18 We even, just because of the geometry of this, we have
19:54:21 allowed most of these units on this side of Victory
19:54:24 Lofts to have it into this wonderful community.
19:54:32 Directly across from these town homes, along 11th
19:54:39 again, and they sit in front of the parking that we
19:54:45 provided for these residential buildings, six stories
19:54:48 of parking.
19:54:50 This is that amenity area.
19:54:56 And our residential buildings here and here are 19
19:55:00 floors above the parking, so we have -- that's a total
19:55:05 of 25 floors.
19:55:06 And we have separated rather than built a singular
19:55:11 mass which we separated this building.
19:55:19 Along Whiting and then turning the corner along
19:55:22 Meridian, because of this being a high traffic area,
19:55:25 we have addressed these buildings in a large-scale

19:55:33 artist kind of a way, which I'll show you.
19:55:36 And as opposed to different areas, we provided for
19:55:42 pedestrians around all the edges of the building, and
19:55:45 wonderful variety of experiences.
19:55:50 But we focused most leisurely pedestrian strolling
19:55:54 through the 11th street which we really believe
19:55:58 will be a natural tendency.
19:56:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question.
19:56:12 On the low-rise units --
19:56:15 >> The townhouses?
19:56:16 >>> Right.
19:56:16 Show me the street.
19:56:19 >> Show you the street?
19:56:20 11th street is this over here running through.
19:56:26 >>> So they will be fronting the street, facing
19:56:28 downtown.
19:56:29 >>> That's right.
19:56:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Facing to the west.
19:56:31 On the backside is an alley?
19:56:36 >>> It's not an alley.
19:56:37 It's a drive.
19:56:44 And these units will also have entries off the

19:56:46 backside as well.
19:56:49 They have a second car parking space here.
19:56:53 And a central covered structure.
19:56:55 >> Is that a garage-like structure?
19:56:58 I mean, everybody --
19:57:01 >>> The garage doors are in the backside of these
19:57:05 buildings.
19:57:06 But this is just an open-air covered parking.
19:57:11 Area.
19:57:12 >> And the people behind that and Victory Lofts will
19:57:16 be looking at what in relation top to the covered
19:57:19 parking structure?
19:57:21 >>> Well, the landscaping here is between the covered
19:57:25 parking and Victory Lofts building, what they'll
19:57:28 mostly be looking at.
19:57:30 This is above the ground about nine or ten feet and
19:57:33 those first units start way up.
19:57:35 We'll show you some elevations and how that relates.
19:57:38 But they would have to stand at the very edge of their
19:57:42 building and kind of peer down to even get a glimpse
19:57:46 of that parking.
19:57:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: (off microphone)

19:57:53 Into -- looks like it's the back of the buildings or
19:57:59 the front part of them?
19:58:00 The townhouses?
19:58:02 >>> Victory Lofts?
19:58:05 >> No, not the Victory Lofts but the townhouses
19:58:07 looking west.
19:58:08 It's that street there.
19:58:10 That you are talking about.
19:58:12 That's a street that will be -- automobiles will be
19:58:16 on?
19:58:19 >>> Yes.
19:58:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sort of like brownstone.
19:58:22 >>> Exactly.
19:58:23 Steps down to the street.
19:58:25 They are also off the ground about four or five feet
19:58:28 just because of our elevation.
19:58:29 >> And what's the distance between that street and the
19:58:35 beginning of the other building?
19:58:38 >>> Right here?
19:58:39 How much do we have between?
19:58:43 >>: Right.
19:58:44 >>> Does anybody -- know that offhand?

19:58:46 I would say that the right-of-way.
19:58:52 60 feet of right-of-way.
19:58:54 And an additional 10.
19:58:56 So about 80 feet.
19:58:57 >> Is it going to be like a 2-way street here?
19:58:59 That's going to be a 2-way street?
19:59:02 >>> It is.
19:59:02 And we have street parking along that as well,
19:59:04 parallel parking.
19:59:05 Lots of trees.
19:59:07 >> And landscaping?
19:59:09 >> Uh-huh.
19:59:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue.
19:59:19 >>> Again, this is a large project and it's always
19:59:21 difficult to get across the essence and the character
19:59:24 of the project for something that if we could build a
19:59:27 full-scale model that would be easy.
19:59:32 We have done -- we have these artist renderings to
19:59:36 illustrate the character.
19:59:39 This, Patty, if you want to point to the southeast
19:59:44 corner of the property, this is the open retail plaza
19:59:47 that we talked about.

19:59:48 The three-story structure here with retail on the
19:59:51 ground level and restaurants, it is connected.
19:59:56 There's a grid that connects it to what we are calling
19:59:59 our signature building here, which again is volume
20:00:03 space, commercial use, and it's tapped in by the
20:00:10 residential units.
20:00:11 And you can start to see some of the architectural
20:00:14 elements.
20:00:15 We are making reference to -- without hopefully
20:00:22 getting too Hokie, you can see like the landscaping,
20:00:29 paving, outdoor cafe areas, and you are looking then,
20:00:35 this is looking up Meridian to the north.
20:00:41 We have also provided photographs of those projects
20:00:45 that will again illustrate our unbuilt project.
20:00:50 And these photographs were the flavor we want there.
20:00:56 The architectural style, and these two may be more to
20:00:59 the experiences, the indoor outdoor, where you have
20:01:05 mall area and open plaza, interesting -- and this is a
20:01:13 round building.
20:01:14 It kind of gives you a sense of what that building
20:01:16 will feel like from the pedestrian's point of view.
20:01:22 The next image he would want to show you is the

20:01:25 pedestrian crossing, which is at Meridian.
20:01:33 Walking through here you would be able to get all the
20:01:35 way from Meridian all the way to Channelside.
20:01:44 Again draw people in and have bridges at each level
20:01:48 for access, one side to the other, again in which
20:01:54 paving, landscaping, and interesting architectural
20:01:58 elements.
20:02:03 The character images that we have for that, these
20:02:07 speak more to the feeling than they would the
20:02:09 architecture.
20:02:10 It has more of a traditional feel to the architecture.
20:02:13 But again you can see the paving, the nice
20:02:19 landscaping, and bridges at each level.
20:02:30 This is looking into the central plaza area, where we
20:02:34 have our interactive, and this is a fountain that can
20:02:40 be turned off so that this becomes a real gathering
20:02:42 area for the community.
20:02:46 And in the background you will see Victory Lofts
20:02:48 building, and the end of the townhouse buildings, and
20:02:51 heading north along 11th street.
20:02:55 To the right are outdoor covered areas for dining,
20:02:59 associated with the hotel.

20:03:06 And again, images that illustrate.
20:03:09 You have seen some of these interactive fountains.
20:03:12 Disney has them.
20:03:13 Lowry Park Zoo has one.
20:03:15 They are just fun things that pop up out of the
20:03:18 ground.
20:03:18 You can tie music to them.
20:03:23 And then they can actually just disappear, and you
20:03:27 will have the area you can walk right over, as well as
20:03:29 some of the wonderful landscaping, and plaza park
20:03:33 areas that we have in mind.
20:03:42 This is the view looking from Meridian street, looking
20:03:46 from 12th street, back into that fountain area.
20:03:50 Fountain area here.
20:03:51 And again, just to show the landscaping and pedestrian
20:03:56 walkway.
20:03:58 This will go across 12th and connect to
20:04:02 Channelside.
20:04:03 And we are beginning to show you what we have in mind.
20:04:06 This is a parking for the hotel which we are fronting
20:04:09 with artist display areas, and interesting row work
20:04:15 and screening on top of the building.

20:04:20 Again, images that start to show those things,
20:04:24 pedestrian, walkway, heavily landscaped, lots of
20:04:28 activity on those.
20:04:29 And here, it's a little hard to see, are the
20:04:33 storefront areas that are used for artist display.
20:04:44 And here is a view looking from the north of the
20:04:47 property down to the south on 11th street, the
20:04:55 townhouse units here.
20:05:02 Illustrations.
20:05:03 Fairly mailed.
20:05:04 Central structures.
20:05:06 And then the last of these renderings is the corner of
20:05:11 Whiting and Meridian, where I talked about doing
20:05:15 something very bold and artistic here.
20:05:19 We have illuminated light panels on this section, as
20:05:25 well as kind of metal finishes along the high speed
20:05:31 traffic area along Meridian.
20:05:40 Now, inside your packets, we have all the different
20:05:44 views, and we certainly can walk through those.
20:05:46 But I think that it would be best if we let our other
20:05:50 speakers have some time, and use those to answer
20:05:55 questions.

20:05:55 They are intended to show you the overall
20:05:58 architectural style, and, as requested, we have placed
20:06:02 the building in our 3-D -- in the 3-D model.
20:06:09 This is the view of -- here you see the channels of
20:06:14 tower side, and the people square project here.
20:06:19 And we have got several other views of that.
20:06:21 But I am going to let Michael English speak now.
20:06:34 >>> Madam Chairman, members of council.
20:06:36 I work at 2205 north 20th street in Ybor City.
20:06:40 I'll be brief.
20:06:45 We would like to speak to you to conclude our
20:06:47 presentation.
20:06:48 You may recall that we worked with Tampa original Ybor
20:06:55 square plan.
20:06:56 It was a good plan.
20:06:57 It was an exciting plan and we liked it.
20:06:59 We also recently have completed the Channel District's
20:07:03 strategic plan.
20:07:04 We worked very, very closely with our clients, and it
20:07:13 was a very important project for us.
20:07:15 We are in a delicate position.
20:07:17 And we believe in the plan we wrote for you and you

20:07:19 adopted.
20:07:20 So we can't really represent someone who we think
20:07:23 isn't meeting the spirit of that plan.
20:07:24 And our clients have been very gracious and generous.
20:07:28 This is a very exciting project.
20:07:30 It's a little bigger but it is offering some wonderful
20:07:33 things.
20:07:33 The ability to create a mid-block connection from
20:07:36 Meridian all the way across 12th and 11th to
20:07:40 Channelside to the streetcar stop may well be one of
20:07:43 the most important public contributions any developer
20:07:46 will make to you in the next several years in the
20:07:49 Channel District.
20:07:52 I wanted to just mention the ownership maintenance.
20:07:57 To handle maintenance.
20:07:58 The whole purpose in our building the system was to
20:08:03 incentivize developers to give you very important
20:08:06 public spaces and the ability to have the public use
20:08:08 them virtually in perpetuity or at least for 30 years,
20:08:12 whichever comes first.
20:08:14 The ability to maintain those is not available from
20:08:17 the public.

20:08:18 The City of Tampa cannot maintain those spaces even
20:08:21 though your citizens will be using it.
20:08:23 So we took a very conservative approach estimate.
20:08:26 If you look through this report, several man hours per
20:08:30 week for some of these spaces for 30 years.
20:08:33 Ware not escalating the costs.
20:08:35 We are using only current values.
20:08:37 So they look like a big number but it's really a small
20:08:39 number.
20:08:41 A project of this size is going to spend millions and
20:08:43 millions of dollars maintaining what they have both
20:08:46 public and private.
20:08:48 >> Let me interrupt you.
20:08:53 As you stated, you and your firm helped draft this
20:08:56 document, the streak action plan, which I assume from
20:08:59 what you're saying, what your clients are saying, has
20:09:03 been the guide for doing this.
20:09:05 >>> Yes, it has.
20:09:06 >> So therefore -- and I think it's the first one.
20:09:09 It's come back in.
20:09:11 And, therefore, it sets a strong precedent.
20:09:15 So I've looked through chapter 5 that Mr. Davis was so

20:09:21 nice to lend to me.
20:09:22 And I don't see any reference in here to maintenance.
20:09:26 And correct me if I am wrong.
20:09:27 Since you wrote it.
20:09:30 >>> It made no specific reference.
20:09:34 It was an issue that remained unresolved after
20:09:38 conversations.
20:09:38 We knew maintenance was an issue.
20:09:41 We found out as we worked through the adoption of that
20:09:43 plan, as a city park it was not going to be made
20:09:48 available for TIF fund use.
20:09:50 So, yes, it's an important policy decision.
20:09:53 It is not contrary to the plan.
20:09:55 It is simply not addressed in the plan.
20:09:58 There are --
20:09:59 >> Well, you had an exhaustive list.
20:10:03 I would say you had an exhaustive list of the bonus
20:10:08 types of things that we are looking at.
20:10:11 And council, as you might recall, I'm reading on page
20:10:17 5-6, some of the bonus things talked about public open
20:10:20 space, public parks, bicycle accommodations, artist
20:10:28 space.

20:10:29 I'm just saying it was a very exhaustive list that was
20:10:32 included and maintenance was never one of them.
20:10:35 So if in fact we decide to include maintenance, we
20:10:38 need to do it with completely in the open, with full
20:10:41 discussion, knowing that it sets a precedent.
20:10:45 >>> Absolutely.
20:10:45 >>: For all future projects, and that, you know,
20:10:50 that's a major policy decision.
20:10:51 The other part that I'm very confused about is I
20:10:55 understand multiplying it times ten for a construction
20:11:01 value, I'm a little confused on the math that you
20:11:08 would take the 30 year thing and multiply again.
20:11:10 That seems like double dipping to me.
20:11:12 I don't know if you have your map guy here.
20:11:14 There he is.
20:11:18 >> Why don't I let him discuss that?
20:11:20 Let me finish this piece.
20:11:22 We always do maintenance, was an issue that had been
20:11:26 addressed.
20:11:26 We always assumed it could cover that so a matter of
20:11:32 policy said --
20:11:33 >> that was never addressed by us in the CRA.

20:11:35 How could the policy be established without the CRA
20:11:37 talking about it?
20:11:39 >>> As we were going through, that's what we were told
20:11:41 by the city administration, was not something we would
20:11:44 be willing to do.
20:11:45 And didn't feel that any special maintenance should be
20:11:49 given to any neighborhood in the city.
20:11:52 So that a neighborhood supported by TIF would have
20:11:56 better maintenance of the public areas than a
20:11:58 neighborhood not supported by TIF.
20:12:00 And we just didn't know how to do it.
20:12:03 >> Where is the guarantee in these documents that this
20:12:05 property would be maintained for those 30 years?
20:12:07 Is it part of the development?
20:12:09 >> Part of the development agreement, absolutely.
20:12:10 >> Is there a development agreement?
20:12:12 >> There will have to be one.
20:12:18 >> This is an attachment to the site plan.
20:12:20 So it becomes a site plan.
20:12:26 This is the site plan condition until we get that code
20:12:28 enacted that addresses it.
20:12:30 >> So how is it enforced?

