Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



Tampa City Council
Thursday, April 12, 2007
5:01 p.m. session

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

17:31:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Call the meeting to order.
17:31:33 The chair will yield to Mr. Joseph Caetano.
17:31:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Let me find my paperwork here.
17:31:49 One of my cafe workers will be here to give the
17:31:53 invocation.
17:31:56 We would like to thank him for the time that he's
17:31:59 taken out of his busy day.
17:32:02 After the invocation, stand for the pledge of
17:32:04 allegiance.

17:32:09 >>> Thank you.
17:32:09 Let's bow our heads.
17:32:12 Father, we thank you for once again allowing us to be
17:32:15 in your presence, giving us the grace and the mercy
17:32:18 that only can come from you.
17:32:19 We ask right now, Lord God, in this council meeting, O
17:32:24 God, that you would be the one to direct and guide and
17:32:27 lead every decision.
17:32:29 We pray for the spirit of harmony, unity, and most of
17:32:33 all, judgment, and understanding to take over in this
17:32:37 place.
17:32:38 We thank you right now that only the peace that can
17:32:41 come from you can be able to come in and bring
17:32:49 understanding to all.
17:32:51 In Jesus name we pray.
17:32:53 Amen.
17:32:57 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
17:33:12 >>CHAIRMAN: Roll call.
17:33:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:33:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
17:33:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:33:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

17:33:25 We need oh open item number 1.
17:33:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved, Madam Chairman.
17:33:30 >> Motion and second.
17:33:31 (Motion carried).
17:33:31 Is anyone going to speak on item number 1 through --
17:33:38 just one at a time.
17:33:39 If you are going to speak on one, would you please
17:33:40 stand and raise your right hand.
17:33:50 (Oath administered by Clerk).
17:33:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair. The reason that I ask
17:33:57 only the first item be sworn in is because that's
17:34:00 called the 5:30.
17:34:04 The others are 6:00.
17:34:05 Council, being that there are new members of council
17:34:07 here, if council is willing, Mr. McKirchy, the
17:34:11 assistant city attorney who is going to be presenting
17:34:13 this tonight, can give you a very brief overview of
17:34:16 the brownfield statute that you are going to be
17:34:19 discussing, and if council is willing he will just be
17:34:22 able to give you a brief introduction to the issue.
17:34:32 >> If it wasn't for the new members, Mr. Shelby, there
17:34:36 would be no council meeting.

17:34:38 [ Laughter ]
17:34:38 >> Give us your background.
17:34:40 >> John McKirchy, assistant city attorney.
17:34:44 Chapter 376, Florida statutes, is the statute that
17:34:48 provides government over the brownfield area, they
17:34:54 decide to designate the area for rehabilitation.
17:34:58 This requires the government to pass a resolution.
17:35:01 Chapter T 376 provides that brownfield sites are
17:35:07 generally abandoned, idled or underused commercial
17:35:11 properties where expansion of redevelopment is
17:35:12 complicated by action perceived by contamination. The
17:35:17 primary goals of the statute are reduce environmental
17:35:20 health and hazards on sites that are abandoned or
17:35:25 underused due to those hazards to create financial and
17:35:29 regulatory development of those sites, and derive
17:35:34 clean-up levels and ease environmental review of
17:35:39 clean-up
17:35:47 The designation of brownfield area and identification
17:35:50 of a person responsible for the site clean-up simply
17:35:53 titles the identified person and negotiated brownfield
17:35:56 rehabilitation agreement with the DEP, or the
17:36:01 Hillsborough EPC.

17:36:05 This is the second and final public hearing before
17:36:07 council for a proposed brownfield designation of the
17:36:09 former TECO power plant property located in the
17:36:14 bookers point area. This proposed designation follows
17:36:16 the submittal of a brownfield designation application
17:36:19 to city staff by the Hendry corporation.
17:36:22 Details of the proposed designation area and planned
17:36:25 development are outlined in the document entitled
17:36:27 staff report and the former TECO hookers plant --
17:36:32 point power plant.
17:36:33 Application for brownfield area designation, which is
17:36:35 available for public review, at the city clerk's
17:36:38 office and has been provided to the City Council.
17:36:44 City staff determined that all public notice
17:36:46 requirements have been met and recommends that council
17:36:48 approve this designation.
17:36:49 One of those criteria is the proposed use meets the
17:36:54 requirements of the city's comprehensive plan and land
17:36:58 development regulations.
17:37:05 At the conclusion of this hearing the council will
17:37:07 have an opportunity to designate the hookers point a
17:37:12 brownfield area as specified in Florida statutes.

17:37:15 If you have any questions the applicant is available,
17:37:17 I'm available, and Mr. Dan Fahey of city staff, he's
17:37:21 the environmentalist specialist, staff is available
17:37:25 for any questions.
17:37:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
17:37:28 Does petitioner want to say anything?
17:37:29 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
17:37:31 item number 1?
17:37:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
17:37:36 Quick question of city staff.
17:37:38 Is there any liability to the city in our granting
17:37:41 this brownfield designation?
17:37:46 >>> No, there's no liability to the city.
17:37:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
17:37:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions?
17:37:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the public hearing.
17:37:54 >> Second.
17:37:54 (Motion carried).
17:37:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to pass the resolution.
17:37:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the resolution.
17:38:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:38:01 (Motion carried).

17:38:02 >>GWEN MILLER: We will go into recess until 6:00ment.
17:38:10 >> Madam Chairman, there was one item continued to
17:38:12 item 30, item 15 on the regular agenda.
17:38:18 Is that 5:30 or 6?
17:38:20 Oh, it's 6:00.
17:38:21 >>CHAIRMAN: 6:00.
17:38:22 Okay.
17:38:26 We stand in recess until 6:00.
17:38:32 (City Council recess).
18:05:08 [Sounding gavel]
18:05:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
18:05:11 order.
18:05:11 Roll call.
18:05:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
18:05:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
18:05:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
18:05:23 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
18:05:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
18:05:26 At this time we are going to go through the agenda and
18:05:28 clean up.
18:05:29 Are you going to do that?
18:05:30 >> Yes.

18:05:32 Good evening.
18:05:34 Phil Shultz, Land Development Coordination.
18:05:36 I would like to clear the agenda, Madam Chairman.
18:05:38 The first item to remove from the agenda is item
18:05:41 number 2, V 06-57.
18:05:44 You have a letter from Mr. Todd Pressman requesting a
18:05:47 continuance to June 14, 2007.
18:05:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Let me see if there's anyone in the
18:05:51 public that came to speak on item number 2.
18:05:53 You can speak on the continuance.
18:05:54 Anyone that wants to speak on the continuance of item
18:05:56 number 2.
18:05:58 Need a motion.
18:05:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to clarify, is this
18:06:02 the first continuance that's been requested.
18:06:05 >>PHIL SCHULZ: This is continuing because it's up for
18:06:07 a comprehensive plan change amendment and we can't
18:06:10 hear this until the comp plan amendment comes before
18:06:12 you.
18:06:12 This has been moved twice probably.
18:06:15 But administratively because the city Planning
18:06:18 Commission and Garcia can verify that, has not had an

18:06:26 opportunity to review it so we can get this on.
18:06:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, thank you.
18:06:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We need a motion to continue to June
18:06:32 14.
18:06:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:06:34 >> Second.
18:06:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder, council.
18:06:38 Council is not requiring any additional notice for
18:06:39 this.
18:06:41 It should be announced at this point that it will be
18:06:43 coming back on June 14th at 6 p.m.
18:06:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Weaver a motion an second.
18:06:48 (Motion carried).
18:06:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We received a letter of opposition
18:06:54 to this and I was wondering if just as a courtesy to
18:06:58 the writer of that letter -- and I believe the staff,
18:07:03 if you could let that person know.
18:07:05 You have.
18:07:06 Has the petitioner seen that?
18:07:09 Maybe counsel -- I want somebody to let this person
18:07:15 know.
18:07:16 Thank you very much.

18:07:21 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Next item is number 3, wet zoning.
18:07:23 WZ 06-38.
18:07:27 Also from Mr. Todd Pressman, would like to continue
18:07:29 that, simultaneously with the rezoning to June
18:07:32 14th.
18:07:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that came
18:07:35 to speak to item number 3 on the continuance?
18:07:37 You can speak on the continuance.
18:07:41 >> Move to continue.
18:07:41 >> Second.
18:07:42 (Motion carried).
18:07:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 6 p.m.?
18:07:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Before 6 p.m.
18:07:48 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Item number 4.
18:07:50 You have -- this one is an administrative request from
18:07:54 staff.
18:07:55 Staff did not provide city clerk with the correct
18:07:58 revised petition, and therefore the notice by the city
18:08:02 was not properly noticed to the public.
18:08:05 And we are asking for a waiver of the $300 fee, and
18:08:11 also rescheduling to 5-24.
18:08:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I made a motion to that effect, to

18:08:27 waive the fee, our mistake.
18:08:28 (Motion carried).
18:08:30 >>GWEN MILLER: What day to continue to?
18:08:33 >>PHIL SCHULZ: 5-24.
18:08:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the sake of clarity, this is not
18:08:38 going to be continued.
18:08:39 It's going to be renoticed and rescheduled as a new
18:08:42 public hearing for May 24th at 6 p.m.?
18:08:47 >>> The question for the petitioner is they want to
18:08:48 know if they have to renotice.
18:08:57 >>JULIA COLE: Legal.
18:08:59 The notice went out, the mailed notice which went out
18:09:02 was correct.
18:09:02 But the newspaper did not include the entire legal
18:09:06 description with the applicant filed.
18:09:09 Is this the one we are talking about?
18:09:15 >>> Yes.
18:09:16 >>JULIA COLE: Then didn't have the revised petition.
18:09:18 The newspaper ad was not proper.
18:09:22 There is no time frame for newspaper advertising so we
18:09:26 could continue this hearing, put in a new newspaper
18:09:30 notice in order to satisfy that deficiency in the

18:09:33 notice.
18:09:34 And then we can move forward.
18:09:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could just clarify that.
18:09:40 There was a defect in the newspaper notice.
18:09:42 What date did that give?
18:09:44 >>JULIA COLE: I'm not sure.
18:09:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Oh, so it was actually noticed for
18:09:50 tonight.
18:09:52 >>> Correct.
18:09:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it going to be rescheduled and
18:09:55 kept as a continued public hearing?
18:09:56 Is that what you are saying?
18:09:58 >>JULIA COLE: I think given that what the deficiency
18:10:00 was, I think we can go ahead and deal with those
18:10:05 classification problems by renoticing in the
18:10:07 newspaper, and continuing tonight's public hearing.
18:10:09 That way anybody who came tonight believing this would
18:10:12 go forward would understand it's been continued and
18:10:14 any question of somebody being confused about what was
18:10:16 going forward can have that information.
18:10:19 >> So if I understand correctly, with the pleasure of
18:10:23 council, there will be no renoticing, and whoever is

18:10:25 listening tonight will know that this is being
18:10:27 continued or the request ultimately is for May
18:10:31 24th at 6 p.m.
18:10:32 Is that correct?
18:10:33 Thank you.
18:10:36 As part of the motion?
18:10:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As the maker of the motion I ask
18:10:43 that all these things be included in it.
18:10:45 [ Laughter ]
18:10:46 >> Second.
18:10:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:10:47 (Motion carried).
18:10:53 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Next is item 5, V 07-08.
18:10:57 Petitioner has a letter on file with city clerk
18:11:00 requesting a continuance to July 26th, '07.
18:11:04 >> So moved.
18:11:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: When you say a continuance, I believe
18:11:07 this cannot be heard, there is no affidavit filed so
18:11:11 it really has to be reset and renoticed, and the day
18:11:14 that's being requested again is July 26th?
18:11:17 >> That's correct, I'm sorry.
18:11:19 >> So moved.

18:11:20 >> Second.
18:11:20 (Motion carried).
18:11:23 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Next item requested by petitioner, item
18:11:26 8, V 07-24.
18:11:30 They are requesting a rescheduling to May 24th,
18:11:34 07.
18:11:34 >> We need to open the public hearing.
18:11:36 >> So moved, Madam Chairman.
18:11:37 >> Motion and second.
18:11:38 (Motion carried).
18:11:38 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
18:11:42 number 8 on the continuance?
18:11:43 Need a motion to continue.
18:11:45 >> So moved.
18:11:45 >> Second.
18:11:49 >>> At 6 p.m.
18:11:50 (Motion carried).
18:11:51 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Next item just came to us this evening,
18:11:55 petitioner item 10, Z 07-31.
18:11:59 They would like to revise their site plan and resubmit
18:12:04 in two weeks, preferably at a daytime meeting.
18:12:09 >> Need to open the public hearing.

18:12:11 >> So moved.
18:12:12 >> Second.
18:12:12 (Motion carried).
18:12:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:12:15 would like to speak to item 10 on the continuance?
18:12:18 Need to continue it.
18:12:19 >> So moved to continue.
18:12:21 >> What's the date?
18:12:22 >> April 26th.
18:12:24 In an A.M. meeting.
18:12:26 >> An a.m. meeting?
18:12:28 Is petitioner here?
18:12:33 It is council's custom to have all first readings set
18:12:38 for evening meetings unless council wishes to waive
18:12:41 that provision and set it for a day meeting.
18:12:46 >> Can we ask the petitioner why they want a day
18:12:48 meeting?
18:12:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, would you come up, please?
18:13:01 >>> Those are very minor changes to the site plan that
18:13:03 needs to be done.
18:13:04 And the site plan has already been revised and it
18:13:07 could be resubmitted tomorrow to meet the April

18:13:10 26th hearing.
18:13:12 And what we are trying to do is save a grand tree that
18:13:14 is on-site.
18:13:16 And been giving a lot of problem --
18:13:21 >> They want to know why you want a daytime meeting.
18:13:24 >>> Oh, because the changes are very minor.
18:13:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in opposition, Mr.
18:13:32 Schulz, that you know of?
18:13:33 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Not that I'm aware of, no, ma'am.
18:13:36 >> In light of the fact nobody has shown up for the
18:13:39 night meeting I don't see why we can't put it on for
18:13:41 the day.
18:13:41 And I'll move that to waive the rules.
18:13:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to waive the rules.
18:13:46 (Motion carried).
18:13:49 >> I am going -- a clarification again here, process.
18:13:55 You know, when you start to waive the rules.
18:13:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can just clarify for council.
18:14:01 For those of you who have your rules.
18:14:04 In this case it's rule 3-C-2.
18:14:09 The rule reads exactly as follows.
18:14:11 For those zoning meetings that are required to be

18:14:14 scheduled, continued or set for reconsideration,
18:14:16 council shall schedule these items on a future agenda
18:14:18 at the end of the agenda following new petitions
18:14:21 consistent with the number of limitation that is were
18:14:24 set forth above.
18:14:25 At council's discretion, by unanimous vote, these
18:14:28 cases may be placed on a future day agenda if deemed
18:14:32 appropriate, and without hardship to interested
18:14:35 parties.
18:14:36 So by these rules, it would require a unanimous vote
18:14:38 if council wishes to set it for a daytime meeting.
18:14:45 >>> Madam Chairman in, view of what the attorney just
18:14:47 told us, I ask for a substitute motion not to have it
18:14:51 during the day, to have it at night, because we
18:14:52 already have one council member in opposition to that.
18:14:55 And if we take a vote -- we can't do it.
18:15:00 The attorney just told us.
18:15:03 >>> The April 26th nighttime meeting is already --
18:15:06 it already has 15 cases.
18:15:08 >>GWEN MILLER: The next one.
18:15:09 What's the next date?
18:15:12 >>> That would be May 10th but that's for comp

18:15:15 plans but there are openings on that.
18:15:20 >>GWEN MILLER: June 8th?
18:15:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think most of us probably agree
18:15:27 on the process issue.
18:15:28 But it's not without precedent.
18:15:30 And we have done this before.
18:15:32 Our theory is we set the first meeting at night.
18:15:35 Nobody shows.
18:15:36 Not one person is showing up at the night meeting.
18:15:38 Then we sort of satisfied the neighborhood courtesy of
18:15:42 doing the night effort.
18:15:44 And that's why we fall back to going ahead and saying,
18:15:47 okay, you know, nobody is here at night.
18:15:49 Nobody cares about this particular rezoning, we'll
18:15:51 have it during the day.
18:15:52 People still can come, if there's a huge outcry, then
18:15:56 the second hearing could actually be at night, you
18:15:58 know, if there's some south of outpouring.
18:16:04 It's not that big a deal, but that's just sort of the
18:16:06 way we have done things.
18:16:13 >>> I understand that.
18:16:13 I just want to get in the -- once we have rules in

18:16:18 process, I like to be consistent, but what happens is
18:16:25 when you start doing that, then it can go on and on
18:16:29 and on.
18:16:30 And I want to make sure that we, from my perspective,
18:16:36 that we look at that so we are not here at 3:00 in the
18:16:40 morning trying to hear these.
18:16:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, just for clarification,
18:16:47 sometimes, because of council's schedule, you run
18:16:50 afoul of another rule, which council instituted, and
18:16:54 that's rule C-1, and what that says is City Council
18:16:58 shall hold evening meetings on the second and fourth
18:17:01 Tuesday of every month beginning at 6 p.m. for public
18:17:03 hearings on zoning petitions and other zoning matters.
18:17:05 And this is where council added this limitation.
18:17:08 The agenda for such hearings, because of council
18:17:12 member's concern, it was stated that agenda shall be
18:17:17 limited to ten new petitions and no more than three
18:17:19 previously continued petitions.
18:17:22 It also says council may schedule matters of public
18:17:24 interest appropriate for evening meetings at a time
18:17:26 immediately prior to zoning petitions while you have
18:17:28 the 5:30 brownfield hearing today.

18:17:30 So what actually -- Mr. Schulz is telling you is those
18:17:35 slots necessarily that are the ten new petitions and
18:17:39 the three continuances, if those are filled, they have
18:17:41 to go to a later date unless council waives that rule,
18:17:48 and allows an additional hearing, which is why in
18:17:50 these cases you have as many hearings as you have
18:17:52 tonight, or you have 15 as he said for that particular
18:17:55 day that he mentioned.
18:17:59 >>> I stand corrected on the 15.
18:18:00 On 5-24 there are only 13 as of today.
18:18:05 There are only 13.
18:18:08 >> Actually, do you have slots?
18:18:11 >>> We have 13, but we go up to 15 if council wants
18:18:14 to.
18:18:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: council's pleasure.
18:18:19 >>GWEN MILLER: What's council's pleasure?
18:18:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move to continue it to the
18:18:25 evening meeting.
18:18:27 What date?
18:18:28 You said you had slots on what date?
18:18:32 >>> There are 13 but you would have to waive the 14 or
18:18:36 15 on 5-24.

18:18:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll give that a try.
18:18:40 I'll move to waive the rules and set it for 5-24 in
18:18:43 the evening.
18:18:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 6 p.m.
18:18:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This lady said she had like little
18:18:50 minor things to save the tree, we are putting off
18:18:52 another six weeks.
18:18:53 I think we should just do it in two weeks during the
18:18:56 day.
18:18:57 >>> Can't.
18:18:57 It has to be unanimous.
18:19:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Scott, are you still opposed to it?
18:19:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think one thing to understand, I try
18:19:13 to be very consistent on my vote.
18:19:18 That's just how I am.
18:19:19 That's the way I function.
18:19:20 And I think we should be very careful when we start
18:19:23 waiving rules, and all of a sudden, one affects
18:19:29 another and that's what I'm hearing tonight now.
18:19:31 It's my understanding we still can go to 15, is that
18:19:34 right?
18:19:35 >>> You can go up to as many as you like as long as

18:19:38 you waive the rules.
18:19:39 Normally, what your rule states is you have -- you
18:19:43 have, as a rule, directed staff to set no more than 10
18:19:49 new hearings on an evening meeting, and three
18:19:53 continuances.
18:19:54 That's what your rules state.
18:19:55 Now, within that rule, if council wishes to have
18:20:00 flexibility, they can move to waive that rule, and add
18:20:03 meetings -- excuse me, add hearings.
18:20:06 However it sees fit.
18:20:07 But I caution council, the clerk does keep tally, and
18:20:10 staff keeps tally of how many there are, and council
18:20:13 should be aware of it so it doesn't find itself in
18:20:16 that position should it choose to do that.
18:20:17 Otherwise under the rules you are limited to a
18:20:19 particular number of slots, and once those slots are
18:20:22 filled, they have to go out however many weeks they go
18:20:25 out
18:20:31 Actually, the rules have to be -- these rules may be
18:20:36 temporarily suspended by unanimous vote of the members
18:20:40 of council then present.
18:20:42 So the rules state, unless it's waived by unanimous

18:20:47 vote.
18:20:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chairman, unless I'm wrong --
18:20:51 and I have been wrong before -- we have violated every
18:20:53 rule there is because we have five continuances today.
18:20:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:21:00 They waived the rules to put them on there.
18:21:02 >> Well, they are wrong, attorney is wrong, we are
18:21:06 wrong.
18:21:06 There's five of them today if I can tell.
18:21:09 Five.
18:21:10 >> Actually more.
18:21:11 [ Laughter ]
18:21:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's get through this one.
18:21:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
18:21:17 What are we going to do with this?
18:21:18 Number 10.
18:21:19 Still trying to decide number 10.
18:21:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, there was a motion that was
18:21:23 made that did not receive unanimous vote to set it for
18:21:25 a day meeting.
18:21:26 >>GWEN MILLER: We are not talking about that vote.
18:21:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There's a motion on the floor now.

18:21:30 >>GWEN MILLER: To waive the rules to have number 10 in
18:21:32 the morning at 10 a.m.
18:21:35 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
18:21:37 Opposed, Nay.
18:21:40 >> Nay.
18:21:40 >> Nay.
18:21:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Another motion.
18:21:45 >> Christmas.
18:21:46 >>> I move it be held the evening session on 5-24.
18:21:49 >> Second.
18:21:52 >> 5-24 has 13.
18:21:53 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to waive the rules.
18:21:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Boy, got to waive the rules. This
18:21:58 is like -- the motion that --
18:22:06 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:22:07 What you have right now is you have a meeting on May
18:22:09 10th that was specifically for comprehensive plan
18:22:12 amendments.
18:22:14 I'm not sure if you need to waive the rules or do
18:22:16 anything.
18:22:16 But you could add zoning on that evening.
18:22:19 But just so everybody understands, especially the new

18:22:23 folks, you specifically directed that you have your
18:22:25 comprehensive plan amendments first, so you weren't
18:22:29 here all night.
18:22:30 But I understand from Phil -- how many plan amendments
18:22:33 there are?
18:22:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Virginia park got pulled.
18:22:37 So that's one less.
18:22:39 >>JULIA COLE: I guess so everybody will understand
18:22:42 where we are.
18:22:58 >> According to the calendar for May 10th you
18:23:00 currently have eight plan amendments scheduled that
18:23:03 night.
18:23:03 There are no land rezonings that night.
18:23:06 April 26th night, if you are trying to schedule
18:23:10 for something for that night, you currently already
18:23:12 have on that night two chapter 27 code amendments at
18:23:18 5:01.
18:23:18 You have seven land rezonings that night.
18:23:21 One continued closure and eight continued land
18:23:24 rezonings that night.
18:23:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm a little concerned when we keep
18:23:30 talking about continuations and there's eight here,

18:23:32 five years, and the rule specifically says three.
18:23:35 That's number one.
18:23:35 Number two, on these continued hearings hopefully we
18:23:39 are not taking any evidence without the public being
18:23:41 heard and the public is going to come back at a later
18:23:44 date.
18:23:44 I hope that's not being done.
18:23:46 And I remember a little bit being in compile for a
18:23:49 little while -- call me new, call me old, call me
18:23:53 anything you want -- but it's that -- if you have a
18:23:56 continuance, you just can't continue having
18:23:58 continuances, you know, 40 times.
18:24:02 I think we used to say you had two and the third one
18:24:04 is in and after that bye-bye, you have to do
18:24:07 everything from the start.
18:24:08 And I hope that's still the sentiment of the council.
18:24:10 >>GWEN MILLER: It is, yes.
18:24:13 You made a motion.
18:24:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: yes, ma'am.
18:24:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Said we have 13 already.
18:24:22 >> Let's deal with it.
18:24:23 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to wail waive the rules.

18:24:26 >> In that motion, that motion includes a waiving of
18:24:28 the rules of council's procedures so this may happen.
18:24:32 >>GWEN MILLER: May 24th at 6 p.m.
18:24:37 We have 14?
18:24:39 >>> 15 now.
18:24:41 >> That would be 14?
18:24:42 >>> Yes, ma'am.
18:24:43 >> If that's okay with council.
18:24:44 All in favor say Aye.
18:24:46 Opposed, Nay.
18:24:46 (Motion carried).
18:24:47 Okay.
18:24:52 That's it?
18:24:56 May 24, 6 p.m
18:24:59 Any others?
18:25:01 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Yes, ma'am.
18:25:02 I was just handed a note by the petitioner for item
18:25:05 number 7, V 06-145, 1515 south bay villa plaza.
18:25:14 They would like to reconfigure their project and
18:25:17 continue to 5-10, if you would allow that on council
18:25:22 night. If not, the only other night then to add
18:25:25 another one to, May 24th.