20:12:32 >> Just like any other.
20:12:37 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
20:12:40 The way it's set up currently in front of you would
20:12:43 set it up as a condition of the site plan development
20:12:46 and it would be something that would be enforced
20:12:48 through code enforcement actually and not through a
20:12:52 separate type of enforcement process.
20:13:03 >> Chris Jones, economic advisors, Kensington lake
20:13:07 circle.
20:13:09 Yes, I have been sworn.
20:13:11 As Mr. English referred to again, you're absolutely
20:13:14 right, commissioner Dingfelder, it's not within
20:13:16 section 5 of the strategic action plan.
20:13:19 The issues pertaining to maintenance.
20:13:21 Although there has been discussion with the developer,
20:13:25 planning staff, or our planning staff and Mr. Chen's
20:13:31 office regarding whether or not that would be
20:13:32 implemented.
20:13:33 But let me make this real simple for you.
20:13:35 The 974,000 dollars that's shown as line item number 2
20:13:40 in the list for maintenance, and the 273 -- the 974
20:13:45 for item 2, the maintenance of the expanded pedestrian

20:13:48 sidewalk and landscape, and item number, I believe
20:13:51 it's 4, 273,600 for maintenance of the port easement,
20:13:56 those two maintenance issues combined over the 30-year
20:13:59 period total $1.24 million.
20:14:02 If you run that through the sausage grinder, if you
20:14:06 will, at the 10 to 1 ratio, bonuses of 9,500 square
20:14:14 feet.
20:14:14 You can throw it out entirely and this project still
20:14:17 clears by a significant threshold in the bonus.
20:14:20 I'm not here to sit here and debate the policy issue
20:14:22 in terms of whether or not maintenance should or
20:14:26 should not be included.
20:14:27 What I can tell you is that we used -- when we
20:14:31 calculated maintenance costs, we did not escalate
20:14:34 salaries or prices for maintenance items over a period
20:14:39 of time.
20:14:40 They are on a present value basis so they are
20:14:43 conservative.
20:14:44 But again, even if we come to some -- or you all come
20:14:48 to some sort of conclusion at the end of the day, that
20:14:50 it shouldn't be included with regards to this project,
20:14:54 they still have considerably more than what they need

20:14:57 to achieve the bonus thresholds.
20:15:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
20:15:01 But my question -- that's a good answer.
20:15:03 But my question is, also, I thought the rationale of
20:15:07 using the full multiplier related to, quote,
20:15:13 construction costs.
20:15:14 And how do you feel with 30-year operating expenses
20:15:18 and then translate that back to construction costs?
20:15:20 And why is it logical to use that same ten-fold
20:15:25 multiplier?
20:15:26 >>> It's a very good issue you bring up and there
20:15:29 probably needs to be a bit more study done on that
20:15:31 because the reality is that it's not quite an apples
20:15:34 to oranges comparison.
20:15:36 And what was done in this process to try to keep it as
20:15:40 capitalized as you conceivably could would not
20:15:45 escalate ongoing maintenance costs on an annual basis
20:15:48 so therefore to try to look at them as much as
20:15:50 possible, as they are in current day dollars.
20:15:53 But having said that, I don't disagree with what
20:15:56 you're saying.
20:15:57 It's not from a dollars and cents standpoint.

20:16:00 It's not a perfect apples to oranges comparison.
20:16:02 I think the larger issue is the fact that if we didn't
20:16:06 want the revenues from the TIF going to cover
20:16:10 maintenance, and the crab man was willing to make
20:16:14 commitments on a project by project basis, to commit
20:16:18 to maintenance over a period of time, that it was
20:16:23 reasonable for some sort of incentive to be
20:16:26 implemented.
20:16:26 And what we tried to do was basically again put it
20:16:29 within the framework of this model, because we didn't
20:16:32 escalate value that was close as we could come to
20:16:35 capitalizing an ongoing maintenance issue but it's not
20:16:40 perfect.
20:16:41 It could be subject to further discussion, and it's a
20:16:44 great point you brought up.
20:16:45 But again at the end of the day with regards to this
20:16:47 project even if we do eliminate it, it more than
20:16:50 clears.
20:16:57 >> Mr. Dingfelder, he's right that it's not a big
20:17:02 issue on this project.
20:17:03 But I want you to really think about this.
20:17:07 It's a important issue to the neighborhood.

20:17:08 If you want these amenities someone has to pay for
20:17:11 them.
20:17:12 And you or the city would not be the payor.
20:17:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If it was such an important issue,
20:17:24 why wasn't it something that came right out of the
20:17:26 gate, from our staff and or you guys to say, now what?
20:17:29 We didn't talk about this.
20:17:30 Maybe we all forgot about it when we were dealing with
20:17:33 the original plan. But now we need to deal with it.
20:17:36 So let's do it up front, instead of John Dingfelder
20:17:40 having to dig it out and waste everybody's time.
20:17:42 >> I apologize for that.
20:17:44 I should take personal responsibility.
20:17:48 It's the realization that the TIF wasn't going to
20:17:51 cover it.
20:17:51 >> As Mr. Garcia said, we think it's a good plan.
20:17:58 We think it needs the plan.
20:18:03 Done on the -- also with the designer for the Channel
20:18:09 District guidelines for streetscape.
20:18:12 So it's a very good project.
20:18:13 It is consistent, I would like to ask him to come
20:18:23 forward.

20:18:23 >> Darian Johnson, and I have been sworn.
20:18:28 I figured I would forget that.
20:18:30 But I think it's important, it wasn't conceived in a
20:18:35 vacuum, the process of designing Seaboard square, we
20:18:39 met with neighbors, joint property owners, certainly
20:18:41 the city staff.
20:18:43 We renewed the approved strategic action plan, to
20:18:48 determine the type of development that we felt would
20:18:53 be consistent with the vision, the overall vision of
20:18:56 Channel District, and what we quickly found out was
20:19:00 the fact that there wasn't any consensus as to what
20:19:04 the vision of the Channel District, it was somewhat
20:19:09 frustrating, but during our involvement over the last
20:19:14 year, we have seen an amazing evolution of ideas about
20:19:19 how the Channel District is something we can all be
20:19:21 proud of.
20:19:21 Like hard work and compromise by public and private
20:19:24 individuals, through lots of hard work and it appears
20:19:31 the consensus exists for the vision of the Channel
20:19:34 District, the design of Seaboard square has been
20:19:38 inspired by that vision, and it's a vision that
20:19:40 includes density with human scale that contributes to

20:19:43 the Channel District, self-sustaining, pedestrian,
20:19:48 open areas, and to host outdoor event, hotel, public
20:19:57 art features, dog walk areas all of which really
20:20:01 contribute not just --
20:20:03 >>GWEN MILLER: You need to wrap it up.
20:20:04 Your time is up.
20:20:06 >>> Sure.
20:20:06 Okay.
20:20:08 That wraps it up, I guess.
20:20:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:20:11 wants to speak on this item?
20:20:14 Item 15.
20:20:15 If you are going to speak, come on up.
20:20:22 Come on and speak.
20:20:27 >>> MESANNA, 101-12th street, yes, I have been
20:20:32 sworn.
20:20:32 This isn't the first time I have been up here.
20:20:36 I have been following Channel District for several
20:20:38 years now.
20:20:39 Lived there, this December it will be two years.
20:20:41 So I have seen a lot of different types of projects.
20:20:46 I have done a lot of personal investigation.

20:20:47 I have spoken to the Sembler group, and gene defreeze
20:20:53 has been very accommodating and I was very happy when
20:20:55 I saw some of the elements that both myself and
20:20:58 neighbors and other people that live in the victory
20:21:00 building have suggested that we would like to see not
20:21:02 only in the Channelside community, but in this
20:21:06 project.
20:21:07 And they are there.
20:21:08 We are very happy to see Tampa density is very much on
20:21:11 the south side of the district.
20:21:13 And the points that this would make, another gathering
20:21:18 place, outside of the Channelside entertainment
20:21:22 district is very interesting because it might be a
20:21:24 little more sophisticated, the Channel District has a
20:21:26 lot of bars, and a little too much of a party
20:21:29 atmosphere so it would be great.
20:21:31 Plenty of ways to get through.
20:21:34 Straight through the Channelside.
20:21:37 Sembler has shown a great deal of respect for the
20:21:39 community and for the residents. I just want to tell
20:21:42 you that they have done that.
20:21:43 I also respect the aspect of the complexity of the

20:21:46 design, the architecture is wonderful.
20:21:49 The mixed use.
20:21:50 All the different types of features.
20:21:52 The one thing that there was one objection about the
20:21:55 open ended statements as to whether or not there would
20:21:58 be changes in the plan.
20:22:00 I just want to make sure that the city has stated that
20:22:03 those have been resolved, that those have been
20:22:05 resolved, then I would remove any kind of objection I
20:22:08 would have or any kind -- it seems like it's a project
20:22:13 that will take quite a few years to come to fruition,
20:22:17 that I would be excited to see it.
20:22:18 I want to let you know I will be staring right out my
20:22:22 back door when I step out on my patio, that's what I
20:22:25 will see.
20:22:25 So it will directly impact me.
20:22:27 So for me to stand up here and say that I support it,
20:22:30 it does take a lot.
20:22:31 So I do support the project.
20:22:33 And I hope you do vote yes.
20:22:36 Thank you.
20:22:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

20:22:38 Next.
20:22:42 >> Of I'm Jeanie bright and I'm president of the
20:22:45 Channel District council and I have been sworn.
20:22:48 And I'm speaking for the whole Channel District
20:22:51 council as we have met and talked.
20:22:54 We think it's a great project.
20:22:56 And we are all for it 100% and we just wanted to get
20:23:00 it started.
20:23:01 Thank you.
20:23:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thanks for coming down and all your
20:23:07 work over the years in that community.
20:23:09 You've heard this discussion about the maintenance
20:23:11 issue.
20:23:12 And basically, they are advocating not only for this
20:23:17 project but for all future projects that the
20:23:21 maintenance costs that the developer would pay would
20:23:26 be included as part of the bonus density calculations,
20:23:31 as compared to the TIF paying for it, as compared to
20:23:35 nobody paying for it, the developer paying for it but
20:23:38 not getting credit for it.
20:23:40 Do you or the council have an opinion on it?
20:23:44 Were you aware?

20:23:45 >> I was not aware of it, John.
20:23:46 To me, I'm not a lawyer.
20:23:48 But from a common sense point of view, I don't know
20:23:54 why all the TIF money can't be used for maintenance.
20:23:59 I mean, Drew Park is going to need maintenance.
20:24:02 East Tampa is going to need maintenance.
20:24:04 West Tampa -- you know, they are going to need it so
20:24:06 why not use the money that has gone from the special
20:24:12 taxing for the people that are living in the area to
20:24:15 maintain that area?
20:24:17 It makes sense to me.
20:24:19 I don't know the legalities involved.
20:24:22 I think you all can pretty well decide whether the TIF
20:24:26 money is used for that or not.
20:24:32 I'm not sure exactly how that works.
20:24:34 But just from somebody that lives in the neighborhood,
20:24:39 I'm perfectly happy with the TIF money being used to
20:24:42 maintain things.
20:24:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:24:46 Next.
20:24:52 >>> Janell grainy, south 12th street.
20:24:57 You asked about photographs.

20:24:59 There is one perspective rendering.
20:25:03 As well as if there's the opportunity to go through
20:25:07 what the community actually does look like as far as
20:25:10 the three-story building, when you go down the street,
20:25:16 this is established, these are two-story.
20:25:19 So even though you are seeing aerial views before, you
20:25:22 weren't given the full opportunity.
20:25:23 But there is -- it hasn't gone all high-rise.
20:25:30 And we do want that change.
20:25:34 We spoke with the city at 3:00 today and we were told
20:25:36 that nothing had consistently changed with the
20:25:39 objection.
20:25:40 We first heard that this evening.
20:25:42 There are only three key points that weren't very
20:25:47 concerned with.
20:25:47 The three key points which were brought out on pages
20:25:51 page 3, findings of staff, the line that says, one of
20:25:57 the public amenities the developer is offering in
20:26:00 exchange for increased height in density.
20:26:02 We were asking about bonus and we asked about 3:00 and
20:26:07 the administration still hadn't.
20:26:09 The other concern, if you look on the site plan, and I

20:26:11 think somebody else mentioned it, too, two points.
20:26:14 Point number 5 stating that this zoning petition is
20:26:16 filed on February 14, 2006, and it's subject to the
20:26:20 requirements of the City of Tampa in effect at the
20:26:23 time.
20:26:24 As well as point number 39.
20:26:27 The architectural rendering, elevations and exhibits
20:26:32 submitted in association with the rezoning application
20:26:35 are provided for illustrative purposes in order to
20:26:38 convey the overall architectural design approach of
20:26:41 the project.
20:26:41 The overall integrity of this architectural approach
20:26:45 will be implemented in the project.
20:26:47 However, architectural modifications to the building's
20:26:51 shape, size, and orientation on the subject site shall
20:26:55 be permitted
20:26:56 Providing the zoning standards otherwise imposed
20:26:59 herein, height, setback, open space and parking are
20:27:02 met and the overall integrity of the building design
20:27:05 approach is met.
20:27:06 Without being on the site plan as condition.
20:27:09 It's almost like a "get out of jail free" card.

20:27:12 Everything we are being shown can be changed.
20:27:15 And also, it is clearly stated in what the city gave
20:27:18 you, that it is their concern, too.
20:27:27 It wasn't addressed this evening and we were very
20:27:29 surprised after speaking with them at 3:00 today,
20:27:32 being told that hasn't changed.
20:27:33 Now if I can briefly read the fact that we actively
20:27:38 work with the developer through the Channel District
20:27:40 council, through the Channel District subteams with
20:27:42 Mary Alvarez attending and being represented other
20:27:45 DRC, sitting with other agencies from day one, and
20:27:51 what the administration was asking as well.
20:27:54 Right?
20:27:54 The administration, we all have many unanswered
20:27:57 questions and are in agreement with the same concerns
20:27:59 that are in this document tonight.
20:28:01 And we agree with the objections that they stated
20:28:04 there.
20:28:04 But if the developer would address the four points,
20:28:07 and would agree to all others put aside we could
20:28:11 actually support the project.
20:28:12 And what we mean by that is, those two points of

20:28:15 addressing the fact of the issue number 39, we need to
20:28:20 know what's going forward, that it's not going to
20:28:24 change, and we also worked with them, stating that we
20:28:27 were looking for a bonus structure of one thing that
20:28:29 we wanted was shown very nicely in this rendering,
20:28:33 which is the kind of bonus structure being a park.
20:28:37 Because there's so little on that plot of land that's
20:28:40 right here.
20:28:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Time is up, Janell.
20:28:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn?
20:28:47 >>> Yes, I was.
20:28:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question.
20:28:50 Janell, would you put that up again, the last one?
20:28:53 >>> Sure.
20:28:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What were you talking about a park?
20:28:57 >>> A park where they were planning to put the town
20:29:00 homes because the town homes themselves, when you look
20:29:02 at the aerial view, the plot of land that's here
20:29:09 central to the community, before the CRA meeting, we
20:29:12 were all saying two things we would like as a
20:29:14 community, we were concerned about infrastructure and
20:29:17 a large recreational open space.