18:25:33 >>GWEN MILLER: We don't know if we are going to
18:25:35 continue or not.
18:25:36 Let's see.
18:25:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to open number 7.
18:25:40 >> Second.
18:25:40 (Motion carried).
18:25:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone -- petition every first.
18:25:47 >> She would like to go to May 24th.
18:25:51 >>> Linda Pearson for the record representing
18:25:53 applicant on this item.
18:25:55 May 10th is not a good day for me.
18:25:58 I am not going to be in town that day but May 24th
18:26:00 would be fine.
18:26:01 We were notified by the staff earlier this week that
18:26:04 we need to make some minor notes and minor changes to
18:26:07 the site plan that is in place, and in response to
18:26:11 some of the requests from neighbor residents.
18:26:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who came
18:26:16 to speak on item 7?
18:26:17 You can if you want to speak on the continuance.
18:26:19 You can speak only on the continuance.
18:26:21 Come up, if you agree with the continuance you can

18:26:23 speak on it.
18:26:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you could state your name and your
18:26:31 position, whether you are for or against the
18:26:33 continuance tonight.
18:26:35 >>> Hugh Smith, against the, 2418 West Palm.
18:26:39 This matter has been continued before.
18:26:45 It has been -- certainly we have been prepared to
18:26:47 speak in opposition to this petition.
18:26:49 It's not recommended by city staff in terms of the
18:26:53 broad overview, and the proposed dates in May are
18:26:58 dates that are already booked on my calendar, and
18:27:01 others of the opposing parties.
18:27:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:27:06 Next.
18:27:11 >>> Walter Crumbley.
18:27:12 I'm with the Courier City Oscawana group.
18:27:15 I'm here to speak on behalf of this petition.
18:27:18 You know, we are back in the same old dog fight we
18:27:21 have been in before, continuance after continuance.
18:27:24 And I think that the council should set a policy that
18:27:28 if you are not ready to go and you haven't satisfied
18:27:32 all the administrative requirements that you should

18:27:35 not be able to come down here and have a hearing,
18:27:38 because myself and a lot of other people get involved
18:27:43 with somebody calls, says go down there, be there, you
18:27:47 know, you cancel your plans, you show up, and you get
18:27:51 here, and, "oh, I want a continuance, I have to move a
18:27:56 tree or I have to do something like that."
18:27:58 You should have known about that.
18:27:59 If you don't have all your ducks in a row, you should
18:28:02 not be asking for a hearing.
18:28:04 And I object to continuing these things time after
18:28:08 time.
18:28:08 Thank you.
18:28:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, I also received a
18:28:13 letter from the neighborhood association.
18:28:15 I think based on the testimony we have heard, we
18:28:17 should hear this tonight.
18:28:28 >>> Thank you.
18:28:28 John McDonald, resident, 2303 South Ardson place.
18:28:34 My wife is struggling to get my children to the
18:28:37 ballpark this evening.
18:28:38 I have scouts tonight.
18:28:38 I'm here today ready to be in objection to this.

18:28:41 I would like to you take that into consideration that
18:28:43 I shuffled my plans and travel arrangements and family
18:28:47 life and professional life this afternoon to be here,
18:28:49 and I am in objection of the continuance.
18:29:01 >>> John Howie, 1507 bay villa place.
18:29:06 I'm the resident agent for a six unit condominium
18:29:09 right next on the north side of this subject piece of
18:29:11 property.
18:29:13 We are opposed to it.
18:29:15 And I think they ought to go ahead and have it
18:29:17 tonight.
18:29:19 And get it over with.
18:29:22 There's very good reasons why it won't work.
18:29:24 I'm an architect.
18:29:26 And I know the square footage and the problems that
18:29:29 they have got.
18:29:29 Thank you.
18:29:34 >> I'm Diana fuller, the property at 1517 bay villa
18:29:38 place right next door to the proposed project.
18:29:40 I likewise oppose the continuance, and oppose the
18:29:44 project.
18:29:45 Likewise, I think if you do continue this hearing

18:29:48 tonight that you ought to give the neighbors the
18:29:50 notice, because we have been e-mailing each other,
18:29:54 coordinating these things over and over again, and we
18:29:57 almost did not get notice of tonight's hearing,
18:29:59 because it was continued from the last setting.
18:30:02 So I would propose that if you do continue it that you
18:30:04 certainly make them notify everybody and let them know
18:30:08 when the hearing is going to be.
18:30:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
18:30:12 Come up.
18:30:17 >>> I'm Timothy Boaz, 2312 Ardson place in the
18:30:22 property immediately behind the proposed development,
18:30:24 also oppose this project, and I oppose the continuance
18:30:29 for the same reasons that most of my other neighbors
18:30:31 have already told you about.
18:30:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else want to speak?
18:30:37 Ms. Cole.
18:30:37 >>JULIA COLE: No more comments from interested
18:30:40 citizens.
18:30:40 I just want to make something clear for the record.
18:30:42 And I would ask Mr. Schulz and he can correct me if I
18:30:46 am wrong, that I understand the applicant is

18:30:50 requesting may be requesting at the end of a hearing
18:30:53 to continue their case in order to make changes to
18:30:55 their site plan in order to comply with staff comments
18:30:59 and the objections from staff.
18:31:01 I want it clearly stated for the record that these are
18:31:04 comments that were received timely by this petitioner
18:31:06 and didn't just come to the applicant last week.
18:31:10 And I just want to make sure that everybody is aware
18:31:11 of that.
18:31:12 The other commentary I want to make on this issue is
18:31:15 if this case does go forward tonight, it goes forward
18:31:17 in the manner in which it's been submitted, with those
18:31:20 objections, and as the site plan that is in front of
18:31:23 you this evening.
18:31:24 So that's what you will be reviewing.
18:31:26 If you choose to go forward after this request for
18:31:28 continuance.
18:31:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There are just four of us that
18:31:32 haven't been here but maybe a couple of weeks.
18:31:34 When this petition originated, what dated?
18:31:37 Does anybody know?
18:31:51 >> Madam Chairman, the original receipt of this is

18:31:54 September 29th, 2006.
18:31:59 This was scheduled for February 8th, 2007, and
18:32:04 then a request for continuance, and moved forward to
18:32:08 tonight.
18:32:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move that we hear this tonight.
18:32:16 >> Second.
18:32:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to go on
18:32:19 with this petition.
18:32:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me understand something.
18:32:24 Where is counsel?
18:32:28 Here again -- and I have to get up to speed on this --
18:32:33 what is council rule on continuance in terms of that?
18:32:36 Because the applicant has a right I guess for the
18:32:45 continuance.
18:32:46 As I understand there needs to be changes made to the
18:32:49 plan based on staff recommendation.
18:32:50 Now may not be a good time but this is the reason why
18:32:53 a zoning here master process is so important.
18:32:59 The gentleman ought to have it worked out before he
18:33:01 got here and then vote it up or down pretty much as to
18:33:04 neighborhood had opportunity to discuss and meet with
18:33:06 the applicant, and hash out all this stuff.

18:33:09 And September to now, before you know it we continue
18:33:14 this, and it will be September again a year later.
18:33:18 So under the law, what are our options here?
18:33:24 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:33:27 There is no obligation for council to continue.
18:33:33 I do know they have that in the county.
18:33:35 And I don't believe there's any specific rules
18:33:38 relating to continuances.
18:33:41 We have some stuff coming forward with our changes for
18:33:43 the PD process that will assist in the situation.
18:33:46 But as it stands today, there is no obligation on the
18:33:49 part of council to continue this case today.
18:33:53 But what is in front of you is the site plan as
18:33:56 submitted with the objections from staff, and the
18:33:59 petitioner has the right to request continuance to be
18:34:02 able to deal with those comments as well as deal with
18:34:04 any of the comments from the citizens.
18:34:06 But you are under no obligation to grant a continuance
18:34:09 and you are under no obligation, and you have the
18:34:12 right to vote the plan as submitted up or down.
18:34:16 And I want to say I understand that this is the first
18:34:19 continuance, is that correct?

18:34:20 So I did want to also make that statement.
18:34:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have also been informed by the
18:34:27 deputy clerk that this was renoticed to the interest
18:34:30 parties on February 20th for tonight's hearing.
18:34:33 So from that date, it has been renoticed.
18:34:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:34:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A motion to keep going.
18:35:07 Oh.
18:35:12 >> Sometimes, council, by way of letting you know,
18:35:14 it's been the custom of council that if a hearing is
18:35:18 being continued for a lengthy period of time, months,
18:35:21 in fact, that we it sometimes gives the community an
18:35:28 opportunity to forget it's been set, council has asked
18:35:30 petitioners have agreed, although there's no
18:35:34 obligation under the code, whether they wish to
18:35:36 renotice.
18:35:37 And this F a lengthy continuance is in order to allow
18:35:40 them to continue it that far forward, council let's
18:35:43 them do that if they go on the record and say they
18:35:45 will renotice.
18:35:46 >> The motion is to continue this tonight, just move
18:35:49 forward tonight.

18:35:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just wanted them to let them know
18:35:53 that's why the notice is sent.
18:35:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion to hear the public
18:35:58 hearing tonight, item 7.
18:36:00 All in favor say Aye.
18:36:01 Opposed, Nay.
18:36:02 (Motion carried).
18:36:03 Any others we need to take care of?
18:36:06 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Yes.
18:36:07 I'm a little off schedule here.
18:36:08 Did we continue item 8?
18:36:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:36:10 >>PHIL SCHULZ: And we continued item 10?
18:36:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:36:14 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Item 14 you have a letter to the city
18:36:21 clerk's office to withdraw that.
18:36:23 >> So moved.
18:36:24 >> Second.
18:36:24 (Motion carried).
18:36:24 >>GWEN MILLER: That's it?
18:36:35 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Yes.
18:36:35 If you are prepared to move forward on the first

18:36:37 hearing.
18:36:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that's
18:36:40 going to speak on item number 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15,
18:36:47 16, 17, 18?
18:36:49 Please stand and raise your right hand.
18:37:00 (Oath administered by Clerk).
18:37:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all written communications
18:37:06 relative to today's hearings that have been available
18:37:07 for public inspection in City Council's office be
18:37:10 received and filed by motion at this time.
18:37:19 >> So moved.
18:37:19 >> Second.
18:37:20 (Motion carried).
18:37:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If council has this H communication
18:37:24 with any member of the public, petitioner or his or
18:37:26 her representative, please disclose prior to action
18:37:28 the person or persons, group or entity with whom the
18:37:31 verbal communication occurred, and the substance of
18:37:33 that verbal communication.
18:37:35 Finally, ladies and gentlemen, if I could have your
18:37:37 attention.
18:37:37 This is a very large crowd, and in order to move

18:37:41 things along quickly and preserve the record, when you
18:37:44 state your name, please reaffirm that you have been
18:37:46 sworn in.
18:37:48 And I put a little sign up by the lecturn to remind
18:37:50 you, so I don't have to remind you if when you state
18:37:53 your name, please reaffirm you have been sworn.
18:37:55 Thank you.
18:37:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 67.
18:37:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:38:00 >> Second.
18:38:00 (Motion carried).
18:38:06 >>PHIL SCHULZ: I would like to go back and consider
18:38:09 one more item from the agenda, I was informed by
18:38:12 petitioner for item 9, Z 07-26.
18:38:15 He wants to add a note on storm drainage on the plan
18:38:19 and he can have that to us tomorrow morning, and he
18:38:22 would like to continue for two weeks in the a.m. at
18:38:27 your consideration.
18:38:28 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open the public hearing.
18:38:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:38:31 >> Second.
18:38:32 (Motion carried).

18:38:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that came
18:38:34 to speak on item 9?
18:38:35 You may speak on the continuance.
18:38:41 Anyone that wants to speak on item 9?
18:38:43 We need to waive the rules.
18:38:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't think that's going to
18:38:48 happen.
18:38:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to continue item 9 to
18:38:50 what time?
18:38:51 Two weeks from today in the morning meeting, 10 a.m.
18:38:54 And this is a downtown project.
18:38:59 Maybe not downtown.
18:39:00 3300 north Tampa.
18:39:01 Sounds like it's not downtown.
18:39:03 >>> Just north of downtown.
18:39:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So sort of a downtown project.
18:39:07 And nobody is here?
18:39:12 I see heads shaking.
18:39:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I'm just about to ask Ms.
18:39:17 Cole to chime in if she feels for new members of
18:39:21 council.
18:39:21 Chapter 27 changes are being made to address some

18:39:24 concerns.
18:39:24 And one of those concerns, glitches, if you will,
18:39:30 would be council cannot pass something if it requires
18:39:33 just a note to be added.
18:39:35 It has to be continued for a minimum two of weeks.
18:39:37 That is something that is going to be addressed, going
18:39:39 to be coming back to council to cure.
18:39:41 But unfortunately, just be very -- the very act of
18:39:44 adding one simple note until we cure that by necessity
18:39:47 under your code until we amend it requires that
18:39:49 continuance.
18:39:50 >>JULIA COLE: I'm going to take this moment to just
18:39:55 explain a little bit about the process.
18:39:57 The way things work is you need to have your site plan
18:40:00 in 13 days before the hearing.
18:40:03 No text or graphical changes can be made after that
18:40:06 date.
18:40:08 If something needs to be changed as a result of the
18:40:10 hearing or as a result of staff comments, et cetera,
18:40:13 that petition will need to be continued a minimum of
18:40:16 two weeks in order to make that change as a result of
18:40:19 the hearing.

18:40:22 And that is something that we are seeking to change.
18:40:26 >>GWEN MILLER: The motion again?
18:40:27 Miranda.
18:40:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Again nobody is here, at the
18:40:32 evening meeting, to move this to the morning meeting,
18:40:34 two weeks from today.
18:40:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
18:40:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:40:41 >> And waive the rules, 10:00.
18:40:42 You said that.
18:40:44 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
18:40:49 Opposed?
18:40:50 You said no?
18:40:51 What do we do?
18:40:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move it in two weeks to the evening
18:40:56 meeting.
18:40:57 In two weeks we have an evening meeting.
18:40:59 So at 6 p.m.
18:41:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But it's full.
18:41:05 >> Waive the recalls to allow --
18:41:08 >>> But it's really full.
18:41:09 >> But this is a note that's being added.

18:41:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's no opposition.
18:41:14 >> That's my motion.
18:41:15 >>MARY MULHERN: The nature is really full, was really
18:41:20 full, and we have already eliminated how many items?
18:41:22 I think if we have to add one more item in two weeks,
18:41:25 maybe we should do that, for the evening meeting.
18:41:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:41:30 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
18:41:31 Opposed, Nay.
18:41:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion carried unanimously.
18:41:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks at 6 p.m.
18:41:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I didn't hear if the vote was
18:41:46 unanimous?
18:41:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, it was.
18:41:48 Yes.
18:41:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Do you keep the records of who
18:41:52 votes, who doesn't vote?
18:41:53 I don't understand this anymore.
18:41:55 Maybe I'm wrong.
18:41:59 All right, thank you.
18:42:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 6.
18:42:05 >>PHIL SCHULZ: First item, V 06-43, 5009 east

18:42:15 Linebaugh Avenue.
18:42:17 Julio Delgado is petitioner. This was a misnotice on
18:42:21 February 8th and moving forward. The DRC has
18:42:24 reviewed the petition and has no objections to the
18:42:26 request to build a single-family detached house on an
18:42:30 irregular lot.
18:42:32 Current zoning is RS-60.
18:42:34 In summary the petitioner is requesting a special use
18:42:36 for the property at 5009 east Linebaugh Avenue to
18:42:39 build a two-story, 1,810 square foot single family
18:42:44 detached a house on an irregular lot, 306 less the
18:42:50 original lot for a total lot area of 31,728 square
18:42:55 feet.
18:42:59 Proposed setbacks are 177 feet fronting on Linebaugh
18:43:02 Avenue, 30 feet on the east side, 55.8 feet on the
18:43:05 west side and 67.5 feet in the rear yard.
18:43:09 If you have any questions, we will be available for
18:43:12 questions.
18:43:20 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:43:22 I have been sworn in.
18:43:25 The land use for the area is residential 20 to the
18:43:29 north of Linebaugh, and residential 10 to the south.

18:43:32 This is subject property in question.
18:43:34 Here's an aerial so you can get an idea of the
18:43:37 context.
18:43:38 Based on the size of the lot, the density potential
18:43:44 the applicant could potentially put five on-site is --
18:43:49 in character as far as being single family attached.
18:43:52 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
18:43:54 proposed request.
18:43:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:43:55 >> Carlos Montella, Jr., agent for Julio Delgado.
18:44:17 It's been a lengthy process.
18:44:19 We had a couple misnotices, staff changes, we had no
18:44:24 objections from staff.
18:44:25 Just moving along with the project.
18:44:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:44:29 wants to speak on item number 6?
18:44:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the public hearing.
18:44:34 >> Second.
18:44:34 (Motion carried).
18:44:35 >> Do we have an ordinance?
18:44:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:44:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?

18:44:45 >> Move an ordinance approving a special use S-2
18:44:48 approving a single family attached house on an
18:44:51 irregular lot in the general vicinity of 5009 east
18:44:56 Linebaugh Avenue, city of Tampa, Florida, and more
18:44:59 particularly described in section 1 thereafter,
18:45:01 providing an effective date.
18:45:01 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
18:45:03 (Motion carried).
18:45:05 We need to open item 7.
18:45:13 >> Move to open.
18:45:13 >> Second.
18:45:14 (Motion carried).
18:45:15 >>> Next item is zoning case Z-06-145, Bayshore
18:45:33 Gardens, south bay villa place.
18:45:37 Retouch is the petitioner.
18:45:39 It was miss noticed on February 8th. This is a
18:45:42 renotice of that date.
18:45:45 The development review committee has reviewed the
18:45:47 petition and has objections to the request.
18:45:50 Current zoning is RM-16, multi-family residential to
18:45:54 PD, planned development, single family attached.
18:45:58 Waivers and considerations, first of section 13-161-A,

18:46:04 waivers, of 3 feet along western property boundary for
18:46:08 use of a 6-foot high privacy fence to buffer visible
18:46:11 parking for adjacent property.
18:46:13 Number 2, section 27-246, a waiver of reduction, from
18:46:19 20 to 11 feet.
18:46:21 Waiver number 3 requested section 13-161-E, waiver of
18:46:26 green space of 96 square feet to be assessed in
18:46:29 payment of fee in lieu, payable to the City of Tampa
18:46:33 Parks and Recreation Department, said fee is to be
18:46:35 based on a current rate at time of permitting and of
18:46:43 any building permits.
18:46:44 Petitioner proposes to re zone property at 1515 bay
18:46:47 villa place to planned development, construct a 7,242
18:46:50 square foot building containing 3 single-family
18:46:53 attached units.
18:46:54 Setbacks for the site include 21 feet on south bay
18:46:58 villa place, 5-foot side yard on northwest side, 10.2
18:47:05 inches on the rear, and the southwest, and 14 feet
18:47:09 side yard on the southeast.
18:47:12 The proposed plan requires one guest parking space,
18:47:16 that petitioner is providing.
18:47:18 Proposed building height is three stories, 35 feet,

18:47:21 with an additional 4 feet, 18 units for a total of 39
18:47:30 feet.
18:47:30 Only one of the three proposed federal style single
18:47:33 family units has a front entrance orientation towards
18:47:36 south bay villa place.
18:47:38 Land Development Coordination objects, pursuant to
18:47:41 sections 27-321-1, 3 and 4.
18:47:46 It is our belief that while the petitioner proposes
18:47:49 the structure is only five feet from the northwest lot
18:47:52 line and two to three feet from several protect trees
18:47:55 and two grand trees, that's raising concerns on an
18:47:58 adjacent impact of the natural elements.
18:48:01 Our second objection, the petitioner has made some
18:48:03 effort to protect the natural environment.
18:48:06 That meets the development team in our opinion to
18:48:08 further down-size or reconfigure the building layout
18:48:12 based on the City of Tampa chapter 13 protective
18:48:14 radius, both protected grand tree.
18:48:17 Mary Daniels Bryson will come up after my presentation
18:48:21 and discuss it.
18:48:23 After Mary Daniels Bryson, Mr. Brian gentry will come
18:48:26 up and discuss his objections.

18:48:31 The third objection is, the petitioner is proposing to
18:48:33 construct a rental style foundation to avoid adverse
18:48:38 impact on the ecosystem along the northwest side of
18:48:41 the building but needs a 6-foot clearance between some
18:48:44 protected trees and the proposed structure.
18:48:46 Ms. Mary Daniels Bryson will come up in just a minute
18:48:49 but when I give you a little bit of -- additional
18:48:54 information.
18:48:59 Elmo, please.
18:49:04 You can see here is the subject property.
18:49:06 Here's bay villa.
18:49:16 This is a picture of the site.
18:49:17 I'm not sure how well you can see it.
18:49:20 But there are numerous trees around the perimeter of
18:49:22 the property.
18:49:24 Plus in the front, this is the house, which I think
18:49:28 you heard the owner here recently.
18:49:34 This house, this structure, I should say this tree
18:49:38 here is a grand tree.
18:49:40 And again they'll discuss their concerns on that.
18:49:48 Here is the project to the west which you heard from
18:49:50 that gentleman as well.

18:49:51 This is the project directly across the street.
18:49:54 This is another view of the adjacent structures.
18:49:58 This is one of the few single family detached along
18:50:02 bay villa place.
18:50:04 And I want you to note that along bay villa place --
18:50:08 and this picture you will know a little more -- there
18:50:13 are no sidewalks.
18:50:14 And if you look on the site plan, note 8, petitioner
18:50:21 is asking not to construct sidewalks, and to pay a fee
18:50:24 in lieu.
18:50:24 The concern Ms. Daniels Bryson will bring up is there
18:50:28 are so many grand trees along this route, it could be
18:50:32 very difficult and have a very disconcerning effect on
18:50:40 the roots.
18:50:41 I'll turn it over if you don't have any more questions
18:50:43 for me to Ms. Daniels Bryson.
18:50:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have been sworn in, is that
18:50:47 correct?
18:50:50 >>> I'm sorry.
18:50:52 That's correct.
18:50:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's all right.
18:50:54 Thank you.

18:50:55 >>> Mary Daniels Bryson, Land Development
18:50:56 Coordination.
18:50:57 I have been sworn.
18:50:59 Basically, the property line that contains the
18:51:05 trees --
18:51:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Can you move it up a little bit?
18:51:09 Thank you.
18:51:10 >>> There we go.
18:51:11 That property line, there are several trees that need
18:51:14 to be protected.
18:51:21 The site plan. The structure does go particularly
18:51:23 close to some of those trees.
18:51:28 We are requiring a six-foot protective -- actually a
18:51:32 ten-foot protective radius.
18:51:34 That protective radius is to include an amount of six
18:51:38 feet of clear space, and foundation after that.
18:51:42 The structure does not provide that at this time.
18:51:46 The petitioner did state that they would clean it up,
18:51:50 and cantilever the foundation back at six foot, and to
18:51:56 try to accommodate those trees.
18:51:58 There is a grand oak, 48-inch oak, on the southeast of
18:52:03 the property that needs to be protected.

18:52:06 And if you put the sidewalk in on that property line,
18:52:10 it will infringe on the tree.
18:52:13 We have got as close as we possibly can to this tree,
18:52:16 and any further pervious pavement placed in the area
18:52:21 will be detrimental to the tree.
18:52:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Finished?
18:52:27 Ms. Saul-Sena?
18:52:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Quick question.
18:52:29 What's being proposed, is the three story building
18:52:33 near the 48-inch oak and complex?
18:52:36 >> We did a field visit, and review the canopy
18:52:40 conflict, and it does not appear that it would be.
18:52:44 >>> Thank you.
18:52:50 >> Transportation.
18:52:50 I have been sworn.
18:52:51 I want to make it clear to council that transportation
18:52:53 does object to waiver number 2.
18:52:56 I have a technical objection.
18:52:58 I want to make that clear, a waiver to reduce the
18:53:01 drive aisle to a 20-foot minimum to 11 feet which is
18:53:07 insufficient on a one-way driveway, a minimum of 12
18:53:10 feet.

18:53:11 They would actually be asking for a waiver, also, even
18:53:15 for a one way.
18:53:17 It would be insufficient.
18:53:18 Also, there could be pedestrians we have car style
18:53:23 refuse carts that pedestrians will be wheeling down
18:53:26 that drive also.
18:53:27 At east Linebaugh certain point you would have a
18:53:30 pedestrian and two cars and only eleven feet of
18:53:36 impervious space.
18:53:37 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:53:44 I have been sworn.
18:53:49 >> From a comp plan aspect, there are three primary
18:53:52 categories in this area.
18:53:53 Subject sight is contained within residential 20 which
18:53:56 is a prey dominant category, residential 50 by is
18:54:01 along Bayshore Boulevard, and residential 35 which is
18:54:05 north of Texas Avenue.
18:54:08 And east of.
18:54:21 The request is for three units which is well within
18:54:23 the density based on the density for the site.
18:54:27 Also taking into consideration the project directly
18:54:31 interfaces, the area in question with residential uses

18:54:35 from high-rise to apartments to other attached uses.
18:54:43 To the rear there are two single-family detached
18:54:45 homes.
18:54:46 There are single family detached directly interfacing
18:54:48 the site, to the left of the site and directly to the
18:54:52 north of the site.
18:54:53 Planning Commission staff had no objections to the
18:54:55 proposed request.
18:54:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:55:06 >>> Linda Pearson, and I have been sworn.
18:55:08 With me tonight are Mr. Robert Fowler, the land owner
18:55:16 and developer, our certified arborist is here with us
18:55:20 tonight, as well as Phyllis Sweeney, our planner who
18:55:26 will be assisting me.
18:55:28 She placed on the easel before you a color rendering
18:55:30 from our architect south of the building that is
18:55:35 before you tonight.
18:55:36 We have provided you with the documents that we will
18:55:41 be using in our presentation.
18:55:43 And if I could, I would like to refer to you tab
18:55:46 number 1, the aerial photograph.
18:55:48 The aerial photograph shows the location of the site,

18:55:51 which is in proximity to Howard Avenue, and the
18:55:54 Bayshore.
18:55:55 The site outlined in yellow on the site plan is 1515
18:55:59 south bay villa and is in the Bayshore Gardens
18:56:03 neighborhood.
18:56:03 This request is for a three-unit town home project.
18:56:07 If you would turn to behind tab number 2, when my
18:56:12 client purchased this property, it was an old rented
18:56:15 house that was occupying the side.
18:56:19 The structure had a myriad of code violations at the
18:56:22 time, and it was demolished subsequently in 2005.
18:56:27 But if we could look at the photograph that Phyllis is
18:56:31 showing you, you have seen the single-family home that
18:56:34 is here.
18:56:34 This is a picture of the home prior to demolition.
18:56:38 It's an old house that was encroaching into the drip
18:56:44 line of the grand tree.
18:56:45 And the portion of the site plan along -- contained
18:56:52 concrete and piling along the front portion of the
18:56:56 right-of-way.
18:57:00 If you would turn to the next page in your booklet,
18:57:03 you will see what was presented to you previously, and