20:29:19 With all of the density that's put in here, and to be
20:29:21 honest, they are saying, if we can go hire, fine.
20:29:28 What we are actually saying is if you can keep this
20:29:30 whatever, and with the low densities here, why not
20:29:33 donate that as a park to the community so all the
20:29:36 community you saw in the photos, the low rise down the
20:29:39 street, you have the EBB and flow.
20:29:42 Someplace we can be on the Fourth of July.
20:29:44 It brings the community together.
20:29:45 And actually in their plan, when it goes over, it
20:29:48 actually fits the FEIN area for that side of land
20:29:55 decreased what's been on this from a building to less
20:29:58 structures to less structures.
20:30:02 So bonus, working with the community still, you
20:30:05 haven't voted on any changes calculation.
20:30:08 It will be a wonderful contribution to everyone.
20:30:11 Because in addition to two twin towers that are going
20:30:14 up, if you recall, this was the point where the cruise
20:30:18 ships come in.
20:30:19 If you put this structure in front of it, you are null
20:30:22 and voiding what you approved those for.
20:30:24 So if we are not going to have those as the pinnacle

20:30:27 and have all this wonderful interaction, let's have
20:30:29 wonderful neighborhood interaction through a community
20:30:32 park, too.
20:30:32 So the area was broken by the smaller buildings, by
20:30:38 the area across the street from it as you can see
20:30:40 here, this two-story brick building, these aren't
20:30:55 large buildings in the center.
20:30:57 There are a few large buildings but they are not that
20:31:00 large.
20:31:00 This is the parking structure.
20:31:01 It only goes up so many stories.
20:31:03 As well as if you want top see when the towers went
20:31:06 up, the people who are buying in those towers also
20:31:09 believed that they are pinnacle points, that there is
20:31:14 going to be ebb and flow.
20:31:17 You talked about nothing big going in the center.
20:31:19 So it's going to be a shock to them.
20:31:21 So the density is going to come in and you are going
20:31:23 to bring in these big buildings.
20:31:25 We do rely on the administration and on City Council
20:31:27 to give us good development.
20:31:29 So if things are changing for the better, let's also

20:31:32 get some bonus contribution.
20:31:34 And I suggest to address the fact that assessment for
20:31:39 beautification of flower pots, cleaning streets,
20:31:42 et cetera.
20:31:43 That's another place to clean things.
20:31:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, thank you.
20:31:48 Next.
20:31:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Keep saying all day long, have to
20:32:01 get on the payroll.
20:32:03 >>> Henry Lewis.
20:32:04 I have been sworn in.
20:32:05 I'm a member of the CDC council and resident and
20:32:10 business owner for 30 years in the Channel District.
20:32:12 I would like to take a moment to thank the Sembler
20:32:14 company for working with the CDC and all of its
20:32:17 neighbors.
20:32:18 Especially the new design and layout.
20:32:21 It brings a whole new energy to the Channel District.
20:32:24 I think it would be very exciting to the City of Tampa
20:32:26 as well.
20:32:27 In regards to the new design versus the old designs, I
20:32:34 think they have been extremely generous to the local

20:32:38 neighbors, particularly people at Victory Lofts.
20:32:41 The original project, if you recall, the building
20:32:45 along Meridian would have been eight stories solid
20:32:48 brick wall.
20:32:49 That's what they would have looked at.
20:32:51 Nothing but a brick wall.
20:32:57 Under the new plan they only have I think 38 feet or
20:33:02 40-foot in front of them and then the structure
20:33:03 immediate immediately on Meridian has view corridors
20:33:07 which they never would have had before. Zoning of 60
20:33:12 feet and not 80 feet.
20:33:14 So it is tremendous.
20:33:15 I think the Sembler company has gone out of their way
20:33:18 and been most generous which they did not have to be.
20:33:21 They have spoken, I believe, with every single
20:33:23 resident in the Channel District.
20:33:24 There's been a lot of time -- and I think this project
20:33:29 really is -- a lot of consideration, and they are
20:33:33 five-star development companies, unlike a lot of
20:33:37 people who do come in this town, with big ideas, and
20:33:40 wonderful plans, that never do anything.
20:33:44 Thank you very much.

20:33:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone else going to speak?
20:33:46 Petitioner, do you want rebuttal?
20:33:49 >>> If I may make a clarification on one of the
20:33:51 petitioner's comments.
20:33:52 As I stated previously, all the objections have been
20:33:54 removed, albeit not graphically.
20:33:58 The objections were in my report but petitioner has
20:34:01 agreed to remove those notes consistent with staff
20:34:04 comments.
20:34:06 And the reason I haven't received a submittal is
20:34:14 because the plans can't be changed until I've received
20:34:18 a new submittal after this hearing.
20:34:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:34:27 >>> Just two issues on rebuttal.
20:34:28 First of all, I would like to say for purposes of the
20:34:31 record, we have removed objections.
20:34:32 We have a waiver outstanding on a parking issue but we
20:34:36 have removed those other objections and that sentence
20:34:38 what the continuance is in part to give us an
20:34:41 opportunity to reflect those on the site plan.
20:34:53 I would like to have Michael English approach you
20:34:55 again to speak to the expansiveness of the public

20:34:59 areas in this project, and the goal and focus of
20:35:06 bringing those areas into design.
20:35:08 Michael?
20:35:12 >>> Michael English.
20:35:13 I'll try to be brief.
20:35:15 I think that you have seen the package and you
20:35:18 understand the pedestrianway, the crossing all the way
20:35:24 through the district, which begins at two points on
20:35:27 Meridian street, mid block, from the corner of
20:35:30 Meridian and Channelside, and then continues from
20:35:35 11th to 12th.
20:35:36 The developer has made an agreement with the port
20:35:38 authority to lease an additional public way through
20:35:43 that next block, to landscape it and maintain it.
20:35:46 That is the single-most important thing they can do in
20:35:49 terms of public open space in this location.
20:35:51 Mission to that, they are offering almost $4, 000,000
20:35:57 worth of public art, which is not presently required
20:36:00 of them in the district.
20:36:02 They are providing an almost 20,000 square feet of
20:36:05 public open space in their project for the use of the
20:36:07 public.

20:36:08 And 25 that you square feet of retail, which is
20:36:12 something of a risk these days.
20:36:14 All of those were issues that we did identify in the
20:36:16 plan.
20:36:17 And felt very strongly about.
20:36:19 In addition to all the key basic design elements, this
20:36:23 is going to be a very basic design element to walk
20:36:27 around the square.
20:36:28 Unless you have any other questions, I can't
20:36:30 overemphasize the fact that I think they are doing the
20:36:34 right thing and offering you a very high quality
20:36:36 project that will create really a neighborhood center
20:36:40 in the south end of the Channel District for decades
20:36:42 to come.
20:36:42 Thank you.
20:36:44 >>CHAIRMAN: Any questions by council members?
20:36:45 Mr. Dingfelder?
20:36:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mary has already seen it so she had
20:36:52 a jump on it.
20:36:54 Mr. English, Janell brings up a good question.
20:36:58 We had lengthy discussion busy the need for park
20:37:03 settings in Channelside.

20:37:04 >>> Right.
20:37:06 >> But yet no project -- I don't recall a project
20:37:14 having a significant amount of green park space.
20:37:18 You're talking about open space, which appears to me
20:37:20 to be, you know, concrete with some trees, and that
20:37:25 sort of thing, which is all fine and good.
20:37:27 But is there any greenery on this project?
20:37:31 >>> There's a lot of greenery.
20:37:32 >> I mean grass.
20:37:34 >>> There is grass.
20:37:35 There are three dog park areas.
20:37:38 There is a fountain.
20:37:40 But this is urban open space.
20:37:41 It isn't a park.
20:37:43 It wasn't proposed as a park.
20:37:45 But I will tell you, you referred to Martin which has
20:37:52 a significant park, not one but two proposals south of
20:37:57 Kennedy offering a neighborhood park.
20:37:58 So you will be hearing -- and one is and one is not.
20:38:03 >> We have been talking about a major park.
20:38:04 This is one of the major chunks of land in Channelside
20:38:08 that we haven't approved yet.

20:38:15 >>> A good size park on the east side of channel
20:38:17 drive, either on the property owned by the city or the
20:38:21 port or some joint development of a park as the other
20:38:25 side of Channelside develops.
20:38:27 >> Show me on that site plan the major grassy areas
20:38:32 that you're talking about.
20:38:39 >>> Along Meridian street.
20:38:44 >> That's concrete.
20:38:45 It's a walkway.
20:38:46 It's concrete.
20:38:49 >>> (off microphone)
20:39:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think that's the bottom line.
20:39:05 That's what I was asking.
20:39:08 What you said off microphone is you are not
20:39:10 proposing --
20:39:10 >>> We are not proposing a neighborhood park.
20:39:13 Other developers are.
20:39:14 We are proposing something we think is at least as
20:39:17 important, which is that whole mid block crossing for
20:39:20 pedestrians in an area that will desperately need it
20:39:23 in future years.
20:39:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chen, they kite that if you go

20:39:32 to the calculation page dated August 10th, the map
20:39:37 guy indicated that could you walk off the maintenance
20:39:40 thing and they still meet the F.A.R. bonus situation.
20:39:47 >>> I heard a statement to that.
20:39:49 >> For purposes of saying that's true, if that's true,
20:39:54 then maybe we are better off lopping off the
20:39:57 maintenance off that page so we don't set a precedent
20:40:01 that we really haven't wrestled with as a full council
20:40:05 and CRA.
20:40:05 Do you have any comments on that?
20:40:07 >>> Well, I think it's something that will have to be
20:40:10 addressed, and frankly, again, as the -- as the plan,
20:40:17 the recommendations in theories expressed in the plan
20:40:20 get translated to the realities of zoning code and so
20:40:23 forth.
20:40:23 I think you're going to find staff attempts to provide
20:40:27 clarification and definitions of how things eventually
20:40:31 evolve which reflect from the recommendations of the
20:40:33 plan.
20:40:35 I think that the maintenance in the district is a very
20:40:39 important piece.
20:40:40 It's a piece that I have spoken with the planning team

20:40:46 several times during the course of our interaction as
20:40:49 the plan evolved.
20:40:53 There's any number of ways that the maintenance
20:40:56 through the district can be addressed.
20:41:00 It could be addressed through TIF.
20:41:02 I think that it's not advisable that it be done that
20:41:05 way.
20:41:07 >> Why?
20:41:09 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I think that it is utilizing -- by the
20:41:14 way, I want top clarify, as part of the answer, the
20:41:18 maintenance being described here is not just project
20:41:26 maintenance.
20:41:26 They are being given bonus with their application
20:41:28 because they have enhanced landscaping above today's
20:41:35 standards.
20:41:35 Okay.
20:41:36 These are things that were not part of a requirement.
20:41:41 These are things that are special.
20:41:42 So the maintenance associated with those special
20:41:46 items, I think that it is not appropriate, and you are
20:41:52 the CRA board, so you will be making the policy
20:41:56 decision whether it's here or in other projects.

20:41:58 But it seems like it's not appropriate to utilize TIF
20:42:03 to pay for the maintenance of a standard that is above
20:42:06 and beyond the reach of the general community.
20:42:12 There are other ways to create it, such as special
20:42:17 taxing districts.
20:42:18 Everything from CDD concept, as you heard and reviewed
20:42:23 in the context associated with the heights plan.
20:42:27 There is a CDD component where the community is taking
20:42:31 a voluntary self-imposed tax to pay for that broader,
20:42:35 overall community standard.
20:42:37 There are also areas in the heights plan where the
20:42:39 city recognizes an obligation to carry the
20:42:44 maintenance, and I think parks, for instance, is one
20:42:47 of them.
20:42:47 In the Channel District, I would expect the
20:42:50 full-fledged park areas involved in the Channel
20:42:53 District.
20:42:54 I would respect to see our Parks Department probably
20:42:56 come in and maintain as we do parks across the city.
20:43:01 But clearly, this maintenance issue is very important,
20:43:03 because it's like you can create a standard and
20:43:09 express preference for very nice landscaping.

20:43:14 Planting of flowers and all that.
20:43:15 The question is, what happens to those next month?
20:43:19 What do they look like next year?
20:43:23 And you really need to have a capital source that's
20:43:27 going to go through there.
20:43:29 And the capital source, can't be a CDD, it could be
20:43:34 TIF.
20:43:34 Is this something that needs to be done as it involved
20:43:37 at this point where do you not actually have a zoning
20:43:39 code and there has not been a dialogue with the CRA
20:43:43 board as far as use of TIF moneys and so forth, it
20:43:46 felt like this was an appropriate way to address it
20:43:49 and was an acceptable way to deal with it.
20:43:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The multifamily residential, is that
20:43:57 going to be condos?
20:44:01 Are those going to be condos?
20:44:04 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Well, there's a combination of condos
20:44:06 and townhouses.
20:44:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The reason I'm asking, if it's going
20:44:10 to be condos, you could have a condo association in
20:44:13 there.
20:44:13 >>> You could.

20:44:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: They do have vacancies for landscaping
20:44:19 and common ground, and --
20:44:24 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I expect you will find that, Mrs.
20:44:26 Alvarez, because the value that's attributed to this
20:44:29 as represented for public enhancement, I think I heard
20:44:34 that it's one seventh of the cost.
20:44:37 There are sixth-sevenths of the cost that will be
20:44:41 picked up from the developer.
20:44:43 And I would suspect it will reflect in terms of
20:44:46 homeowners fees towards maintenance.
20:44:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, what would be the objection to
20:44:51 putting it on the site plan to have a maintenance
20:44:53 agreement?
20:44:55 You know, owners change.
20:45:00 This owner may not be there ten years from now.
20:45:03 What's to prevent, if we put it on the site plan, that
20:45:06 he has to have a maintenance agreement.
20:45:08 Is there an objection to be doing that?
20:45:10 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I certainly have no objection to it,
20:45:12 if the developer doesn't.
20:45:14 I think again, the objective of all this vision and
20:45:18 time span in the plan is that you end up with a

20:45:22 district that is exceptionally unique in the city.
20:45:25 And to be that way for a long time.
20:45:29 >> And I'm not questioning that.
20:45:30 I think that that's what we are looking for.
20:45:36 For now and in the future.
20:45:37 >>> Yes, ma'am.
20:45:38 >> But like I said, things change.
20:45:39 And if we had it in the site plan, or we knew it was
20:45:44 going to be a condo association that was going to
20:45:47 assess these fees, you know, what's the problem?
20:45:52 >>> I don't have a problem with additional
20:45:53 documentation.
20:45:54 In fact, I suggested if we are given credit for value
20:46:00 associated with a maintenance of this, it is
20:46:02 appropriate that there be something that would
20:46:04 indicate their obviously gays to actually utilize that
20:46:07 maintenance.
20:46:08 >> Well, somebody is going to have to take care of the
20:46:11 grounds.
20:46:12 >>> I agree.
20:46:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Or it could become a code enforcement
20:46:16 issue.