18:57:08 showing that the area bounded by Howard and Stroud are
18:57:14 primarily res 20 with res 83.
18:57:18 Our next exhibit is a zoning map which shows the RM-16
18:57:22 zoning district, and the other multifamily zoning
18:57:26 designations within a several-block radius of this
18:57:29 site.
18:57:31 Behind cab number 5 are photographs of homes along
18:57:37 arson place.
18:57:37 The first photo shows what abuts bay villa to the
18:57:45 south. The next photograph shows the predominant
18:57:47 two-story housing complex.
18:57:50 That's the rear yard of our site.
18:57:52 These are photographs of homes on Ardson.
18:57:57 The next set of exhibits for you to review tonight are
18:58:00 photographs of bay villa place.
18:58:04 The first photograph shows the variety of multifamily
18:58:09 developments in the area.
18:58:10 The entire block is predominantly multifamily,
18:58:15 multi-story.
18:58:16 You will notice that the next photo has a beauty and
18:58:20 character of bay villa, and due to the number 3, our
18:58:26 client is very concerned about the presentation of the

18:58:28 trees along that right-of-way as far as the
18:58:31 characteristics that drew him to the location.
18:58:34 Once again you see what is before you.
18:58:39 I would like to refer you to the site plan once again
18:58:41 that is our next exhibit.
18:58:44 This project has provided sufficient parking.
18:58:48 There will be three units, but each unit will have a
18:58:50 two-car garage.
18:58:52 There will be parking available behind the garage
18:58:55 unit.
18:59:03 None of the projects -- I won't say none.
18:59:06 Most of the projects, particularly one directly
18:59:09 adjacent to us, has adequate parking.
18:59:12 This concept plan definitely provides more than
18:59:15 adequate parking that is needed in the area.
18:59:18 Most of the other units are parking within the public
18:59:21 right-of-way, across the street from us, and to the
18:59:25 north of us.
18:59:27 We have included at the staff's request pedestrian
18:59:30 access, which is what the transportation department
18:59:35 asked about, so that there is a rear entry to the
18:59:38 home, as well as vehicular entry that can be provided

18:59:42 at each of the front doors of each of the units.
18:59:48 And I'll tell what you is frustrating for us is
18:59:50 because every time we have met with staff, we have
18:59:52 gotten different opinions and different
18:59:54 recommendations.
18:59:54 We have tried to respond to them as quickly as
18:59:57 possible.
18:59:57 And be responsive to them and work with them.
19:00:01 And they have been good at working with us.
19:00:03 The transportation comment tonight in objection to the
19:00:07 waiver, we specifically had numerous meetings with
19:00:09 Melanie and staff in development of the concept plan,
19:00:12 and they asked to us put stop bars so there would not
19:00:15 be conflict with pedestrian and vehicular traffic,
19:00:19 might be ingress and egress on the site and we have
19:00:23 also carefully moved what concrete was there away so
19:00:25 that there is a good drip line under the grand tree.
19:00:32 The next several exhibits that are before you are
19:00:35 referencing the tree table and their preservation and
19:00:38 pruning.
19:00:40 Our certified arborist is here tonight, and he has
19:00:43 been out to the site and worked with staff on numerous

19:00:46 occasions, and res his rezonings resume and tree table
19:00:53 is tab number 8 in our materials for you this evening.
19:00:56 Last week, he identified the size and species of trees
19:01:02 and has shown how the trees would be to NC 3.
19:01:07 This is also per staff request.
19:01:09 It is our intention once again to preserve the 42-inch
19:01:13 oak that is located at the front of the site, as well
19:01:14 as the stand of trees on the northern property line.
19:01:19 As Phyllis said, bring those to your attention,
19:01:22 specifically also to do pier and lintel construction,
19:01:29 and we have revised the site plan to provide a better
19:01:31 feed for the trees on our side of the property.
19:01:33 Unfortunately, the driveway on the other side is much
19:01:36 closer than sitting on the roof system of the trees.
19:01:41 What we do we hope will certainly benefit them in the
19:01:44 long run.
19:01:45 Staff and Mr. Samick have indicated there are several
19:01:52 trees that are, and they should be addressed with the
19:01:58 city staff and neighboring property owners if needed.
19:02:01 We met and corresponded with the Bayshore Gardens
19:02:03 civic association.
19:02:05 We revised our site plan based on their comments and

19:02:08 their requests.
19:02:08 We have had multiple dialogue and conversation was the
19:02:12 neighborhood, residents, including the four who are
19:02:16 here tonight who asked us to amend the wall that's on
19:02:22 the southern boundary of the site to a four-foot wall
19:02:25 instead of a six foot.
19:02:26 And he's asked us to match the brick on her home which
19:02:30 we have agreed to do.
19:02:31 And that is a note that we wanted to add to our site
19:02:34 plan, but staff indicated to us that in order to do
19:02:36 that, we would need to request a continuance.
19:02:40 And I apologize for any confusion when I entered the
19:02:42 room tonight.
19:02:42 I was approached by staff asking us if a continuance
19:02:47 would be acceptable.
19:02:48 So I was responding to that request.
19:02:50 The Planning Commission has found our application to
19:02:52 be consistent with the comprehensive plan and with the
19:02:56 development trend, and existing development pattern in
19:02:59 the area.
19:03:01 We have negotiated in good faith with the staff and
19:03:03 the neighborhood and our client, that is sensitive to

19:03:09 their suggestion, yet preserve it is quality of the
19:03:11 site and the character of this lovely street.
19:03:13 And we are quite proud of the architecture of the
19:03:19 building that is here before you tonight.
19:03:21 And would be happy to answer any questions and answer
19:03:27 any comments for rebuttal.
19:03:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone that wants to speak on
19:03:33 number 7?
19:03:34 Everybody that's going to speak, please get up and
19:03:36 line up.
19:03:49 >>> Diana fuller.
19:03:50 And I own the property at 1517 south villa.
19:03:57 And I have been sworn.
19:04:00 I own the property at 1517 south bay villa place,
19:04:03 which is to the southeast of this development.
19:04:11 On Palm Drive.
19:04:12 And I would just like to say that I think three
19:04:15 townhouses on that property of approximately 2400
19:04:20 square feet each is way too much building for that
19:04:23 little lot.
19:04:24 And as you can see from the site plan, they are
19:04:27 asking, basically, for you to give them a variance of

19:04:32 three of the four setbacks on the property.
19:04:36 And then on the one where they are actually increasing
19:04:39 the, quote, setback from 7 feet to the side yard that
19:04:42 abuts my house, 120 feet long, they are going to put a
19:04:48 paved driveway there.
19:04:49 Now,
19:04:56 It's shaded by the nice trees, one of which they are
19:04:59 going to take out the camper tree they are going to
19:05:02 destroy to create the extra parking lot, or that extra
19:05:05 parking space.
19:05:10 That's taking out
19:05:17 I don't see the difference between -- this isn't a
19:05:22 planned development.
19:05:23 This is three townhouses.
19:05:27 I thought that PD zoning was for something that other
19:05:31 zoning classifications could not accommodate.
19:05:34 If you -- to take advantage of some unique feature of
19:05:37 the piece of property.
19:05:38 There's nothing unique about -- in fact, on the
19:05:43 perimeter, every one of these trees that they are
19:05:45 being so careful to build the lintel, all of those
19:05:50 trees are within the setback.

19:05:54 Every single one of them.
19:05:55 They want you to reduce that setback and kill those
19:06:00 trees.
19:06:02 In order to build their 35-foot structure with the
19:06:06 four more feet on top, which is a massive construction
19:06:12 in this neighborhood, multifamily but nothing on this
19:06:16 scale.
19:06:17 But in order to do that, they are going to have to
19:06:19 turn back some of those trees.
19:06:20 They are going to take out the canopy, which is what
19:06:23 makes that property unique, which in theory qualifies
19:06:27 them for the PD zoning to begin with.
19:06:30 But my major concern is the drainage.
19:06:32 After they remove that little boarding house that was
19:06:35 next door, somebody -- and I don't know if it was the
19:06:37 developer or somebody else -- but somebody brought in
19:06:40 some fill, and elevated that site.
19:06:44 So I was getting water poured on me before.
19:06:49 Now that slopes down my way.
19:06:54 I get everybody.
19:06:55 They cover that whole lot and I'm going to get a
19:06:58 flood.

19:07:01 I have a swale on my property that you all made me put
19:07:03 in and it can't handle a small rain.
19:07:05 And there's no place for that water to go.
19:07:09 I'm told they want to put in a half inch drain but
19:07:12 that's not going to take care of that water.
19:07:14 I'm familiar with French drains.
19:07:15 Yeah, it will take the first tea cup first but there's
19:07:19 no way to route it.
19:07:21 I don't know where they are going to put it.
19:07:23 And their driveway, the eleven foot driveway that they
19:07:26 are arguing about, the building hangs over that on the
19:07:30 second floor.
19:07:32 So impervious or not, the water is not going to get up
19:07:35 there to percolate.
19:07:37 So I'm very much opposed to this project.
19:07:42 And I hope --
19:07:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the height of your house?
19:07:49 >>> I don't know.
19:07:50 It's two stories.
19:07:51 The garage is one story.
19:07:54 And it has ten-foot ceilings on the bottom floor, and
19:07:59 nine foot on the top floor, with a pitched roof.

19:08:02 So I don't know what that --
19:08:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
19:08:13 >>> Steve Smith.
19:08:13 I have been sworn.
19:08:14 I live at 2418 West Palm drive, single-family
19:08:18 residential structure, across the street from the
19:08:20 house that Ms. Fuller just described, which is also a
19:08:25 single-family residential structure.
19:08:29 Directly adjacent to the property at 2418, there's
19:08:32 another single-family residential home of considerable
19:08:36 value with maybe 7,000 square feet, large homes.
19:08:42 On Ardson, all of the structures there are
19:08:46 single-family residential structures.
19:08:49 The structure is directly across the street from this
19:08:52 proposed construction.
19:08:54 It's single-family residential.
19:08:56 The multifamily residential that exists in that
19:08:59 neighborhood is relatively low in terms of its
19:09:03 profile.
19:09:04 It is not a massive structure of 39 feet in the air
19:09:09 that covers the entirety of the land.
19:09:12 So that the basic point that I'm making to you -- and

19:09:16 you have seen -- is that this structure is wholly not
19:09:21 in keeping with the character of this neighborhood.
19:09:25 I'm a little bit philosophically taken aback by the
19:09:28 approach of rezoning, something that is RM-16, which
19:09:33 will allow two residential structures on this
19:09:38 property, to a planned development type of zoning.
19:09:44 We're talking about one lot that has 7200 square feet,
19:09:51 approximately, and maybe I'm a little old-fashioned,
19:09:55 when I was city attorney for Madeira Beach and mayor
19:09:58 of Indian rocks, but we talked about this as being
19:10:00 classic, spot zoning.
19:10:04 And the reason for it is it is not in keeping with the
19:10:09 provisions of chapter or section 27.231 where the
19:10:15 whole function of a PD zone is to take some unique
19:10:19 characteristic of that property that makes it
19:10:21 undevelopable for something else, and allows a mixed
19:10:25 unit, or a mixed use development, not three big town
19:10:29 homes, and the development should be of a relatively
19:10:34 large tract of land, where maybe you want a commercial
19:10:39 development, some residential development, some park
19:10:42 space, and the like.
19:10:43 That's the purpose of a PD zone.

19:10:47 That's missing here.
19:10:49 What instead is being proposed is a massive structure
19:10:54 that virtually covers the entire property.
19:10:57 If you believe for a second that the six trees on the
19:11:00 north side of the property will be preserved, you're
19:11:02 sadly mistaken, because they will not.
19:11:04 The camphor tree which has a 30-inch trunk will be
19:11:08 removed for a parking space, and the grand oak will be
19:11:13 imperilled because you have got an impervious or
19:11:15 pervious driveway coming right across its root, and
19:11:19 its canopy will be destroyed.
19:11:21 So the very characteristic that supposedly makes this
19:11:25 property unique is the very ones that they'll destroy.
19:11:29 Thank you.
19:11:29 >>GWEN MILLER: The next speaker.
19:11:34 >>> Good evening.
19:11:35 I have been sworn in.
19:11:36 John McDonald, a resident at 2303 south Ardson place.
19:11:41 I am in objection to the development and the project.
19:11:44 The developer's representative cited that there's
19:11:49 several units that have this that are similar to our
19:11:52 design, they don't have this, and they use this street

19:11:54 and so forth.
19:11:55 And because I have a young family, I tend to put
19:11:57 things in that space's analogy.
19:11:59 Just because Tommy did it doesn't make it right.
19:12:04 Human nature is that the backed up parking spaces will
19:12:09 be there provided, it's human nature that they are
19:12:13 going to go ahead and move if the street out to the
19:12:16 street parking.
19:12:16 It's unfortunate that maybe this development might
19:12:18 suffer because of others that are already setting a
19:12:20 precedent that I am in opposition on.
19:12:23 We can't give safety and life safety vehicles through
19:12:26 there on parade days.
19:12:28 We can't get life safety vehicles through there on
19:12:30 regular living life-style days because of multifamily
19:12:34 dwellings, what they traditionally have been single
19:12:38 family sites.
19:12:39 You put three units in there, I guarantee there's
19:12:42 going to be six cars minimum, plus-plus.
19:12:45 Some people have the luxury of storing boats and wave
19:12:48 runners and motorcycles and other toys in their
19:12:51 garages, in their homes for just simple storage.