20:46:17 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I see no objection to creating some
20:46:21 sort of additional documentation or something that
20:46:23 does create the obligation for ongoing maintenance, at
20:46:27 least for the period where they are claiming a value.
20:46:33 >> Well, can you talk to the petition er about that,
20:46:37 Mr. Davis?
20:46:39 >>> Council members, we believe it has been our
20:46:42 obligation to begin with.
20:46:43 So taking that into the initial position, the
20:46:47 corollary is we have in a objection to a maintenance
20:46:49 agreement.
20:46:50 >> Put on the site plan?
20:46:51 >>> Being included in the site plan as a condition, or
20:46:53 actually, yeah, Ms. Cole and I have actually spoken
20:46:56 about working at the ingredients of a maintenance
20:46:59 agreement over the next couple of weeks.
20:47:01 Certainly did not object to that.
20:47:03 Because one of the critical considerations is than
20:47:04 this is a package.
20:47:06 This vision is one that requires the maintenance of
20:47:10 those areas, because they function to establish the
20:47:12 vision in the project.

20:47:14 So no objection at all.
20:47:17 >>KEVIN WHITE: I assuming I see Mr. Davis' willingness
20:47:24 to do that but I want to ask a question.
20:47:26 Are you saying that you're not agreeing with the
20:47:29 allowing of the TIF moneys to be used for the
20:47:35 continued maintenance on this particular project or in
20:47:38 the district?
20:47:39 >> Well, I would say first of all, the use of TIF
20:47:43 moneys is governed, I guess we actually would look at
20:47:47 criteria 3 hurdle, if you will, to what you are
20:47:50 spending your TIF moneys.
20:47:53 One is state statutes as to what they will or will not
20:47:55 allow.
20:47:55 The second is the CRA plan and what it is describing
20:47:59 for TIF.
20:48:00 And a third is yourselves, as the governing body of
20:48:03 our TIFs.
20:48:04 All right?
20:48:05 I would be not just happy top but I would be honored
20:48:12 to engage with each of you or even the group of you to
20:48:18 discuss, debate, where there are benefits, and
20:48:22 positives and negatives, to the use of TIF funds in

20:48:28 this way.
20:48:29 I will tell you, my recommendation, my personal
20:48:32 feeling -- and this is personal -- is that for an
20:48:36 elevated environment life-style, I think that it's not
20:48:41 appropriate to utilize TIF funds for that maintenance.
20:48:46 >>KEVIN WHITE: The reason I was asking, we have to be
20:48:50 fair and consistent across the board.
20:48:55 In East Tampa we are using TIF dollars to build a
20:48:59 police station.
20:48:59 We are using TIF dollars -- also for the Lake Avenue
20:49:12 project which is a beautification enhancement project,
20:49:15 which is an upgrade.
20:49:17 Which is not anything that's absolutely necessary, but
20:49:19 it is -- it is necessary to revitalization of that
20:49:23 neighborhood.
20:49:23 And it has to be slum and blight to even be considered
20:49:27 a CRA.
20:49:28 So on the term, are we going to penalize the residents
20:49:35 of Channelside, because the area appears to be at this
20:49:38 time a little more affluent than another?
20:49:42 And it should be up to the residents appealing to this
20:49:46 board of how they want their TIF dollars spent.

20:49:52 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I think certainly we recognize the
20:49:54 value and the need for public interaction in regards
20:49:57 to --
20:49:58 >> Well, that's what we have got and that's what we
20:50:01 have got in East Tampa.
20:50:02 But I think each CRA, each TIF, that particular
20:50:08 community, that's what we have encouraged, that's what
20:50:10 we have set up.
20:50:11 We are going to do this.
20:50:13 And once we get these dollars, we want you, the
20:50:16 community, to come back to us and tell us how you want
20:50:20 these dollars spent.
20:50:21 In your community.
20:50:23 That's what we've said.
20:50:25 Now, if I'm hearing -- people say, this is what we
20:50:31 like, and Mr. Davis' project, which happens to be a
20:50:35 billion dollar project rather than a million dollar
20:50:37 project, and it's in a different neighborhood, but the
20:50:40 community in that neighborhood where the tax dollars
20:50:44 are being taken, consolidated, and supposed to be
20:50:47 going back into the neighborhood, if they want to
20:50:51 spend it on the riverwalk, then they'll come back and

20:50:54 say spend it on the riverwalk.
20:50:55 If they say they want it on enhancements, and not
20:51:01 maintenance, we should listen to that too.
20:51:03 I don't think we should arbitrarily be telling the
20:51:06 community at this point in time just because it's
20:51:09 aesthetics and upgrades that we are not open to that.
20:51:17 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I'm in no position to make that
20:51:19 policy.
20:51:20 I did hear just one comment, that actually was a
20:51:25 result of a specific question posed by councilman
20:51:29 Dingfelder, and the response did say, it seems
20:51:32 natural, it seemed reasonable, but it also was
20:51:34 something that had not been discussed.
20:51:37 >> And I don't want to beat a dead horse.
20:51:39 I think it's probably time to move on.
20:51:41 It's getting late and we have five or six more.
20:51:44 >>> I'm happy to work with you.
20:51:46 It is our responsibility to work with you to arrive at
20:51:47 a policy on what this works out, and I agree with you,
20:51:51 it needs to be a very level playing field across all
20:51:54 of the CRAs as well as within them.
20:51:57 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you. That is my point.

20:51:59 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
20:52:02 >>CHAIRMAN: We can't close.
20:52:04 We have to continue.
20:52:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe just for clarification
20:52:07 purposes, at this point in time, Ms. Lamboy, what's
20:52:13 going to take place is with regard to the staff
20:52:15 objections, I believe those are going to be addressed
20:52:18 by notes and that will come back to council as a
20:52:20 completed site plan.
20:52:22 And I guess the other point is if there's any other
20:52:24 issues that council wishes to address, this would be
20:52:26 the appropriate time to do that, because the developer
20:52:28 is here, you have a hearing, and if there are any
20:52:31 other issues that need to be addressed prior to the
20:52:33 site plan coming back this would be an opportune time
20:52:37 to do that.
20:52:37 Otherwise it would be a continuance for the purpose of
20:52:40 having the site plan come part tonight relative to
20:52:43 those objections.
20:52:45 >> What you will do is continue this for a minimum two
20:52:48 weeks to allow the petitioner to come back with a site
20:52:51 plan.

20:52:54 The fact that they are in compliance with staff
20:52:56 objections and also reflecting, I believe, we can do
20:53:01 it as a note, which notes that there will be a
20:53:05 maintenance agreement, or they can bring back a
20:53:07 maintenance agreement, whatever your pleasure.
20:53:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My recommendation, council, and I
20:53:10 don't know how this would be on a time line, but
20:53:13 because it is a significant component of the project
20:53:16 as a whole, it would be my recommendation to see if
20:53:20 there can be a maintenance agreement that could be
20:53:26 created at the time of adoption.
20:53:28 I would think that would be the best course of action.
20:53:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
20:53:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think throws a missed opportunity
20:53:37 here.
20:53:37 I'm not an architect or anything like that.
20:53:39 Not a planner.
20:53:41 Or a landscape architect.
20:53:43 But I think in that area, where the brown stones are,
20:53:48 that -- and especially as related to the covered
20:53:52 parking shelter area, in the area where the brown
20:54:00 stones are, and then there's an open alley or

20:54:02 something, and then there's a covered parking area, I
20:54:05 think there's a great opportunity in that space to
20:54:14 still build a townhouse effect but put the garages
20:54:18 that are needed inside the townhouses and use the
20:54:20 leftover space as green space.
20:54:22 I mean grass.
20:54:24 Grass for the entire community.
20:54:26 A grassy park area for the entire community to use.
20:54:29 Because how many units is there a total in this
20:54:34 project, Mike?
20:54:40 >>> 725.
20:54:40 >>: Okay, we have 725 units.
20:54:43 1500 plus people.
20:54:45 Then we got The Towers of Channelside which I don't
20:54:47 even remember.
20:54:48 That's probably another 500 units.
20:54:51 So they have got more than a thousand total units, or
20:54:56 couple thousand total units.
20:54:58 Can't do the math.
20:54:59 Thousands of people.
20:55:00 And we have other than along Meridian, which is a
20:55:06 four-lane soon to be very busy road, we don't have any

20:55:09 grassy area, we don't have a place where you can lay
20:55:14 out in the grass and enjoy yourself.
20:55:17 You can say this is an urban area but even New York
20:55:19 City had Central Park and many other pocket parks
20:55:22 scattered throughout New York City.
20:55:23 So, you know, why not seize the moment, and make some
20:55:29 modifications along those lines?
20:55:31 I think Janell has a great point.
20:55:34 And she often brings up things that we don't
20:55:36 necessarily see.
20:55:38 And I just think there's a really fine opportunity to
20:55:41 do.
20:55:41 And it doesn't impact your retail area or your
20:55:44 fountains or those things.
20:55:45 Those are all wonderful things, too.
20:55:47 But it's a major project.
20:55:49 Eights major cornerstone.
20:55:51 And I think it's an opportunity to do something a
20:55:54 little bit different and a little bit softer and
20:55:59 better.
20:56:01 >>GWEN MILLER: We need a motion.
20:56:09 >> How much time do you all need on this?

20:56:12 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I have just spoken with the
20:56:14 petitioner.
20:56:14 For the maintenance agreement and site plan, two weeks
20:56:17 is sufficient time.
20:56:23 >>> Excuse me, if I might inquire.
20:56:24 On a maintenance agreement we will certainly have one
20:56:28 brought back to you.
20:56:29 I there may be an interpretation if that maintenance
20:56:32 agreement would also have to meet the same time frame
20:56:35 as revising the notes on the site plan, which is next
20:56:37 Tuesday.
20:56:38 And --
20:56:41 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: That's not the issue.
20:56:42 The issue is the maintenance agreement, I would
20:56:44 actually have to have that in the agenda process by
20:56:48 noon on Wednesday.
20:56:50 The 23rd.
20:56:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The whole thing should be continued
20:56:54 for about a month.
20:56:55 It's a complex thing.
20:56:57 But, council, I thought I was so eloquent and nobody
20:57:01 responded to my notion of green space.

20:57:04 And if you all don't agree with me, just say so.
20:57:09 If you agree with me, I think you need to say so.
20:57:11 Because they need direction in terms of if they are
20:57:14 going to modify the site plan.
20:57:16 So rose, you're never shy.
20:57:20 Come on.
20:57:23 >>ROSE FERLITA: If I agreed with you, Mr. Dingfelder,
20:57:26 would have said so.
20:57:31 >>GWEN MILLER: How long do you need?
20:57:32 >>> Council members, we'll come part with that time
20:57:34 frame.
20:57:35 I will have a maintenance agreement to Ms. Cole Monday
20:57:38 so she can review it, well before the Wednesday.
20:57:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks.
20:57:44 Make your motion again.
20:57:45 >>> I move we continue for two weeks, 9 a.m
20:57:52 If we can make it 10 a.m. first reading.
20:57:57 What date?
20:57:57 >>CHAIRMAN: Two weeks would be the 31st.
20:58:00 We have a motion and second.
20:58:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Wait, wait, wait, whoa, whoa.
20:58:07 I was going to make a substitute motion.

20:58:09 That whatever you want to call it, Mr. Shelby.
20:58:19 My alternate motion or substitute motion or whatever
20:58:21 else Mr. Shelby would like to call it is that when
20:58:24 they come back, they come back with a modified site
20:58:26 plan that includes additional green space, that
20:58:30 includes a small neighborhood park that is grassy, and
20:58:36 that is available to the community, because I think
20:58:38 it's important for Channelside.
20:58:39 Because one by one these projects are going to come
20:58:41 through, and they are not going to offer those green
20:58:44 spaces.
20:58:45 Or if we are going to rely on Mr. Stoltenberg they are
20:58:48 going to have to walk seven blocks to the north to go
20:58:50 to his green space, you know.
20:58:52 That's not reasonable.
20:58:53 So that's why I am offering that as an amendment or a
20:58:57 substitute motion.
20:59:02 And I don't think it's a big deal.
20:59:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Dingfelder, I don't know how much
20:59:08 space they can actually have for a green space.
20:59:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did you see what I was talking
20:59:14 about?

20:59:15 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I know, but it's up to them.
20:59:17 They are the developers.
20:59:18 And they have to reto this whole thing here.
20:59:22 If you want to do that, let them come back with a
20:59:24 suggestion.
20:59:25 But for us to tell them, you know, I don't feel
20:59:27 comfortable with that.
20:59:29 >>CHAIRMAN: The motion dies for lack of a second so we
20:59:31 have a motion to continue for two weeks, August
20:59:34 31st at 10 a.m.
20:59:37 All in favor say Aye.
20:59:38 Opposed, Nay.
20:59:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nay.
20:59:40 (Motion carried).
20:59:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to open item number 16.
20:59:43 >> So moved.
20:59:44 >> Second.
20:59:44 (Motion carried)
20:59:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
21:00:38 We still have agenda.
21:00:39 Let's move on.
21:00:42 Go out quietly.

21:00:42 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Land development.
21:00:45 The subject property is located at 4410 Boy Scout
21:00:50 Boulevard, immediately across the area of the national
21:00:53 mall.
21:00:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, I'm sorry.
21:00:55 Were these numbers 16 and 17 together?
21:00:59 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Yes.
21:01:00 We opened both together.
21:01:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were they opened?
21:01:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, we opened it.
21:01:05 We opened 17.
21:01:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We need to open 16 and 17 together.
21:01:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's open 17, too.
21:01:13 >> Motion to open 17 as well.
21:01:14 >> Second.
21:01:15 (Motion carried).
21:01:15 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Thank you.
21:01:19 The subject property is the triangular piece rezoned
21:01:23 back in 2004, and they have just come back with a
21:01:27 vacating that Mr. Cook will present to you in just one
21:01:30 moment.
21:01:31 And redesigned site plan.

21:01:33 The petitioner has been responding to the neighborhood
21:01:36 association.
21:01:37 Originally they had a plan that listed that all
21:01:43 commercial general uses were to be allowed and did not
21:01:46 get a very good response.
21:01:47 So at the previous rezoning in 2004, four site plans
21:01:50 were presented in an effort to address neighborhood
21:01:52 concerns.
21:01:54 There are six site plans associated with this
21:01:56 particular position.
21:01:58 The general uses are for a hotel, an office building,
21:02:03 restaurants, and a bank with a drive-through facility.
21:02:07 So those are the four general uses and different
21:02:09 organizations on the site.
21:02:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When was that approved?
21:02:17 The one you were talking about, the four options.
21:02:19 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: In the beginning, 2004.
21:02:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I sort of remember.
21:02:29 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: Just to direct you, the plans are
21:02:32 coming around right now.
21:02:33 You will see that there are a couple of plans that
21:02:36 have parking waivers being requested.