19:12:54 I don't see this house, this development being
19:12:57 appropriate for the site.
19:12:58 We just invested as a city tons of money in our
19:13:01 neighborhood to send the water away, thank you very
19:13:05 much.
19:13:05 It seems to be helping.
19:13:07 Let's keep that investment sound.
19:13:09 Let's not put a structure there that bastardizes that
19:13:13 opportunity and makes that not working.
19:13:20 The right-of-way right now, you're looking at taking
19:13:23 three people.
19:13:25 Who in their right mind would do this and try to sell
19:13:27 a product that's insufficient to carry cars down a
19:13:32 driveway of eleven feet wide?
19:13:36 It's going to screw up things, ultimately the three
19:13:39 homeowners are going to get together and say we have
19:13:42 to do something to fix this, and therefore again,
19:13:45 after the fact, they are going to go in and take out
19:13:48 things and rip up things, so on and so forth.
19:13:50 Part of the investment in South Tampa versus other
19:13:53 parts of town, and newer developments, where
19:13:56 developers go in and take every tree out, and you can

19:13:58 then buy landscape package A, B or C, part of the
19:14:02 appeal of our neighborhoods in South Tampa are the
19:14:08 canvas, the trees, the beauty of that, not see it go
19:14:12 away.
19:14:13 I'm sorry for the develop theory he's driven into this
19:14:15 situation.
19:14:15 Perhaps an alternative, downsizing a single-family
19:14:18 home there I would support.
19:14:20 Thank you for your time.
19:14:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:14:22 Next.
19:14:31 >>> Walter Crumbley.
19:14:32 I have been sworn.
19:14:33 I don't actually live in this neighborhood.
19:14:34 I live over on south Westland Avenue in the Courier
19:14:38 City group.
19:14:40 However, I heard about this project coming up, and
19:14:45 felt that I should come down here and put my dog in
19:14:47 the fight and see if I could stop one more
19:14:51 neighborhood from being raped and ravished by the
19:14:53 developers.
19:14:54 And that's probably the best way I can describe it.

19:15:00 I have a three-story townhouse next door to me, and I
19:15:05 told you earlier, it's sort of like sitting in a life
19:15:08 boat in your backyard and watching the Titanic go by.
19:15:11 You don't have any privacy.
19:15:14 You go out in your backyard, you have to be careful
19:15:17 where you scratch because you don't know who's
19:15:19 looking.
19:15:23 I grew up in this neighborhood over there.
19:15:25 I used to have a girlfriend in fact who lived on bay
19:15:28 villa, so I know this area well.
19:15:30 That was back in 1950 before most of you were born.
19:15:35 This is totally incompatible with that neighborhood.
19:15:41 You know, what they are talking about is seriously
19:15:47 harm several grand trees, or ultimately destroy them.
19:15:50 I've seen what happens when they -- they prune the
19:15:55 trees so they can get the building on the lot.
19:15:58 And it ends up that it eventually kills the tree
19:16:00 itself.
19:16:03 I have already spoken to you about privacy issues, of
19:16:05 course.
19:16:07 You don't have any three stories right next to you.
19:16:13 The developer calls -- in Courier City we call this

19:16:18 the box or bunker style.
19:16:20 You know, it's got the real aesthetic appeal to it
19:16:24 sort of like a card board box full of Kleenex or
19:16:27 something like that and you draw some pictures on it.
19:16:32 Just as we have dealt with before, with you all in
19:16:36 Courier City, you won't all the primary entrances on
19:16:42 the street, you know, and you want it compatible with
19:16:47 the neighborhood, and this is not going to fit in.
19:16:52 I realize that there are other townhouses there.
19:16:57 But take my word for it.
19:16:58 Just because we let a few get in doesn't mean you have
19:17:02 to turn the whole neighborhood into it.
19:17:06 Thank you very much.
19:17:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:17:15 >>> John Howie.
19:17:16 I'm already sworn in.
19:17:18 The former greenhouse on the south side of our
19:17:19 property, at 1507 to 1511.5 bay villa had about 15
19:17:25 feet width O on the side next to our condominium where
19:17:30 they had a driveway, so there was plenty of room for
19:17:32 those eight oak and Laurel oak trees to grow across.
19:17:39 When I designed the six units, I wanted to be a good

19:17:42 neighbor.
19:17:42 I put sloping roofs on all the six units of the
19:17:46 townhouses so the highest peak was only 35 feet so it
19:17:49 matched the neighboring houses there.
19:17:52 I notice that the one as cross the street that were
19:17:54 built about ten years ago, the same thing, sloping
19:17:58 roofs and I believe the one on the corner had sloping
19:18:00 roofs.
19:18:01 The house that the lady brought up also has a
19:18:05 residential hip roof on it.
19:18:07 So first of all I don't think we are being good
19:18:11 neighbors to run this box up 35 feet and then another
19:18:14 five feet to put air conditioning units on.
19:18:17 What they would be getting is an extra third floor,
19:18:19 wall to wall, in there without any slopy roofs.
19:18:25 The design as he described it is a big box.
19:18:28 The next problem is, there is one large grand Laurel
19:18:33 oak tree, which we had Steve Graham, the forester,
19:18:37 look at.
19:18:38 They don't show it but the trunk is on our property,
19:18:44 but the span of it, like I say, at least a third of
19:18:47 the tree is over on their property.

19:18:50 So that's an additional problem they didn't bring up.
19:18:55 I think that sidewalks could be put in.
19:18:58 Right now, we put in the drainage for guest parking,
19:19:06 we are able to park two cars off-site, off for each
19:19:09 unit.
19:19:10 But you do have guests who stay there.
19:19:12 That's true.
19:19:13 I think could you put in a sidewalk that would be
19:19:17 self-draining to drain the trees.
19:19:20 The next thing I might mention is that we have a
19:19:26 sewage problem on Palm Drive, and we have got a lot of
19:19:30 rain.
19:19:30 It bubbles up in the street along.
19:19:33 The lowest point is towards Isabel towards the western
19:19:36 end.
19:19:37 But there's already a serious problem.
19:19:40 I think it's overloaded.
19:19:41 I think that needs to be looked at.
19:19:43 I think you need to take it back to the department and
19:19:49 see what they can do about it.
19:19:52 So in short, I think it's a disaster waiting to
19:19:56 happen.

19:19:57 I think the square footage of 7,170 square feet, it
19:20:05 might be -- if they tastefully do two units on it, it
19:20:08 might work.
19:20:08 You need to add a wider 20-foot driveway, and it's
19:20:17 just breaking all the rules, I think.
19:20:19 So, hopefully, I think they could do two units on
19:20:22 there.
19:20:23 We did two units per the same square footage and we
19:20:28 have 6 units, that's two units per the size of their
19:20:31 property.
19:20:31 The property is only 60 feet by 119 feet long, which
19:20:36 they show on their plan.
19:20:38 But that's the dimensions.
19:20:40 So in my opinion, right now it's a disaster.
19:20:44 (Bell sounds).
19:20:45 If they would go back and revise the plans and put
19:20:48 less units on there, I might a it.
19:20:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:20:52 Next.
19:20:54 >>> My name is Timothy Boaz, 2312 south Ardson place
19:21:00 which is the property immediately behind the proposed
19:21:02 development.

19:21:02 I have been sworn in.
19:21:07 I don't want to reiterate everything that everyone
19:21:10 else has said but I agree wholeheartedly with the
19:21:16 comments so far by Ms. Fuller who is also next door to
19:21:19 this property.
19:21:20 I had a little bit of a hard time following some of
19:21:22 the information that they presented about the trees,
19:21:26 that the back and specifically my main concern in that
19:21:29 regard is what they have labeled on the document that
19:21:32 I got as a 60-inch oak that lies right along the
19:21:36 property line, approximately looks like 18 feet from
19:21:40 the back lawn.
19:21:42 I took a couple pictures of this tree from my
19:21:46 backyard.
19:21:51 It's got a sabal palm sitting in front of it.
19:21:54 And you can see the six-unit development that sits to
19:21:58 the north of it there, and my thanks to the designer
19:22:01 of that -- well, in one respect, with the sloping
19:22:06 roofs there, that becomes very nonnoticeable from my
19:22:10 backyard, and they are set back aways so I do have a
19:22:15 fairly reasonable buffer there.
19:22:17 The trunk of this tree is showing as being on the

19:22:20 property of the six-unit building.
19:22:22 However, this is wide enough that it actually
19:22:24 protrudes a couple of feet into the subject property.
19:22:27 And you can imagine what's going to happen.
19:22:29 When you have a wall, and it's shown on here as being,
19:22:33 you know, on the other side of the corner of this
19:22:35 building.
19:22:36 All of those limbs coming off of there will have to be
19:22:40 lopped off basically right at the trunk in order for
19:22:43 them to put this wall in, if the tree were to stay,
19:22:46 and of course once they did that, it's unlikely that
19:22:49 the tree would survive.
19:22:50 I have another photo here, also, of this tree.
19:22:56 It's a little hard for me -- I'm not a professional
19:22:58 photographer.
19:23:00 It's a little hard for me to do. This I can't get far
19:23:03 enough away from the tree to really capture the
19:23:05 magnitude of this thing but it totally dominates my
19:23:08 backyard.
19:23:09 And when this tree is taken out, or all the limbs on
19:23:12 this side of it are taken out, it will be replaced
19:23:14 with a big box that's going to be sitting right over

19:23:17 my fence.
19:23:17 You will notice also that on the back wall of this
19:23:20 proposal, there's a balcony that is attached to the
19:23:24 second floor of this unit.
19:23:27 And if you look at my picture here, you can see the
19:23:33 top of my six-foot fence.
19:23:34 All the vegetation that you see there essentially
19:23:36 would be removed, and the floor of that balcony will
19:23:39 sit about four feet over that fence, and ten feet back
19:23:44 from my fence.
19:23:45 And so, you know, when I'm sitting out there, they are
19:23:49 going to be sitting here like this.
19:23:50 So I would lose all privacy back there.
19:23:55 And it goes from this gorgeous view that I have now to
19:23:57 one where I am basically looking at a big box.
19:24:02 I'm also concerned, as is Ms. Fuller, about the
19:24:05 drainage back there.
19:24:07 I'm not sure what they have planned.
19:24:09 My backyard drains towards my front yard.
19:24:11 I already have difficulty with drainage back there.
19:24:14 If any of that comes in my direction, and I couldn't
19:24:17 tell from the information that I got which way it was

19:24:21 going to go, I would have additional problems there.
19:24:23 Also, I wanted to point out --
19:24:26 (Bell sounds).
19:24:27 Never mind.
19:24:28 Thank you very much.
19:24:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:24:29 Next.
19:24:36 >>> Joe Monfore.
19:24:40 I have been sworn.
19:24:41 I live at 2314 Bayshore Boulevard so I'm about 100
19:24:44 feet away from this property.
19:24:46 I would like to compliment the council for sitting and
19:24:49 listening to all this information.
19:24:50 I support this project.
19:24:52 I have lived there for over ten years.
19:24:55 I use that particular street multiple times every day
19:24:58 to access my home where I live.
19:25:04 Traffic on it is always very slow.
19:25:08 You encounter people walking along the side of the
19:25:11 roads, people pushing baby buggies, and people drive
19:25:17 extremely slow on that particular road.
19:25:19 It's almost -- to call it a road -- well, there's

19:25:25 quite a few people out there, cars park on the sides
19:25:28 and so forth.
19:25:29 When I first moved in there, the house that was on
19:25:32 there, it looked like a crack house or something.
19:25:36 It was a real dump.
19:25:37 And the yard was full of pickup trucks on blocks, and
19:25:42 those would change and the people sitting on the front
19:25:49 porch.
19:25:49 So I was kind of happy when someone bought that and
19:25:52 tore it down.
19:25:52 I have looked at the design that they are proposing,
19:25:55 and frankly it looks to me like the design of just
19:25:59 about every other place that you see come up in South
19:26:01 Tampa now.
19:26:03 I don't think this is making out the way they built
19:26:06 things 10, 20, 30 years ago but seems to be the way
19:26:10 they are building now.
19:26:11 Property, land, is scarce.
19:26:13 And we put multiple townhouse units up.
19:26:17 So I support it.
19:26:18 I think it's a good looking property that will bring
19:26:20 something to our community.