21:02:45 There are some plans that have the construction of the
21:02:49 hotel facility and there is no waiver being requested.
21:02:52 The parking is going to be all accommodated in a
21:02:55 hotel.
21:02:56 Just for your information, the petitioner is going to
21:02:59 present to you that the parking waiver is not much of
21:03:02 an impact, because the Ned for the additional parking
21:03:08 for the restaurant will be at different times from the
21:03:11 office building.
21:03:16 The proposed development area is architectural, and
21:03:22 you have some elevation provided to you.
21:03:27 The objections that remain that couldn't be addressed
21:03:31 because of the 13-day deadline is the technical
21:03:34 objection to the parking waiver and it's up to the
21:03:36 council to determine whether a waiver is justified.
21:03:42 On the plan regarding stormwater retention, that will
21:03:46 be addressed.
21:03:47 And the solid waste issues regarding access to the
21:03:51 solid waste facilities, met with solid waste with
21:03:58 Rhonda for two hours, and hashed out and resolved.
21:04:05 So the petitioner has worked diligently with staff to
21:04:09 resolve all those issues.

21:04:11 And a revised site plan was walked over to staff
21:04:14 addressing all these issues, we'll render no
21:04:19 objection.
21:04:20 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
21:04:28 I have been sworn in.
21:04:40 On the south side of Boy Scout Boulevard, Spruce
21:04:45 Street, collector road, and the predominant land use
21:04:50 category for the area is regional mixed use 100 which
21:04:53 you can see completely surrounds the site and also the
21:04:57 future land use designation for the site itself.
21:05:00 International mall is located to the north.
21:05:03 The intersection of Westshore and Boy Scout to the
21:05:05 west.
21:05:06 And of course to the east, the intersection of Dale
21:05:10 Mabry and Boy Scout Boulevard.
21:05:17 Here is the proposed site.
21:05:20 As Ms. Lamboy has stated there are several scenarios
21:05:23 being presented as far as types of commercial tern
21:05:26 tiffs that could be proposed on the site for your
21:05:28 consideration.
21:05:31 Immediately adjacent to the site to the north, of
21:05:33 course, are three restaurant chains, Lee Roy Selmon

21:05:37 Expressway, Flemings, and Roy's, Roy's being closest
21:05:41 to the proposed site.
21:05:42 Jefferson high school does lock in close proximity to
21:05:47 the site.
21:05:47 Of course further to the site we do have the Westshore
21:05:51 mixed use development center, which as we all know,
21:05:54 and the Rocky Point, major areas.
21:06:04 This is within the boundaries of the proposed Carver
21:06:06 City, Lincoln Gardens.
21:06:10 Regarding --
21:06:13 >> What's on the site now?
21:06:16 The site is vacant.
21:06:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's showing a building.
21:06:20 >>> Yes, that building has been demolished sense.
21:06:23 >> I thought it was the fire house.
21:06:25 >>> No.
21:06:26 I think this was -- the boy scouts.
21:06:33 That's the name.
21:06:37 But basically, there are a variety of commercials --
21:06:43 you approved this at that particular site for town
21:06:47 home development, high end town home development.
21:06:49 There's an apartment complex over here.

21:06:51 And I think this is a town home development.
21:06:57 There's several hotels along Lois which slides
21:06:59 directly to the east.
21:07:00 You can't quite see Lois.
21:07:02 Actually, it's right off towards the City of Tampa.
21:07:05 As you know, all the way down, and spruce goes all the
21:07:12 way to Dale Mabry.
21:07:15 And of course direct access to boy scout.
21:07:18 Planning Commission staff of had no objections to the
21:07:20 proposed request.
21:07:22 They are well within the requirements.
21:07:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
21:07:32 I have a question for legal.
21:07:37 I remember at the time, which is about a year and a
21:07:41 half ago, I guess, thinking it was unusual that we
21:07:44 were approving four different options on the same PD
21:07:50 was created, but unusual.
21:07:52 And now we are going from the four to I guess it's
21:07:55 being proposed we are going to six.
21:07:57 Is there any precedence for that elsewhere in the city
21:08:00 that we know of, and does the code even speak to that
21:08:03 or allow it?

21:08:05 It seems really unusual, because I think people look
21:08:09 to zoning to create some predictability.
21:08:13 So, in other words, if I own the property next door,
21:08:15 at least I have a pretty good idea of what's going to
21:08:18 be on that vacant lot, you know, eventually.
21:08:23 And because that's what the zoning is.
21:08:25 But with this you have four options.
21:08:28 And possibly six options.
21:08:29 And it just doesn't sit right.
21:08:32 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
21:08:33 I understand that as a precedent, not only has it --
21:08:39 but it's done in other situations.
21:08:42 A second site plan, three separate site plans, and
21:08:47 four different site plans.
21:08:53 Coming to the meeting tonight I think we are all
21:08:55 thinking this is a little unusual and looking at the
21:08:58 code, the code really does use language that seems to
21:09:01 indicate a singular site plan is being reviewed.
21:09:05 However, I don't know that there is specifically
21:09:08 anything in the code that prohibits an applicant from
21:09:10 coming forward and requesting that you review more
21:09:12 than one site plan, and have alternative site plans.

21:09:18 Cathy Coyle, zoning administrator, previous
21:09:22 administrators haven't applied on that issue and it
21:09:25 may be appropriate for you to have some sort of plan
21:09:27 on that specific issue.
21:09:28 They can go ahead and make that interpretation.
21:09:33 >> Okay.
21:09:34 Remind me at the end of this hearing -- on this one, I
21:09:37 don't think we can really change the rules in extreme
21:09:40 because we are already playing the game, and gave them
21:09:43 four.
21:09:43 So now we'll look at six.
21:09:45 But I think we need to look at it from a bigger
21:09:48 picture policy issue.
21:09:50 >> And to even take it a step further, I think looking
21:09:59 at multiple site plans, puts everyone in a difficult
21:10:02 position.
21:10:03 I think again I would suggest that at the end of this,
21:10:09 come through the process that we go ahead and request
21:10:10 the zoning administrator look at that issue.
21:10:13 >> And six times the normal fee.
21:10:24 >>> I shared my concern with Ms. Cole.
21:10:26 Of course it's unusual today.

21:10:27 There is the precedent right off the bat with the case
21:10:29 in front of you that you do have four, under no
21:10:34 obligation to go to six, there is an underlying.
21:10:37 Council could choose to do that.
21:10:40 I am also concerned about it being precedential.
21:10:44 And I'm also concerned, obviously this was done in
21:10:47 2004, before I came on board.
21:10:48 And my interpretation of the code, I believe, does not
21:10:52 necessarily -- it would contemplate, it appears, based
21:10:57 on my interpretation, singular PD site plan, so that I
21:11:02 would also like to have some sort of clarification for
21:11:04 future that it does not become a precedent and council
21:11:09 is not safe having six different site plans to approve
21:11:13 in its totality to allow a flexible zoning issue.
21:11:19 So just a concern that I have shared with Ms. Cole and
21:11:23 Ms. Zelman and Ms. Coyle.
21:11:25 And I think it would be appropriate for there to be a
21:11:28 determination so that staff at least have some
21:11:30 direction, because rightly so, this did get very far
21:11:37 with the council and staff bringing it to council.
21:11:48 >>JAMES COOK: I have been sworn.
21:11:50 City of Tampa has requested to vacate a portion, from

21:11:56 Boy Scout Boulevard to chess nut street.
21:12:01 You see on the Elmo, the area requested highlighted in
21:12:07 yellow, Boy Scout to the north, international mall to
21:12:09 the north.
21:12:10 Hess per disease to the west.
21:12:13 Hesperides to the west.
21:12:18 Portion of Spruce Street, approximately 110-foot wide
21:12:22 right-of-way.
21:12:28 This is spruce looking west from Manhattan.
21:12:31 On the north side of spruce.
21:12:35 This is spruce lag west from Manhattan.
21:12:41 The shot of spruce looking east from Hesperides.
21:12:44 The subject site is on the left-hand side of the photo
21:12:46 here.
21:12:47 This is the TECO substation on the right-hand side.
21:13:11 This is spruce continuing east.
21:13:15 Across Manhattan.
21:13:29 This is Manhattan looking south of spruce.
21:13:34 This is Hesperides.
21:13:44 And this area, the north part of Spruce Street, part
21:13:47 of the vacation, which will leave approximately 40 to
21:13:50 45 feet of right-of-way there.

21:13:56 This is the subject property specifically for
21:13:59 rezoning.
21:14:00 Actually that's on the south side.
21:14:02 This is the property being asked to rezone on the
21:14:05 south side of spruce.
21:14:14 Shot of the TECO substation abutting spruce on the
21:14:17 south.
21:14:18 And this is the property catter-corner to spruce lying
21:14:21 west of Hesperides.
21:14:23 Staff has no objections as long as drainage and
21:14:26 utilities are reserved and all the conditions at Tampa
21:14:29 electric have requested be met.
21:14:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe you said this, Mr. Cook.
21:14:37 This says that the petition comes from James Cook.
21:14:41 >>> It's actually the City of Tampa.
21:14:43 They just put my name down there.
21:14:44 And keeping counsel's motion, Dave parkson is here
21:14:49 from staff representing city.
21:14:51 Representing city in the vacating.
21:14:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And why is the city the petitioner?
21:14:58 >>> This right-of-way is 110 feet.
21:15:00 60 of it is platted.

21:15:02 We own 30 feet on the north and 20 feet on the south
21:15:05 so we actually have an interest in this right-of-way.
21:15:09 I believe Mr. Parkson will speak to a development
21:15:12 agreement for this site, which needs a portion of this
21:15:16 right-of-way.
21:15:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm really confused.
21:15:32 >>> Dave Parkinson from urban development.
21:15:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn in?
21:15:39 >>> In a, I haven't.
21:15:43 (Oath administered by Clerk).
21:15:59 >>> Dave Parkinson for urban development.
21:16:01 I have been sworn.
21:16:01 Thank you.
21:16:02 The city's interest in this actually is multiple, that
21:16:09 the primary interest, aside from the additional
21:16:12 intensity of development that can be allowed by
21:16:15 vacating this, is that there's a very large ditch that
21:16:19 runs through this right-of-way that you can see in
21:16:24 some of these photographs and the developer has agreed
21:16:27 as part of this package of redevelopment that you are
21:16:30 considering to pipe this ditch which will eliminate a
21:16:35 pretty substantial annoyance in the neighborhood that

21:16:40 the neighborhood association is very interested.
21:16:44 It also, in doing that, it allows some additional
21:16:47 space from the developer to add parking over that
21:16:51 space.
21:16:52 It also allows there to be sufficient space for the
21:16:56 TECO transmission lines that are associated with the
21:16:59 substation that was in the photographs that Mr. Cook
21:17:02 showed you.
21:17:02 So basically, it solves problems for us.
21:17:07 It increases the ability of the developer to have
21:17:10 different options on the site.
21:17:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If somebody will put this on the
21:17:20 overhead.
21:17:21 Do you have it, Jimmy?
21:17:23 This one?
21:17:23 Okay.
21:17:29 So I see where we are talking about vacating, to the
21:17:32 south of that, is there still going to be -- no, to
21:17:37 the south -- just this strip.
21:17:40 Is there still going to be a public right-of-way
21:17:43 through there?
21:17:47 >>> We are not vacating the entire.

21:17:50 >> Is that currently a dirt road?
21:17:52 >>> Yes.
21:17:53 >> And nobody is looking to improve that, like the
21:18:00 adjacent property owner?
21:18:01 >>> The adjacent property here has already been
21:18:04 rezoned, and they have a drive entrance that will be
21:18:09 into there and it will be paved.
21:18:11 >> So they are going to pave half of it?
21:18:14 >>> They are going to pave the portion to the
21:18:15 entrance.
21:18:20 This substation, they currently use Hesperides and
21:18:25 also this dirt strip here as the substation.
21:18:32 They don't typically use the dirt section.
21:18:34 >> The last time I was along there it was actually
21:18:37 blocked off.
21:18:38 You couldn't even go down that dirt road.
21:18:41 Somebody had big pipes in the way or something.
21:18:45 >>> I'm not familiar.
21:18:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
21:18:48 >>CHAIRMAN: Petitioner?
21:18:49 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy and I
21:19:09 have been sworn.

21:19:10 And I have asked Mr. Shelby to pass out a little
21:19:12 booklet for you.
21:19:13 It does include all the site plans, and then some
21:19:17 elevations that I'll walk you through.
21:19:19 And I was going to point out to Mr. Dingfelder that it
21:19:21 does show on the site plan where the property to the
21:19:27 south is paving.
21:19:30 Part of Spruce Street.
21:19:36 I have with me tonight the applicant.
21:19:39 I have with me members of our team, Richard Rhoder and
21:19:42 McMullin from CMT, our traffic consultant, Wilson
21:19:47 Miller, and DSGN associates, an architect.
21:19:53 This is a very difficult and unique site.
21:19:55 It's very small.
21:19:56 It's a relatively small approximately three and a half
21:19:58 acres.
21:19:59 I don't know if you can see it basically and elongated
21:20:03 triangle.
21:20:04 There's a TECO substation to the south, and
21:20:07 transmission poles and distribution poles that have to
21:20:11 be worked around, and all of these factors together
21:20:13 combine to make it very difficult to meet setback

21:20:17 requirements and provide buffers and parking and
21:20:19 achieve economically feasible development of the site,
21:20:23 while providing adequate drive aisles and stormwater
21:20:26 drainage.
21:20:27 But we think we have been able to device plans that
21:20:31 will meet all those goals, and provide you with a very
21:20:33 quality development that meets the purpose and intent
21:20:36 of your PD code.
21:20:40 And I did want to explain again some of the questions
21:20:43 that Mr. Dingfelder was asking about, why so many site
21:20:46 plans.
21:20:48 When we began the zoning process for the 2004 rezoning
21:20:52 back in probably late 2003, what we were proposing was
21:20:57 something in the nature of a PDA, and technically this
21:21:00 site isn't large enough to be rezoned as a PDA under
21:21:03 the code.
21:21:04 But we just wanted to show and say within these
21:21:10 envelopes you can have either an office or retail.
21:21:13 When we showed it to the neighborhood association,
21:21:18 they were very concerned about that, they wanted to
21:21:22 see if it's a bank what's it going to look like, if
21:21:26 it's a retail strip what's it going to look like?