19:26:23 In the neighborhood there.
19:26:24 And, I mean, I live right next to it.
19:26:26 And I drive past it a couple times a day.
19:26:28 So I think it will be good.
19:26:30 And I think council should approve it.
19:26:33 I'm a soldier.
19:26:34 I don't know anything about trees or drains and things
19:26:38 like that.
19:26:38 But I kind of like that famous guy, you know, I know
19:26:42 what I like, and I looked at it, I think I like it and
19:26:45 I think it would be nice for our neighborhood to have
19:26:47 it.
19:26:47 Thanks very much.
19:26:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:26:48 Next.
19:26:51 >>> My name is Merrill Falus and I have been sworn in
19:26:56 H.i am a South Tampa resident and I have seen through
19:26:58 the years lots of development.
19:27:00 I have seen some very positive development.
19:27:04 There are good decision that is you all have made.
19:27:08 I watched this development progress.
19:27:11 And I think that obviously there are some things that

19:27:17 have been attended to and looked at.
19:27:18 But I think they have spent a lot of good time and
19:27:21 effort and energy trying to comply and trying to do
19:27:24 the things that the city wants them to do.
19:27:27 And I do approve this development.
19:27:29 Thank you.
19:27:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
19:27:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ma'am?
19:27:35 I was just wondering.
19:27:37 Do you live close to the project?
19:27:39 >>> In South Tampa.
19:27:41 No, I don't live next door.
19:27:43 >> How far?
19:27:44 >>> A couple miles.
19:27:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
19:27:53 >>> My name is Trisha Smedley.
19:27:56 And I feel like I am going to represent the developer
19:27:59 and be very brief.
19:28:00 But I was the agent that represented Mr. Fowler in the
19:28:06 last project and I'm just here to talk to the quality
19:28:10 and all the neighbors that are opposing, because when
19:28:14 I had the other town homes for sale that he built on

19:28:17 the same street pretty much on a daily basis I had
19:28:19 neighbors coming in complimenting them saying how
19:28:22 beautiful they were.
19:28:23 So I'm here on behalf of the developer.
19:28:29 And the market is very slow as you all know, we
19:28:32 successfully sold all three of his last projects.
19:28:35 Thank you.
19:28:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?
19:28:39 >>> Yes.
19:28:47 >>> I have a public.
19:28:47 When the members of the public state their name and
19:28:51 address --
19:28:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We request that they give their name
19:28:54 and address.
19:28:54 And if you do not hear that and you wish to have it,
19:28:58 you can raise that issue.
19:29:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
19:29:03 >>> I'm Paula Sizemore, 1208 south Albany Avenue and I
19:29:09 have been sworn.
19:29:10 I do not live in the immediate neighborhood.
19:29:12 However, since coming to Tampa in 1980 -- 1980 I have
19:29:18 always lived in this particular area of South Tampa.

19:29:21 My very first apartment was on Deekle so I know the
19:29:25 vicinity quite well.
19:29:27 When I read about this in the paper a few weeks ago,
19:29:29 my husband asked, what is wrong, because of the
19:29:33 reaction that I had.
19:29:34 I was just appalled to read about the size of this
19:29:38 project on this particular lot.
19:29:42 South Tampa has always been Tampa's jewel.
19:29:47 Historically, it has been the gem of this community.
19:29:55 There is no question that people want to come in our
19:30:01 part of the city.
19:30:01 As mark Twain said, invest in real estate: They're
19:30:07 not making it anymore.
19:30:08 The developers rightly want to bring additional units
19:30:11 into our area.
19:30:14 However, the mass and scale of this is so outrageous
19:30:18 compared to the surrounding unit.
19:30:22 Yes, there are multifamily units on that block,
19:30:25 throughout that area.
19:30:26 However, this is quite extensive compared to what is
19:30:30 in that region presently.
19:30:35 We have seen over the past few years an incursion of

19:30:40 overdevelopment in the Courier City, Bayshore areas.
19:30:47 This is another indication of "let's try a little bit
19:30:52 harder, let's see if we can push the limits just a
19:30:55 little more," that typical issue that all of us who
19:30:58 have been teenagers have pulled on our parents or have
19:31:02 dealt with as parents of teenagers.
19:31:04 Okay, that's the limit.
19:31:05 Let me see if I can take it a little bit farther.
19:31:08 Where are they going to draw the line?
19:31:13 The residents of the Soho area have said, please draw
19:31:17 the line.
19:31:21 It's gone far enough.
19:31:22 A multifamily unit on that is not out of order.
19:31:26 It is RM-16.
19:31:28 But to take it to PD is letting that line in the sand
19:31:32 be drawn a little bit farther away.
19:31:35 So even though I do not have a dog in that fight, by
19:31:39 not living on that street, it does affect my
19:31:42 community, and I am here to oppose it.
19:31:45 Thanks very much.
19:31:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:31:47 Would anyone else like to speak?

19:31:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
19:31:52 I received a letter from Vicki Pollyea, who is the
19:31:55 president of the neighborhood association, and -- have
19:32:02 all the council members received it?
19:32:04 Thank you.
19:32:09 >>CHAIRMAN: She dropped it off today, yeah.
19:32:12 Petitioner, do you want to come up in rebuttal?
19:32:19 >>> Thank you, Madam Chairman.
19:32:20 In rebuttal, I would like to share my rebuttal
19:32:23 comments with Joe Samick to respond to the tree issues
19:32:26 before I do my closing comments.
19:32:28 Thank you.
19:32:29 >>>
19:32:33 Good evening.
19:32:35 I'm a con summiting arborist.
19:32:37 I have been sworn in.
19:32:38 1015 Michigan Avenue in the sleepy little community of
19:32:41 Palm Harbor, Florida.
19:32:45 And I'm here for two purposes, if I may.
19:32:47 First to say it's a pleasure to be standing in front
19:32:50 of you folks again, in the great cigar city.
19:32:55 I'm here to respond in a scientific manner to comments

19:32:59 that have been made tonight.
19:33:01 Number two, I am here to answer any questions that you
19:33:02 may have.
19:33:03 I would like everyone to know that I have no interest
19:33:05 in the parties involved in this matter, and I have no
19:33:08 regard to the outcome whatsoever.
19:33:11 I would like to respond first to the good folks who
19:33:16 came up and spoke before you.
19:33:21 Ms. Fuller, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Crumbly, all
19:33:29 had one common denominator in their concerns regarding
19:33:32 the trees in this matter, and that is that the tree
19:33:37 canopies would be ruined or removed, the trees
19:33:42 situated along the north property line of this
19:33:45 proposed site.
19:33:48 Such in fact is not the case.
19:33:49 I did a very thorough analysis of these trees.
19:33:54 And stand before you, and I think it's a part of the
19:33:58 City Commission, my report is part of the submission,
19:34:01 that two trees will each have a part of one limb
19:34:05 removed from them.
19:34:07 One tree is a sugar Berry, which is incorrectly
19:34:12 labeled as an oak on this survey.

19:34:15 It will have approximately an 8-foot -- excuse me, an
19:34:20 8-inch diameter of limb truncated in a proper fashion,
19:34:26 and another tree will have an 8-inch limb cut or
19:34:32 truncated in a proper professional manner, all of the
19:34:35 trees are unaffected.
19:34:37 There is no other negative affect on the canopy of
19:34:41 these trees.
19:34:42 As it relates to the 30-inch camphor tree there is no
19:34:45 such thing.
19:34:45 There is no 30-inch camphor tree there.
19:34:48 It's a 24-inch oak and it will remain untouched.
19:34:52 As it relates to the grand tree closest to south bay
19:35:00 villa place, I would respectfully submit to you that
19:35:03 the only thing I can tell you about this tree -- the
19:35:07 only two things I can tell but the tree are this:
19:35:11 Number one, two people testified that they were
19:35:13 concerned that this tree would be ruined because of
19:35:15 pruning.
19:35:16 The City of Tampa and I concur that no pruning will be
19:35:19 necessary on this tree whatsoever.
19:35:21 Number two, the setback from the tree is something
19:35:25 that I cannot speak to.

19:35:26 It's my understanding that the petitioner had been
19:35:32 given a certain setback distance to adhere to.
19:35:36 It's my understanding that they did that.
19:35:38 That's all I can speak to as it relates to the setback
19:35:41 of that tree.
19:35:43 There was another camphor tree located on the -- I am
19:35:47 going to set this down if I may do that, please.
19:35:53 Focus on here.
19:35:54 There's another camphor tree located in this
19:35:56 particular area.
19:35:58 I'm speaking for myself.
19:36:00 And I would say that I would think my colleagues in
19:36:06 the City of Tampa and the Parks Department would agree
19:36:08 that's a hazard tree and needs to be removed.
19:36:11 It's certainly had every indication I have had in
19:36:13 meeting with those fine folks.
19:36:15 I would now address the off-site Laurel oak tree.
19:36:18 And it is located here.
19:36:21 This tree was alluded to by Mr. Boaz as a 60-inch
19:36:26 Laurel oak which it's not.
19:36:28 It's smaller than that.
19:36:29 However, I do certainly -- would certainly be in step

19:36:36 and cadence with his concerns as regards the impact of
19:36:39 that tree, should this site be approved.
19:36:43 I am not going to speak for Mr. Raleigh.
19:36:46 He's here tonight.
19:36:48 You are welcome to speak for himself.
19:36:49 It's certainly my opinion and certainly my opinion
19:36:51 that this tree is falling apart.
19:36:53 It's decayed.
19:36:56 It's got problems.
19:36:57 It's my understanding -- and I am not going to speak
19:37:00 for Mr. Riley.
19:37:01 He's here.
19:37:02 Ask him yourself.
19:37:03 And sunshine meetings that he and I had, he had opined
19:37:06 to me that that tree could be removed, as well as a
19:37:09 very dangerous elm tree that's located along the north
19:37:13 side of the property.
19:37:17 And I believe my colleague, Mary, concurs with that,
19:37:23 and the tree is located here.
19:37:26 That tree is riddled with insects, woodpeckers.
19:37:33 Thank you very much.
19:37:34 That elm tree is located --

19:37:40 Elm tree is located here.
19:37:45 That concludes my response to the comments made by the
19:37:48 good folks as it relates to this site, and would
19:37:51 certainly answer any questions you may have of me.
19:37:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
19:37:57 Thank you.
19:37:59 >>> Thank you, ma'am.
19:38:05 >>> Just a few comments in rebuttal, council members
19:38:07 there. Were some comments made tonight about bulk and
19:38:10 mass.
19:38:10 Let me just refer you back to the past in our
19:38:19 presentation, to demonstrate to you the property is
19:38:23 directly across the street adjacent to here.
19:38:27 Both of these are across the street.
19:38:29 Across the street.
19:38:32 These two are down the street.
19:38:36 This is the project at the end of the block to the
19:38:38 north.
19:38:40 I don't think that bulk and mass is an issue.
19:38:44 The code allows us to provide screening for rooftop
19:38:47 vents and air conditioners.
19:38:50 Our architect has done a tremendous job with is the T

19:38:54 style.
19:38:54 We are in keeping with that multifamily development
19:38:57 pattern in the immediate area.
19:38:59 There were some comments by Mr. Boaz.
19:39:03 I just bring your attention.
19:39:06 He previously made the comments.
19:39:09 This is his house.
19:39:11 This is his rear yard.
19:39:13 He talks about -- and if I may, needed to step over to
19:39:19 the easel for a moment.
19:39:21 He talks about the rear balcony, which is right here,
19:39:27 on the site that would be abutting his backyard.
19:39:32 And I comment and bring your attention to the number
19:39:35 of windows that he has on his second story that would
19:39:38 be looking in our backyard.
19:39:40 Mr. Boaz has a property, from the property appraiser's
19:39:45 office, this is our site here.
19:39:49 This is his property here.
19:39:50 He has a lot and a half.
19:39:51 His property has a 10-foot platted alley behind his
19:39:59 house, as it is all along the backside of the lots
19:40:04 that are on facing south Ardson.

19:40:07 That property, according to title work and Barbara
19:40:13 Lynch, the residents said they are using it as their
19:40:20 private yard and that's not a problem with us, we
19:40:23 don't care.
19:40:23 But I think if we are going to talk about views and
19:40:26 what people are using and how it's encroaching in
19:40:28 their backyard from our property line ten feet on the
19:40:31 other side of our lot is a plotted alley, and how he
19:40:35 wishes to use that is certainly up to him.
19:40:37 This is not an area of historic bungalows.
19:40:40 I take exception to the opposition that was expressed
19:40:43 by Mr. Crumbley, who also lives a good distance from
19:40:46 the site, but also in South Tampa, and it is a public
19:40:49 hearing, and no matter where you live you have a right
19:40:52 to come and speak your opinion before this council,
19:40:54 and I support that for people who support me and for
19:40:57 people who oppose me.
19:40:59 It is an established multifamily street.
19:41:02 The architecture, style, type, is all compatible.
19:41:08 Density is compatible as evidenced by the testimony.
19:41:11 And we believe that we have already submitted 34
19:41:15 letters in support from the over 300 letters that were

19:41:18 mailed out on this application.
19:41:22 And the comments we mainly got was, oh, we don't care.
19:41:27 Show us what it looks like, we don't care.
19:41:30 We have opposition here tonight.
19:41:31 I respect them.
19:41:32 But we dutifully and respectfully disagree with them
19:41:36 and would appreciate your approval and support.
19:41:37 Thank you.
19:41:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
19:41:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Linda, I have a quick question.
19:41:42 Could you put up the zoning map which I think is
19:41:45 behind tab 4?
19:41:51 >>> I can.
19:41:55 >> That's good.
19:42:03 There you go.
19:42:07 Your parcel is outlined in black there.
19:42:10 All the yellow, as I understand the legend of that
19:42:13 map, all the yellow is RM-16.
19:42:18 >>> That's correct.
19:42:19 >> It might be built out.
19:42:20 Some of is it built out single-family.
19:42:22 But it's all still zoned multifamily 16.