21:21:29 We met with Gloria Moreda who was the zoning
21:21:31 administrator and she was actually the one who
21:21:33 suggested the use of alternative site plans, and again
21:21:36 I wanted to answer Mr. Dingfelder's question.
21:21:39 The purpose of having the plan some to give you the
21:21:45 predictable you're asking for.
21:21:47 We can only develop one of these.
21:21:48 But whichever one ultimately, that's who they can get
21:21:53 to come in and be a purchaser on this property.
21:21:58 Once we know who that is, will have to be committed to
21:22:02 one of these plans and say we will have a plan and you
21:22:04 will have a plan that shows you exactly what it's
21:22:06 going to look like.
21:22:07 Again, I propose something conceptual, as Jeff says,
21:22:13 either a bank or office or something in this place.
21:22:16 Also, we met with the neighborhood association again
21:22:18 as far back as when we were doing the first rezoning,
21:22:21 and I believe Jimmy mentioned one of their concerns
21:22:23 was the open ditch on Spruce Street.
21:22:25 And we saw some of the pictures, saw that it collects
21:22:30 water, it's ugly, it's dangerous, and worried about
21:22:32 children falling in.

21:22:34 And I'm not sure, Mr. Garcia, I think actually the
21:22:38 school to the Soult of us is an elementary school, not
21:22:40 a high school.
21:22:41 So there was concern about the danger theory posed to
21:22:44 children and other people in the neighborhood.
21:22:48 So one of the things that CMT began talking with the
21:22:51 city about and wasn't able to accomplish prior to the
21:22:53 last rezoning but kept talking with afterwards, was
21:22:56 the possibility of vacating Spruce Street, and being
21:23:00 able to pave over the ditch, and provide underground
21:23:04 stormwater drainage vaults.
21:23:07 It took a long time to agree to that with the city
21:23:11 mainly because it took for forever for us to figure
21:23:14 out who actually owns the right-of-way.
21:23:17 Usually by the city and tracks for the public but in
21:23:22 this case there were actually parts that were owned in
21:23:26 fee simple title by the city.
21:23:27 There was some question as to whether Hillsborough
21:23:30 County had an interest in it.
21:23:31 We had to meet with their real estate department, find
21:23:33 old deeds.
21:23:34 Long story shore short we were finally able to

21:23:37 determine who owned it.
21:23:38 Then we had to arrive at a price.
21:23:40 Because the city owned it.
21:23:42 The city couldn't just give to the my client.
21:23:44 They had to sell it to my client so it was a very long
21:23:47 process.
21:23:48 But as others have alluded to, paving over the ditch
21:23:56 is a win-win for the city, a win-win for TECO, a
21:23:58 win-win for the neighborhood and win-win for my
21:24:01 client.
21:24:01 It's a win-win for the city because the ditch right
21:24:04 now is a maintenance and liability problem for the
21:24:07 city.
21:24:09 And also what my clients build will be a much improved
21:24:15 stormwater drainage system. The city is also able to
21:24:18 make, you know, small amount of money selling some
21:24:21 right-of-way that right now is going un.
21:24:23 Used.
21:24:24 And ultimately when my client is able to develop the
21:24:27 site they'll have a tax base there instead of a vacant
21:24:30 unused property.
21:24:31 And again the neighborhood.

21:24:32 This is a benefit for the neighborhood.
21:24:34 They really did want this ditch closed for safety and
21:24:36 aesthetic reasons.
21:24:37 They also had a very strong interest in making sure
21:24:40 that Spruce Street, this unpaved part of Spruce
21:24:43 Street, never became a through street.
21:24:46 They did not want automobile traffic going through
21:24:53 Hesperides.
21:24:54 And that's why you look at the entranceway to the
21:24:56 property south of us is designed it comes to a
21:24:59 dead-end, again allowing us to vacate just makes us
21:25:02 that much more certain that it never will become a
21:25:06 threw street for the neighborhood.
21:25:07 This is also beneficial, TECO, gives them bet are
21:25:10 access to their substations and poles.
21:25:12 I can tell you that our original vacating proposal
21:25:15 included more right-of-way, and TECO made us cut it
21:25:19 back because they wanted more of it to stay open and
21:25:25 unvacated.
21:25:28 Causing them to lose some parking, I might add.
21:25:30 Again it is a win for my client because it does allow
21:25:33 them to increase the size of what was even a smaller

21:25:35 parcel, about one acre.
21:25:41 They will get about one acre if vacating is approved.
21:25:44 But because this is a win for the city, the city has
21:25:47 worked closely with us, and again as I explained to
21:25:49 you, the petitioner and the vacating.
21:25:53 I will kind of walk you through site plans.
21:25:55 They are really not that different, again.
21:25:57 What we tried to do was predict what possible uses
21:26:00 could go on the site and lay them out depending on
21:26:04 which combination was approved.
21:26:05 And if you want to follow along in the book I gave
21:26:08 you, and these are also in the larger site plans, page
21:26:12 1 has a 9500 square foot roster on, a 3-story office
21:26:17 building and a smaller 3-story bank, combined bank and
21:26:21 office building, page 2 has the same, 9500 square
21:26:25 foot, and a combined single building that's four
21:26:31 stories.
21:26:31 Page 3, which is planned to have again the same
21:26:34 restaurant, a second smaller restaurant, and then that
21:26:38 same 15 that you square foot bank office building that
21:26:42 you see on plan 1.
21:26:45 Plan 3, 3-A and 4, and then plan 3 has the hotel plus

21:26:53 the 3-story office building and again the same bank
21:26:56 office building that you saw in plan 1.
21:26:58 Plan 3-A has the hotel and then the same combined bank
21:27:02 office building that you saw on plan 1-A, and then
21:27:06 plan 4 has the hotel combined with another restaurant
21:27:09 and a small bank office building.
21:27:12 I believe Heather mentioned all the buildings will
21:27:15 have Mediterranean style architecture.
21:27:20 Buildings that are three stories or less.
21:27:22 In your booklet we do have elevations.
21:27:29 I don't know if you want me to show those on the Elmo
21:27:31 or not.
21:27:32 We are providing landscaping and access per code
21:27:34 requirement.
21:27:35 At the 2004 hearing councilwoman Saul-Sena asked that
21:27:41 all replacement trees, the trees that were landscaped,
21:27:44 the vehicle use area, be 3-inch diameter trees rather
21:27:48 than the 2-inch that your code requires.
21:27:50 We carried that that addition through the site plan.
21:27:53 We also carried over the tradition for the last site
21:27:56 plan, that if the traffic signal is warranted, we'll
21:28:02 take $75 that you toward it.

21:28:04 We do have opposition tonight from the property owner
21:28:07 to the south, the apartment complex.
21:28:12 We have had conversation was them, in some meetings.
21:28:14 One of the things that they did not like on the site
21:28:16 plans that are before you is the way the hotel was
21:28:19 designed.
21:28:21 It's designed as a five-story hotel, with a five-story
21:28:24 parking garage behind it.
21:28:26 So we have had architects working this week on trying
21:28:30 to find a way to redesign that so that the hotel that
21:28:35 they would be looking at, would have a different
21:28:38 configuration, and a lower garage closer to their
21:28:41 development on Spruce Street.
21:28:43 So if I may, if you turn to page 14 in your booklet --
21:28:59 I need the microphone.
21:29:00 This is their apartment complex which I understand it
21:29:02 will be under construction soon.
21:29:04 And what we did is instead of having a five-story
21:29:07 garage here and then another five-story hotel here, we
21:29:12 designed it, this garage down by 15 feet.
21:29:17 So I think it's now three stories.
21:29:19 And then put the hotel on top of it here, with I

21:29:24 believe seven, possibly eight floors on top of that
21:29:29 garage.
21:29:31 Again, we think this is much more aesthetically
21:29:35 pleasing for them.
21:29:37 They don't have a parking garage that's the same
21:29:39 height as their buildings there.
21:29:41 They have enough view corridor here and then the hotel
21:29:43 is closer to Spruce Street.
21:29:47 And again, if you turn to page 15, here is another
21:29:51 view, looking from their development toward the hotel.
21:29:59 Page 15 gives you an idea what it would look like at
21:30:02 ground level.
21:30:03 And you can see that we would visually screen the
21:30:07 garage.
21:30:07 Again you can see the garage is much lower.
21:30:11 There's also, I believe, 56 feet between the garage
21:30:18 and the edge of the right-of-way.
21:30:19 So throws a pretty good distance between their
21:30:22 building and the back of this garage.
21:30:25 And the last page in your booklet is the way you would
21:30:29 have to redesign our site plan to accommodate this
21:30:32 change in the garage.

21:30:33 And you can see we have already come up with it.
21:30:36 So that's a very simple change.
21:30:38 It doesn't change the traffic circulation hire.
21:30:43 I think it will be pretty easy for your staff to
21:30:45 review these changes because it's really changing the
21:30:47 footprint of the hotel.
21:30:49 It is increasing the rooms.
21:30:51 It we will have to increase the parking garage
21:30:56 capacity as well but we have already taken that into
21:30:58 account.
21:30:59 I'll tray to go very quickly through the waivers.
21:31:08 We are seek ago waiver from the southern landscape
21:31:10 buffer requirement.
21:31:11 We are required to do 8 feet and we are doing one foot
21:31:14 from the property line.
21:31:16 As I think Heather alluded to this is really a
21:31:18 technical waiver.
21:31:19 It was actually an eleven foot landscape buffer being
21:31:23 installed in city right-of-way, to buffer our
21:31:26 development from the property to the south.
21:31:29 And that was already part of their design as their
21:31:32 entrance to the project.

21:31:34 I'll show it to you very quickly.
21:31:42 Again that's the 11-foot buffer in there.
21:31:48 The parking waivers as you will note on transportation
21:31:51 is only objecting to one of the plans, because it has
21:31:57 what they believe is a 22% waiver parking
21:32:10 We are providing that parking.
21:32:12 We are providing it via valet parking with the plan
21:32:14 being to stop the cars like do you in the parking lot
21:32:20 east of here.
21:32:29 It's only at lunch time that it doesn't have enough
21:32:31 spaces to accommodate what your code requires for a
21:32:33 restaurant.
21:32:34 So by either deed restriction if the property sold or
21:32:38 by lease agreement, the restaurant operator will be
21:32:41 required to provide valet parking, and stack the cars
21:32:46 in the area of the restaurant during lunch hour.
21:32:48 The dinnertime.
21:32:50 The other property users will be at the bank or office
21:32:52 building to the west will be required, through again
21:32:56 deed restrictions or lease language, to allow the
21:32:59 restaurant valet parkers to use their spaces at night,
21:33:03 which of course is when the restaurants would have the

21:33:06 higher business anyway.
21:33:07 And it is the anticipation that the restaurant that
21:33:12 this will attract, particularly that they provide
21:33:16 valet parking only, will be your high end steak house
21:33:20 like a Ruth Chris or Flemings.
21:33:25 Your staff objections again, they are objecting to
21:33:28 that parking waiver.
21:33:30 Again I think we have adequately addressed that.
21:33:32 One of the site plans is missing, a sidewalk note.
21:33:36 Again, under the procedure that you seem to have
21:33:38 adopted now, it looks like we are going to be
21:33:41 continuing for at least two weeks so we can certainly
21:33:43 add that note to the plan.
21:33:44 Again, they set out as the plans we overestimated
21:33:49 parking.
21:33:50 We are glad to take that down, we can adjust the plan.
21:33:56 Some similar notes that needed to be added to the site
21:33:58 plan.
21:33:59 There's apparently three trees on the site.
21:34:02 We are removing two instead of one which would keep us
21:34:05 under the 50%.
21:34:11 Again we are leaving all the replacement requirements

21:34:14 and exceeding code with our landscape plan.
21:34:17 The dumpster, the property owners to the south, has
21:34:21 objected to the locations of the dumpsters.
21:34:23 And I'll show you where they are right now.
21:34:29 Right now we have got dumpsters over here.
21:34:33 Of course, behind the restaurant.
21:34:35 And I think the ones that they are objecting to are
21:34:38 the ones closest to the entranceway.
21:34:40 Obviously their concern is that people coming in will
21:34:43 see a dumpster.
21:34:44 But I don't know that that's accurate, as we said.
21:34:47 There's an 11-foot landscape buffer between where the
21:34:53 people will be driving and where our property begins.
21:34:56 There will also be a 6-foot masonry wall.
21:35:00 And there will also be the screening that your code
21:35:04 requires for dumpsters.
21:35:05 And I believe at this point that actually asking for
21:35:09 the dumpsters to be slightly closer to that driveway.
21:35:12 But again as we trade to explain to them, we put the
21:35:16 dumpsters where your staff tells us they need to go in
21:35:19 terms of how the trucks can get in and out and
21:35:21 maneuver and that's what they are where they are

21:35:28 asking us to put them.
21:35:29 Again the Planning Commission, staff found the
21:35:31 request, the comprehensive plan, your staff, I
21:35:34 believe, has confirmed that the remaining objections
21:35:38 are really technical in nature and be addressed with
21:35:44 site plan notes.
21:35:45 The vie vacating, allowing to us vacate data indicate
21:35:48 and close that ditch is a win-win for everybody
21:35:50 involved.
21:35:51 This is a quality, attractive development, consistent
21:35:54 with the stated purpose and intent of your code, which
21:35:57 is to allow for design flexibility, integrated uses of
21:36:01 structures and allowing development that's consistent
21:36:02 with the surrounding area.
21:36:05 So we ask for your approval.
21:36:06 And I would like to save some time for rebuttal.
21:36:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
21:36:11 wants to speak on item number 16 or 17?
21:36:16 16 and 17?
21:36:19 >>> Graham Carrothers with Shoemaker, 101 East Kennedy
21:36:26 Boulevard, suite 2100, here this evening on behalf of
21:36:29 the property owner to the south which is Parkland

21:36:32 Development Corporation.
21:36:33 With me this evening are John Evans and Joe CAPASSO
21:36:38 from Parkland development, as well as their
21:36:40 professional engineer, mark Sullivan from Florida
21:36:43 engineering services.
21:36:45 If it's all right with you, I think I would like to
21:36:47 wait until Mr. Shelby is back.
21:36:49 Because I think there are some significant legal
21:36:51 issues.
21:36:52 >>GWEN MILLER: We have an attorney.
21:36:54 Ms. Cole is in here.
21:36:57 She can answer any question you want so just go ahead.
21:37:00 >>> Thank you.
21:37:10 I'm not quite sure where to start.
21:37:12 There are some very conceptual and legal issues which
21:37:14 we believe exist with this project and with which we
21:37:16 have serious concerns.
21:37:18 I think to start preliminarily, from the big picture
21:37:22 standpoint, to pick up where Mr. Dingfelder started in
21:37:26 the beginning of this public hearing, and Ms. Zelman
21:37:31 touched on it during her remarks as well, we have this
21:37:34 very unusual issue with having six proposed site plans

21:37:37 that were submitted timely to the city and staff of
21:37:42 the city.
21:37:43 Apparently there is now a second proposal set forth in
21:37:46 the package of materials that was distributed to you
21:37:48 this evening.
21:37:49 I understand that staff was providing the 7th
21:37:53 alternative for the first time this morning.
21:37:55 My clients and I were presented with a copy of it
21:37:59 about 4:15 this afternoon.
21:38:02 Obviously we have not had a sufficient opportunity to
21:38:04 review the 7th plan and would like to have an
21:38:07 opportunity to do that.
21:38:10 I would respectfully disagree with Mr. Shelby's
21:38:13 characterization of, you know, maybe we are too far
21:38:16 down the road here with this particular applicant.
21:38:19 They had four rezoning site plans approved back in
21:38:23 2004.
21:38:24 And since we gave them four in 2004, maybe it's too
21:38:27 late to stop the train with six at this point.
21:38:32 I disagree with that entirely, and think that it's an
21:38:35 incredibly bad precedent to set.
21:38:37 This council does have the authority right now to --

21:38:44 up hold the city code requirements which do
21:38:47 contemplate a site plan to be submitted and reviewed.
21:38:51 In this particular case, we have six, now seven.
21:38:54 And not only do I imagine that's very difficult, it's
21:39:01 been difficult for legal staff, I imagine it's
21:39:04 difficult for me to get through.
21:39:06 I can tell you with 100% certainty that it makes it
21:39:09 incredibly difficult for a surrounding property owner
21:39:12 to have any realistic, meaningful idea of what's being
21:39:15 proposed here.
21:39:18 We have six or seven various alternatives.
21:39:20 At this point my client doesn't know whether we are
21:39:22 dealing with a hotel and a restaurant and an office
21:39:24 building, or a hotel and two restaurants, or three
21:39:29 office buildings, or, you know, this applicant needs
21:39:32 to make up its mind about what they want to do, submit
21:39:35 a site plan accordingly, and seek approval of it.
21:39:43 I think that's clearly the intent of the code.
21:39:44 And I think Ms. Zelman said it herself, the reason we
21:39:47 have so many site plans is based upon what an ultimate
21:39:50 buyer for this property might want.
21:39:52 And I would submit to you that is entirely a use of

21:39:56 this forum to seek any number of different approvals,
21:39:59 so that whichever buyer shows up at the door first,
21:40:03 you will be able to say, we have an approved plan for
21:40:05 that.
21:40:06 It's an inappropriate use for this forum.
21:40:10 Second, and if you will indulge me on the time.
21:40:13 >>GWEN MILLER: A few more seconds, that's it.
21:40:17 Three minutes is your time.
21:40:18 I'll give you a few more seconds.
21:40:20 >>> Three of the six site plans are graphically
21:40:23 inaccurate in that they do not show graphically the
21:40:25 parking situation that is described in the materials.
21:40:30 And that is the site plans that were submit towed
21:40:34 tonight and the notices that went out include the
21:40:38 property that they are seeking to be vacated tonight,
21:40:40 includes property that this applicant does not own
21:40:43 tonight.
21:40:43 Okay?
21:40:46 And to me that seems to be putting the cart before the
21:40:49 horse.
21:40:49 They are relaying on the property which will be
21:40:51 vacated.

21:40:52 And the rezoning applications.
21:40:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Come to conclusion.
21:41:01 >>> Unless I have more time -- I have quite a bit.
21:41:06 Unfortunately, I don't have time.
21:41:08 79 thank you.
21:41:09 Ms. Alvarez.
21:41:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think I have to agree with Mr.
21:41:15 Carruthers on this.
21:41:16 If it happened in 2004 I must have been out that day
21:41:20 because I don't recall doing an alternative plan.
21:41:23 The petitioner always brings us one plan, and we
21:41:25 either approve it or disapprove it.
21:41:27 And it's up to them to give us the information for us
21:41:32 to do that.
21:41:35 You know, we are sitting here, it's almost 10:00, and
21:41:38 we don't have any definitive plans on where we are
21:41:42 going with this.
21:41:43 And Ms. Mr. Carruthers, you are bringing up a lot of
21:41:47 good points which we didn't even know, that they don't
21:41:49 own most of the property or whatever.
21:41:51 So I don't want to sit here spinning my wheels.
21:41:54 I really don't.

21:41:55 I don't know how my other colleagues feel.
21:41:58 But I foal like I'm listening to all this stuff here.
21:42:02 And we're not going to do anything tonight.
21:42:06 So now we are just going to listen to all this, and
21:42:09 then we are going to come back in two weeks and hear
21:42:11 some more.
21:42:13 I'm just not going to do it.
21:42:14 So we are either going to stop it right now, or
21:42:17 continue it and somebody bring us site plans for us to
21:42:22 look at, that they are the ones that are going to make
21:42:26 up their minds how they want to do it, not us.
21:42:31 >>ROSE FERLITA: To put some conclusion to that, why
21:42:35 don't we ask Mrs. Zelman to come back.
21:42:41 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: There are a couple of things that
21:42:43 aren't accurate.
21:42:44 First of all, yes, our application does include
21:42:46 property we don't own.
21:42:47 You Tilley required that.
21:42:48 When we are doing a zoning that includes property
21:42:51 that's to be vacated, we are required to include that
21:42:54 in the zoning application.
21:42:57 You developed a rule of making the zoning and the

21:42:59 vacating to go forward.
21:43:00 The city is the other owner and they signed an
21:43:03 affidavit on behalf of themselves as a property owner
21:43:07 for the zoning.
21:43:07 That is done all the time.
21:43:14 And Mrs. Alvarez, with all due respect you were here
21:43:17 in 2004.
21:43:19 >>> I must have been out because I don't recall that
21:43:21 happening.
21:43:21 You say we did.
21:43:23 >> Well, I think our opposition is really somewhat of
21:43:27 a smoke screen because if the rezonings that they are
21:43:29 objecting to the multiple site plans is they don't
21:43:32 know what's being built. The reason we did cecal tern
21:43:35 tiffs was to give the neighborhood and you the
21:43:37 certainty of what would be built.
21:43:39 I mean, the other option is just to show a box and say
21:43:41 this is going to either be a bank or an office, or a
21:43:45 restaurant, and what we did was try to figure out
21:43:48 every possible use, how it would be configured, the
21:43:51 neighborhood wanted to see what the footprints would
21:43:53 look like.

21:43:54 And again if you look at the site plans, they are
21:43:56 really not that different.
21:43:57 It's just taking the same uses and mixing them and
21:44:00 putting them in different places.
21:44:01 >>: Then you all make up your minds which you want and
21:44:04 bring it back to us, and we'll decide if it's good or
21:44:07 bad.
21:44:09 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: The problem is for a developer, that
21:44:12 to sell your property or to leave your property to an
21:44:14 end user, they want to know what they can build on it.
21:44:18 So you have to get it zoned for uses that they want to
21:44:23 come and build.
21:44:24 Can't just say, well, I think I can get this zoned for
21:44:27 a bank or an office.
21:44:29 Again the city would love us get it approved for
21:44:30 alternative uses, we could have done that.
21:44:33 But that wasn't something the neighborhood wanted, and
21:44:36 that's something we are not allowed to do because we
21:44:38 are not a big enough parcel to do a PDA.
21:44:40 And let me clarify one thing Mr. Carruthers said, six
21:44:45 site plans, now a 7th.
21:44:46 I thought I made it clear that 7th was the

21:44:49 redesigned hotel which means we'll just have to
21:44:51 resubmit new site plans for the last three and to show
21:44:57 the different footprint of the hotel.
21:44:58 So we are not adding a new site plan.
21:45:00 We are substitute ago different hotel footprint for
21:45:03 what's before you now.
21:45:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What was the underlying zoning at the
21:45:07 beginning?
21:45:08 >>> Before it was a PD, LP 1 which would have allowed
21:45:13 office buildings and uses up to 200 feet, very minimal
21:45:17 setback requirement.
21:45:18 What we are doing is actually much less intensity than
21:45:21 our underlining zoning and our land use plan category
21:45:25 would allow.
21:45:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Now you are going from PD mixed use
21:45:30 to --
21:45:31 >>> PD mixed use.
21:45:32 >> To planned development, office, restaurant, hotel.
21:45:36 >>> Right.
21:45:37 And before it was restaurant, office, and bank and
21:45:39 retail.
21:45:42 >>MARY ALVAREZ: How about if you go back and you tell

21:45:44 your petitioner, your developers, two site plans, not
21:45:50 six or seven, and for us to decide.
21:45:53 It just doesn't make sense.
21:45:59 >>> If that's the wishes of council that's what we
21:46:00 would have to do, is have you tell us of the six which
21:46:03 you prefer, because again, we are trying to figure out
21:46:09 what the end users will want.
21:46:11 If we cut out some of the site plans all that means is
21:46:14 find an end user who can't build and the two that are
21:46:17 left, we have to come back with a new zoning.
21:46:19 What we are trying to give you is the exact
21:46:22 predictability you are saying we are not giving you.
21:46:25 We are showing you exactly what could go there,
21:46:28 depending on which end users we get.
21:46:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anybody else want to speak?
21:46:39 >>KEVIN WHITE: A representative from the neighborhood
21:46:41 association that may want to speak, and give a little
21:46:44 input.
21:46:49 >>> Hany: I'm a resident in the condominium complex,
21:46:53 former complex that was converted last year, which is
21:46:57 on the east side from where the proposed subject
21:47:01 development is, and I just wanted to come and say I'm

21:47:05 in full support for whatever development happens.
21:47:09 I have hotels in front of me.
21:47:10 There's an office building going to be built on the
21:47:12 north side.
21:47:13 There's currently a bank to the east side with an
21:47:15 office building, another hotel, the three restaurants,
21:47:18 and I thoroughly like going to the restaurants, and
21:47:22 having is pretty much mixed in the area.
21:47:25 Unfortunately, from where I live in the condo complex,
21:47:27 there's a big ditch that runs across the side.
21:47:32 I have a nice view downtown but a ditch.
21:47:35 But our parking is very limited so I wish maybe they
21:47:40 would have covered that up and made additional
21:47:41 parking.
21:47:42 But another thing that's horrendous when I drive to
21:47:45 work every morning is looking at that dirt road that
21:47:48 just goes straight there, which is the vacant piece of
21:47:50 land.
21:47:51 And I understand the two owners, the one on the south
21:47:54 and north are trying to do a great thing.
21:47:56 And I would like to move forward if somehow we can do
21:48:01 it.

21:48:03 Thank you.
21:48:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:48:04 Next.
21:48:10 >> And were you sworn?
21:48:11 >>> Yes.
21:48:11 I did.
21:48:14 >>> Gad edge.
21:48:15 I'm Lorraine wily.
21:48:18 I reside at had 201 west Nassau street.
21:48:22 On behalf of the Carver City, Lincoln Gardens
21:48:26 homeowners association, and Richard Rhoder, who is the
21:48:30 owner of CMP, be met with the board in May of 2004 and
21:48:37 presented a plan to build two buildings.
21:48:39 That plan was to build a restaurant, bank, furniture
21:48:44 store, retail, did not include the sale of alcoholic
21:48:49 beverages on that site.
21:48:51 The association at that time had no objection.
21:48:57 In 2006, Richard met with the board and the
21:49:00 association and asked if we would support a revised
21:49:04 plan at this site for a bank, office, restaurant, and
21:49:10 hotel.
21:49:13 Back in 2004 when Richard presented this plan, the

21:49:16 community had a great concern of filling a huge ditch
21:49:22 which is approximately ten fate deep, just about as
21:49:25 wide and as long as a city block.
21:49:28 Richard stated after meeting with us, several thoughts
21:49:33 were given to fill in the ditch, and at the time he
21:49:35 may have a plan to assist us in doing so.
21:49:39 He would be filling the ditch, providing that the
21:49:46 association would help with the additional use of one
21:49:48 additional unit.
21:49:53 Cost wise it would be too expensive to fill the ditch
21:49:56 just for two buildings.
21:49:57 He stated that he would properly fill the ditch
21:49:59 because the space would be needed for this project of
21:50:02 three buildings only, not six I'm hearing.
21:50:06 You know, six, seven.
21:50:08 But only three.
21:50:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Plans they are talking about, Ms.
21:50:14 Wyley, there won't be six buildings.
21:50:17 >>> Three buildings only.
21:50:19 Richard assured us with the involvement of stormwater
21:50:22 he would make certain that the drainage is properly
21:50:27 according to code to continue to fulfill his

21:50:30 purposefully so that flooding would not become a
21:50:32 problem in our community.
21:50:34 And also one that's dangerous, unprotected, open ditch
21:50:39 we'll have to deal with.
21:50:40 The layout shown was acceptable, attractive plan, and
21:50:44 the height of the building that they are providing,
21:50:47 such as the landscape parking, garage, and it's
21:50:52 business use was discussed and agreed upon.
21:50:56 The association has no objection with the three
21:50:58 buildings at that location.
21:51:00 And also to include with the vacating of the spruce,
21:51:04 we would recommend that spruce be vacated at
21:51:08 Hesperides because we have enough traffic already in
21:51:10 our community.
21:51:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:51:12 Would anyone else like to speak?
21:51:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Were you provided with this, the
21:51:18 alternative site plans?
21:51:20 >>> Yes, I was.
21:51:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: When you were shown the site plans,
21:51:24 did they give you -- did they tell you which plan did
21:51:29 you like?

21:51:31 >>> Well, we definitely told them that, well, they
21:51:34 said, for example, office, hotel, and a restaurant.
21:51:40 Those three.
21:51:42 And we were given all alternatives.
21:51:46 It would either be this, this or this.
21:51:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Six?
21:51:51 >>> No, not six.
21:51:52 Definitely three.
21:51:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
21:51:58 Ms. Zelman, would you like rebuttal?
21:52:00 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I really think Ms. Wyley brought home
21:52:04 what we were talking about, and said six, not six
21:52:07 buildings.
21:52:08 I think she made it clear, it's not as complicated as
21:52:11 some people are trying to make it sound.
21:52:13 We are talking about four uses.
21:52:15 Bank, office, restaurant, hotel.
21:52:19 Three buildings. The reason for the six plans is tap
21:52:22 those uses and just, you know, alternate.
21:52:24 One has a hotel, office, restaurant, one has a hotel,
21:52:27 bank, office.
21:52:28 Again it's four uses, three buildings.

21:52:31 We did show up at the neighborhood association.
21:52:33 They liked that.
21:52:34 Again at the very beginning what they didn't like was
21:52:37 uncertainty.
21:52:38 So we showed them the certainty.
21:52:40 And depending on which uses we get and what the
21:52:43 mixture is, this is what it will look like.
21:52:45 Again, I think people are making it sound a lot more
21:52:48 complicated than it is.
21:52:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Zelman, would you like a
21:52:54 continuation?
21:52:55 >>> I think we have to.
21:52:58 >> Go back so it's two alternatives and not as many as
21:53:01 you have got now.
21:53:03 You all make up your minds.
21:53:05 Which plan is it you want and then bring it to us and
21:53:07 see if we like it or not and then we'll go from there.
21:53:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we have been on this.
21:53:14 We have got to continue.
21:53:17 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: If that's the wishes of council that
21:53:19 we pair it down to two, is there a direction which
21:53:23 uses?

21:53:24 Because the different site plans show a different mix
21:53:27 of uses.
21:53:30 Predict what an end user -- until we have that end
21:53:34 user.
21:53:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The associations said that they
21:53:38 liked --
21:53:39 >>> They liked all six.
21:53:41 >> No, they didn't.
21:53:42 >>> They said they liked three buildings.
21:53:43 I'm sorry, I don't want to put words in their mouth.
21:53:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Three buildings.
21:53:51 That's all they want.
21:53:52 >>> You make up your mind what it is they want and
21:53:54 just bring us some plans, one with the building, one
21:53:58 with the hotel, one with the bank, whatever.
21:54:00 Just give us two.
21:54:04 I think by giving us six, or six plans, it's just more
21:54:10 than we can chew at 10:00.
21:54:12 Sorry.
21:54:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita.
21:54:21 >>ROSE FERLITA: Okay, Ms. Alvarez.
21:54:23 Let me add to your frustration.

21:54:25 This is quite unusual.
21:54:26 And all of us who were here then, that were present,
21:54:31 have to take credit or blame for this.
21:54:33 But this is really unusual for somebody to come up
21:54:35 with several different plans as opposed to a PD, and
21:54:38 ask us to vote on it or say, you guys pick what you
21:54:41 want.
21:54:43 It doesn't matter to me.
21:54:44 So I'm not going to make your clients' choice, to be
21:54:47 quite frank with you.
21:54:48 Come back with something that you all want us to look
21:54:50 at and approve.
21:54:51 And if it doesn't work, you come back with a site
21:54:57 change, that's fine.
21:54:58 But this is very convoluted and it is kind of crazy.
21:55:01 And we are talking about vacating a property because
21:55:03 you need that property, but we are going to vacate
21:55:06 that property these not even part and parcel though
21:55:10 this yet because we don't know where we are going with
21:55:13 this.
21:55:17 >>> It's consistent throughout and vacating allows
21:55:19 them to close the ditch.

21:55:21 >> Mr. Shelby, do you know where I am trying to go
21:55:23 with this?
21:55:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Basically, if I understand what you
21:55:25 are saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that your
21:55:29 decision on whether the public purpose, whether to
21:55:32 vacate the land, is dependent on what ultimately is
21:55:36 going to be developed on that site or whatever public
21:55:40 service is served by that.
21:55:42 >>> That's my dilemma here.
21:55:43 Because we don't know if it does serve a public
21:55:46 purpose.
21:55:47 We don't know because we don't know which of these
21:55:50 six.
21:55:50 I don't think it's for us to decide.
21:55:52 I think you have to come back with something defined.
21:55:55 And if it doesn't work then goes from there.
21:55:58 >>> I believe that your staff explained the reason the
21:56:00 city made the Pate for the vacating and the public
21:56:03 purpose being served is the closure of that ditch.
21:56:05 It really doesn't have to do with which.
21:56:11 >>ROSE FERLITA: Six site plans.
21:56:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: regardless of which plan, the ditch is

21:56:28 going to have to be closed.
21:56:29 That's no problem as far as I'm concerned.
21:56:31 That's okay with me.
21:56:32 Just bring us something that they like.
21:56:35 And then maybe we'll like.
21:56:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: Get something that's marketable for
21:56:42 you.
21:56:46 >>GWEN MILLER: How many weeks do you need?
21:56:51 >>> Is it the wish of council to be two, or go back to
21:56:53 the four?
21:56:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: It's up to you.
21:56:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Bring us two.
21:56:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: If you want definite direction, as far
21:57:01 as I'm concerned, bank, restaurant, office, hotel,
21:57:04 restaurant, office.
21:57:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Either-or.
21:57:09 >>GWEN MILLER: How many weeks will it take you to come
21:57:11 back with those plans?
21:57:14 >> Two weeks.
21:57:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks.
21:57:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A question out of curiosity.
21:57:20 Does that give you enough time to be able to review

21:57:22 ultimately what has to be done?
21:57:25 >>KEVIN WHITE: They already have the site plan.
21:57:27 They only have to pick them out.
21:57:31 >>> No changes between now and then?
21:57:34 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: They have to get the site plans to
21:57:36 me.
21:57:36 >>KEVIN WHITE: Give three weeks.
21:57:42 >>GWEN MILLER: The 31st at 10:30 a.m.
21:57:49 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: What you said, bank, restaurant,
21:57:55 hotel --
21:57:57 >> Bank, restaurant, office, hotel, restaurant,
21:58:00 office.
21:58:04 >>GWEN MILLER: I am going to get a motion.
21:58:08 August 31st at 10:30.
21:58:10 Motion and second.
21:58:11 All in favor say Aye.
21:58:12 (Motion carried).
21:58:13 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
21:58:17 You have to have an associated vacation with this
21:58:19 petition.
21:58:19 There is not anything that prey includes you from
21:58:22 moving forward if you want to go ahead and approve

21:58:24 that.
21:58:24 Or if you rather, you can have that submitted.
21:58:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you all want to vacate?
21:58:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We'll do them together.
21:58:32 >>GWEN MILLER: They are going to continue number 17.
21:58:40 Motion and second to continue item 17 to August
21:58:43 31st.
21:58:44 (Motion carried)
21:58:45 We need to open 18.
21:58:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
21:58:48 >> Second.
21:58:48 (Motion carried).
21:58:50 >> Heather Lamboy, land development.
21:58:52 I have been sworn.
21:58:53 The subject property is located south of cypress.
21:59:05 At Occident.
21:59:08 And just about here.
21:59:10 And if you will take a look at this site as well as
21:59:14 this site.
21:59:17 The rezoning maps -- I had a copy.
21:59:23 >>GWEN MILLER: It's late, we don't care.
21:59:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What is the orientation here?

21:59:27 What are we looking at?
21:59:31 >>HEATHER LAMBOY: This is the subject site, cypress.
21:59:33 Westshore over here.
21:59:35 And the petitioner is proposing to rezone the
21:59:43 property.
21:59:44 And to PD-office.
21:59:49 By the way, the aviation authority has reviewed this
21:59:52 petition and finds it consistent.
21:59:54 With their regulations.
21:59:56 The portion of the site on which the proposal with the
22:00:01 Westshore overlay district.
22:00:02 The petitioner wishes to construct a parking garage to
22:00:07 serve the proposed office building.
22:00:12 The plans are right there. I'll bring them over to
22:00:14 you in a minute.
22:00:15 The parking garage has been proposed as well.
22:00:17 Proposed uses for the office building include medical,
22:00:20 office building, business vocational school.
22:00:23 Accessory uses include restaurant, personal services,
22:00:26 retail, convenience goods,.
22:00:29 The office building, the garage is 80 feet which is
22:00:34 consistent with the aviation authority regulation.

22:00:36 The objections on the petitioner relating to the
22:00:42 Westshore overlay, which was agreed to.
22:00:45 Additional clarifications, regarding the stormwater
22:00:48 easement, which the petitioner has come to agreement
22:00:53 with stormwater and will address to revised site plan,
22:00:56 and in addition there is no objection to the reduction
22:00:58 in green space.
22:01:02 Petitioner agreed to the plan.
22:01:05 And parks and recreation had an objection, that the
22:01:11 petitioner has met with parks and recreation on the
22:01:13 site, and I believe that issue has been addressed as
22:01:17 well.
22:01:18 The petitioner has elevations for you.
22:01:21 So I would like to go through that.
22:01:23 That completes staff comments.
22:01:30 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
22:01:31 I have been sworn in.
22:01:33 Several additional comments to add to Ms. Lamboy's
22:01:37 comments.
22:01:43 This is like the third one we are doing.
22:01:45 It's within the Westshore business district.
22:01:47 Major employment center.

22:01:54 The interstate to the south.
22:01:55 We have a high-rise to the east.
22:01:57 Parking garage to the north.
22:01:58 Hotel directly to the north.
22:02:02 The proposed parking garage, associate parking garage
22:02:05 Ms. Lamboy stated and the proposed site over here
22:02:10 which will be approximately 180,000 square feet in
22:02:12 site.
22:02:15 The associated uses, Westshore, high intensity uses,
22:02:20 mostly high-rise buildings, Marriott hotel,
22:02:22 catter-corner on the north side of Westshore and
22:02:25 spruce and Westshore plaza, Planning Commission has no
22:02:29 objections to the proposed request.
22:02:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
22:02:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question for staff.
22:02:37 For stormwater staff.
22:02:45 >> I have been sworn.
22:02:48 Stormwater department.
22:02:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It looks like some correspondence
22:02:53 or analysis from Wilson Miller, and it says stormwater
22:02:56 staff has asked to do this, and they say we disagree
22:03:00 with the request and move -- they would be glad to

22:03:03 continue the dialogue.
22:03:04 Where are we on these --
22:03:06 >>> We do have some unresolved issues including the
22:03:09 upgrading across from the site.
22:03:11 And we would be glad to continue to work with
22:03:13 petitioner on that, given the opportunity.
22:03:15 I don't know if we need to go into great detail or
22:03:18 not.
22:03:20 >> So, in other words, at the end of this, just like
22:03:24 these other ones, if we continue it for two or three
22:03:26 weeks, and you could work on it with them in regard to
22:03:30 working on the notes, because there needs to be a note
22:03:32 on the site plan.
22:03:33 >> Yes.
22:03:34 And we would be glad to work with petitioner further
22:03:37 with that and reserve the right to elaborate on our
22:03:40 objection if we can't come to a resolution that way.
22:03:43 >> Okay.
22:03:44 Carry on.
22:03:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
22:03:52 >>> Good evening.
22:03:54 David Mechanik, 305 south Boulevard.

22:03:57 I have been sworn.
22:03:59 Here on behalf of the applicant, ACP Westshore
22:04:02 holdings.
22:04:05 I'll try to keep our presentation brief this evening.
22:04:07 We are in a similar situation as the other
22:04:09 petitioners.
22:04:10 We would like to hold the hearing on the rezoning
22:04:13 application, but as indicated, there are several notes
22:04:17 on the site plan that we need to add in order to
22:04:20 address the various staff comments.
22:04:23 And as indicated by the Mr. Secrest, we have indicated
22:04:27 our desire to sit down with them and hopefully iron
22:04:30 out a couple of notes that would deal with their
22:04:34 issues.
22:04:35 I have with me this evening Mr. John ward, with ACP
22:04:39 Westshore holdings.
22:04:41 Mr. Howard Bruining, architect with RR Simmons.
22:04:45 Mr. Brent Kichner, also with RR Simmons.
22:04:50 Marcie stemmark, Wilson Miller.
22:04:55 Rachel Rogers, landscape architect.
22:04:59 And Randy Coen of Cohen consulting.
22:05:01 I am not going to ask all these people to speak.

22:05:04 I would like to have Mr. Bruining come forward and
22:05:06 give you a presentation of the site plan and the
22:05:10 renderings of the project.
22:05:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How many people are here in
22:05:17 opposition to this project?
22:05:18 >>GWEN MILLER: None?
22:05:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe you want to hold for
22:05:23 rebuttal.
22:05:24 >>GWEN MILLER: If council members have any questions.
22:05:29 Do you want two weeks for continuance?
22:05:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we need more than two
22:05:33 weeks.
22:05:34 I was thinking of three weeks getting a site plan.
22:05:38 >> Stormwater issues.
22:05:41 >> September 7th.
22:05:45 >>KEVIN WHITE: So moved, 10:30 a.m.
22:05:47 >>CHAIRMAN: September 7th at 10:30 a.m.
22:05:50 Question on the motion?
22:05:52 Ding
22:05:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You did ask if anybody wanted to
22:05:57 speak.
22:05:58 Nobody responded.

22:06:00 >>GWEN MILLER: 10:30 on September 7th.
22:06:06 >>DAVID MECHANIK: You didn't want a presentation?
22:06:10 >>CHAIRMAN: Not unless you had some opposition.
22:06:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I should point out, council, just so
22:06:17 that you are aware, with the T gnaw transition with
22:06:23 this process, it creates a little bit of a stop gap
22:06:26 issue.
22:06:27 Although council has decided that it would be in the
22:06:33 petitioner's best interest to not make the
22:06:34 presentation tonight, if the petitioner does wish to
22:06:37 do so, and chooses not to dop that tonight, that's
22:06:41 fine.
22:06:41 But he still will retain that right should he feel the
22:06:43 need to do that in order to preserve his right and
22:06:48 reserve the right and come back for a continuance.
22:06:52 >> Absolutely.
22:06:52 >>DAVID MECHANIK: We have no problem deferring the
22:06:55 presentation but we would, just to make sure I'm
22:06:57 clear, we would like to make a presentation at the
22:07:01 first reading of the hearing.
22:07:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's fine.
22:07:07 Everything you are talking about verbally has already

22:07:08 been provided to us in writing as probably the record.
22:07:11 So I think the record is pretty clear in terms of what
22:07:13 you're offering.
22:07:15 I think that go back and work with staff and work out
22:07:18 those issues with staff, and then you will have first
22:07:20 reading in three weeks.
22:07:24 >>> I would like to correct one major omission on my
22:07:27 part.
22:07:28 Another member of our team is Mr. Michael English from
22:07:31 Wilson Miller and he's here this evening.
22:07:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I did have one thing before we vote.
22:07:36 Mr. Wyley, are you here on this issue and is there a
22:07:39 major tree issue?
22:07:41 Because I didn't see the note on the tree.
22:07:43 Maybe I missed.
22:07:44 >>> David Riley, parks.
22:07:48 I have been sworn.
22:07:48 Not really.
22:07:49 I consider it a successful, where we worked with the
22:07:52 stormwater and the petitioner in regards to the
22:07:55 stormwater pipe that's being relocated.
22:07:59 I was just here for questions.

22:08:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: okay.
22:08:03 Anybody on other staff that needs to speak?
22:08:06 >>GWEN MILLER: See you in three weeks.
22:08:07 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:08:08 Opposed, Nay.
22:08:09 (Motion carried)
22:08:10 19 is a continued public hearing.
22:08:20 >>> Associated with number 18.
22:08:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue for three weeks.
22:08:25 10:30.
22:08:26 All in favor?
22:08:28 (Motion Carried).
22:08:28 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to receive and file all documents.
22:08:31 Second.
22:08:32 (Motion Carried).
22:08:33 >>JULIA COLE: Mr. Dingfelder at the end of the
22:08:38 previous hearing was going to ask for an administrator
22:08:41 interpretation.
22:08:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I appreciate the reminder.
22:08:47 I forgot.
22:08:47 Yes.
22:08:48 Could we get a staff report from legal and from zoning

22:08:53 on the issue of multiple site plans for a PD?
22:09:09 (Motion carried)
22:09:10 Anything else to come before council?
22:09:11 We stand adjourned.
22:09:13