19:42:28 In Euclidean form.
19:42:30 >>> That's correct.
19:42:31 >> The only exception being the PD in the purple there
19:42:33 and the other PD in the purple.
19:42:36 This is something that jumped out at me when you
19:42:39 handed us this map and Scott gave us a similar map, is
19:42:43 some neighborhoods are already speckled, you know,
19:42:46 with a lost PDs and that sort of thing.
19:42:49 You know, we can try and say whether or not that was a
19:42:51 good idea or not a good idea.
19:42:53 But it sort of became the trend.
19:42:55 But this neighborhood, for whatever reason, seems to
19:42:58 have maintained its RM-16 zoning, Euclidean zoning.
19:43:05 And I guess -- and then I took a look at the criteria
19:43:08 that Mr. Shelby gives us every week.
19:43:13 And this is if handout that we get.
19:43:16 And it says chapter 27-324 number 1, says one of the
19:43:21 criteria for a PD says the design of the proposed
19:43:24 development is unique, and therefore in need waivers
19:43:30 justifying a PD.
19:43:31 I heard a lot about trees and the respect that you all
19:43:35 want top save as many trees as possible.

19:43:37 And I believe you.
19:43:37 But way haven't heard is anything that leads to that
19:43:41 criteria that, you know, what is driving this to push
19:43:47 these three units?
19:43:49 We know that there's multifamily up and down many of
19:43:52 these streets.
19:43:52 That's a given.
19:43:54 But I think what we have heard loud and clear is that
19:43:58 you're cramming three large 2400 square feet condos on
19:44:04 there, and you're maxing out the height with a large
19:44:08 amount of mass at 35 feet, plus the four feet of
19:44:12 decoratives.
19:44:15 You're just cramming a lot of stuff on that small lot.
19:44:18 And I was very interested to hear -- I think it was
19:44:20 Mr. Howie who said that his six-plex next door was
19:44:25 built out at two units on the same lot size as your
19:44:29 lot.
19:44:30 And I was going to ask him how many units he built on
19:44:34 the equivalent lot size.
19:44:36 Because I couldn't figure out exactly what his lots
19:44:38 were.
19:44:38 But he's waving his hand again saying two units.

19:44:42 It seems to me -- and then again, Vicki Pollyea, who
19:44:45 is the neighborhood president, stressed the same thing
19:44:47 in her letter.
19:44:48 She said this project will probably be a lot more
19:44:51 palatable to everybody in the neighborhood if it was
19:44:53 two units.
19:44:54 And then you would bring it in and maybe bring it down
19:44:57 a little bit and the whole mass and scale would be a
19:44:59 lot less.
19:45:00 I'm throwing it at you to give us a justification why
19:45:03 this should be a PD and especially with three units
19:45:06 instead of two.
19:45:07 >>> I'm happy to reply to that, Mr. Dingfelder.
19:45:10 If I could refer you also to the comprehensive plan
19:45:12 graphic that I placed on the Elmo.
19:45:15 This entire yellow area is a residential 20.
19:45:20 When we look at property from planning and a
19:45:22 development perspective, we look at your comprehensive
19:45:24 plan, your future land use plan indicates to us that
19:45:27 on a long-term basis you intend for all of this area
19:45:30 in yellow to be developed at a maximum of 20 units per
19:45:34 acre.

19:45:34 We look at also zoning and development patterns in the
19:45:37 area.
19:45:38 You refer to the peace to the north, which is this
19:45:41 condominium development.
19:45:43 And while in its time it may have been a beautiful
19:45:46 development -- and I don't mean to imply that it isn't
19:45:49 now -- but from a land landing, site planning
19:45:53 perspective, it is dysfunctional as far as parking in
19:45:58 the right-of-way.
19:45:58 They have pavers up to the street, where they are
19:46:01 parking every day, every night, out in your public
19:46:05 right-of-way.
19:46:05 We are providing, in this site plan we put very
19:46:10 careful consideration to the single-family at the
19:46:13 corner, moved our building toward the multifamily, to
19:46:18 provide a greater separation, but with the idea that
19:46:21 we could also comply with the density in the plan, and
19:46:25 that's the purpose for the three units.
19:46:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to close.
19:46:31 >> Second.
19:46:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close the public
19:46:33 hearing.

19:46:33 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
19:46:35 Opposed, Nay.
19:46:35 (Motion carried).
19:46:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
19:46:41 I'm very familiar with this area.
19:46:42 I used to live in the harbor about a block and a half
19:46:47 away.
19:46:47 I'm very familiar with this area.
19:46:49 And I move to deny the petition before us on the
19:46:53 grounds of incompatibility, and the criteria that's
19:47:00 developed for the PD to be applicable, doesn't seem to
19:47:06 be met to me, and we have heard much testimony on the
19:47:10 record from neighbors about the character and
19:47:13 compatibility of the neighborhood, and what is
19:47:15 proposed does not meet that.
19:47:17 And -- code provisions.
19:47:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council, when you say code
19:47:23 provisions so the record is enclosure, just a
19:47:25 remainder, council members, a relatively recent change
19:47:29 to chapter 166 took effect October 1st, states
19:47:33 when a municipality dense an application for
19:47:37 development give written to the notice to the

19:47:39 applicant, the notice must include a citation to the
19:47:41 applicable portions of any ordinance, rules, statute
19:47:44 or other legal authority for the denial of the permit.
19:47:46 As used in this section of land development permit had
19:47:49 the same meaning as in section 163.3164, and that is
19:47:54 defined as development permit includes any zoning
19:48:00 permit, rezoning, certifications, special exception,
19:48:02 variance, or any other official action of local
19:48:05 government having the effect of permitting development
19:48:09 of land.
19:48:10 Now council, I will state to you that you do have, as
19:48:14 has been stated, applicable sections of the chapter 27
19:48:18 for rezoning.
19:48:19 I should also point out, council, that the staff
19:48:23 report does also site in their staff report that T
19:48:26 basis for their objection, if council wishes to take
19:48:29 that into account, but I would ask that you, in your
19:48:33 deliberation, determine what applicable code sections
19:48:36 you think are appropriate.
19:48:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Shelby, I want to do this
19:48:41 properly.
19:48:41 I'm not a lawyer.

19:48:42 Would you suggest that I read the staff objections and
19:48:48 the waivers considerations?
19:48:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can probably reference them.
19:48:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You can reference them. If that is
19:48:54 the basis for your determination, if that is the basis
19:48:56 upon which you find competent, substantial evidence
19:48:58 upon which to base your decision, could you make
19:49:00 reference to those provisions in a staff report and
19:49:03 state that you have done so.
19:49:07 Is that correct?
19:49:08 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:49:10 You don't need to read off the entire provision.
19:49:12 You can cite to the section.
19:49:13 From what I am hearing you say, in consideration of
19:49:16 what's in the staff report, chapter 27-321, subsection
19:49:21 1, subsection 3, subsection 4, with the applicable as
19:49:25 well as the section for compatibility, I think it was
19:49:31 27-323, the applicable code provision.
19:49:36 So that preserves some of the provisions you would be
19:49:42 speaking of.
19:49:42 >> Thank you.
19:49:43 Those are the ones speaking on staff report and those

19:49:45 are the ones I cite.
19:49:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second that and I'll add if I
19:49:50 could 27-324 which is the provision that I referenced
19:49:54 about the uniqueness.
19:49:56 I don't see where there's been competent, substantial
19:49:59 evidence to justify the uniqueness of the PD that's
19:50:02 proposed.
19:50:02 I think this project could have been done either
19:50:05 within the RM-16, or done with a two units instead of
19:50:10 three.
19:50:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
19:50:12 Question on the motion?
19:50:14 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
19:50:16 Opposed, Nay.
19:50:16 (Motion carried).
19:50:18 Item number 11 is a conned public hearing.
19:50:29 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Next item on the agenda is zoning case
19:50:36 Z-07-141, 9704 north Pawnee Avenue.
19:50:48 Lisa MONTELIONE, continued from January 25th.
19:50:54 On behalf of the four new members of council I would
19:50:57 like to read the summary so they can be brought up.
19:51:00 There are no waivers being requested on this project.

19:51:02 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property
19:51:04 located at 9704 north Pawnee Avenue from RS-60 to PD.
19:51:11 9,619 square foot parcel, creates two buildable lots.
19:51:15 The site plan has 113 feet of frontage along the
19:51:20 westerly portion of Pawnee Avenue. The proposed
19:51:23 frontage are 66.7 feet and the southern parcel, lot
19:51:27 14, and 46.5 feet on the northern parcel of lot 12.
19:51:32 The existing site is proposed to be demolished and
19:51:34 replaced with a new 1,542 square foot single family
19:51:39 detached homes. The property which is located in an
19:51:43 RS-60 zoning district is surrounded by single-family
19:51:45 residential homes, the PD setbacks for lot 12 are as
19:51:50 follows: 20.26 on the front yard, 28.99 feet on the
19:51:55 rear, 6 feet on the north side yard, 5.43 side yard --
19:52:02 south side yard, for lot 14, 18.4 inches on the front,
19:52:07 32.77 the rear, 6.03 on the north side yard, and 12.74
19:52:14 feet south side yard. The minimum building separation
19:52:16 is 10.51 feet.
19:52:19 The proposed front setback is consistent with the
19:52:21 placement of the previous home.
19:52:23 The petitioner has submitted front building elevations
19:52:27 of the proposed structures.

19:52:28 No waivers are being requested.
19:52:30 At the request of City Council, the petitioner revised
19:52:33 the elevation which I provided for you here this
19:52:35 evening on the site plan to conform to DRC objections
19:52:39 and was asked to make contact directly with the
19:52:41 neighbors, and the neighborhood association.
19:52:45 To orient the new members to this project again,
19:52:49 please, Elmo.
19:52:56 >>> We can only be new one time
19:53:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We can only be new one time.
19:53:02 You opened the meeting saying Z 07-141.
19:53:06 It's Z 06-141.
19:53:09 >>> I stand corrected, sir.
19:53:11 This property appears north pawnees.
19:53:17 This is 98th street.
19:53:19 East 98th street.
19:53:21 And we have Takomah Trail on the oblique.
19:53:26 Behind it we have OPAWAHA.
19:53:33 Here's an aerial photo showing the location with the
19:53:36 street pattern.
19:53:42 This is a subject parcel.
19:53:43 You can see the existing house on the site.

19:53:47 Here is a better picture of the existing house.
19:53:54 Here's a house to the north.
19:53:57 This is across the way.
19:53:59 Some of the homes, you can see the style.
19:54:11 Very comparable to one another.
19:54:14 DRC has reviewed this and has no objections.
19:54:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It looks like on the site plan, the
19:54:23 large trees, and do you have repaver or do you all
19:54:28 have something to say about that?
19:54:29 >>> Mary Daniels Bryce, Land Development Coordination.
19:54:32 I have been sworn.
19:54:32 There are a number of exotic trees on the site, muscle
19:54:38 berries, and a China Berry tree.
19:54:41 Those are not protected trees.
19:54:44 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:54:55 I have been sworn in.
19:54:56 Just a couple of additional comments to go with Mr.
19:55:00 Schulz's comments. The land use category for the area
19:55:02 is residential 10.
19:55:03 The site does lie north of Busch Boulevard and west of
19:55:07 Busch Gardens, to give you a greater context on the
19:55:09 area in question.

19:55:10 The request is for two single family detached
19:55:12 residential units, well within the density cap for the
19:55:15 residential 10 future land use category.
19:55:17 Planning Commission staff still retains its finding of
19:55:21 no objection to the proposed request.
19:55:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
19:55:35 >>> Good evening.
19:55:36 I'm Steve Allison, representing Lisa Montelione,
19:55:44 petitioner, and I have been sworn.
19:55:46 We last appeared as indicated at your January 25th
19:55:49 public hearing.
19:55:50 At that time, you requested that we do two things,
19:55:54 specifically as were mentioned.
19:55:55 First is to provide the new building elevations, and
19:55:57 second was to confer with our neighbors.
19:56:00 In regard to the elevations, what we provided gives
19:56:05 you substantially more detail than before, much more
19:56:10 architectural interests.
19:56:11 They are symmetrical, structural features, roof
19:56:14 enhancements, front porch balance last, garage door
19:56:19 treatment -- ballast, and on both various unifying
19:56:29 architectural elements.

19:56:30 The result is that these homes will not only be
19:56:33 compatible with the character of the neighborhood, but
19:56:37 will in our view establish a desirable design standard
19:56:40 for any future development that may occur.
19:56:44 In regard to the neighbors, I personally sent to the
19:56:51 leading opponents in the last meeting a letter asking
19:56:53 for the opportunity for dialogue.
19:56:58 Lisa also sent letters to everyone who had previously
19:57:01 signed letters in opposition to this request.
19:57:06 Those letters are being provided into the record.
19:57:09 I think you will see, if you get copies yourselves,
19:57:13 that the tone of the letter is not heavy handed in any
19:57:17 way.
19:57:18 It was very much just wanting to have discussion and
19:57:23 to correct any misinformation that seemed to have
19:57:26 permeated the neighborhood in regard to this.
19:57:30 Our letters, however, received absolutely no response,
19:57:34 and so we were not able to have any kind of organized
19:57:38 meeting with our opponents.
19:57:41 Lisa, however, the applicant, who is also a resident
19:57:45 of this neighborhood, resident and property owner.
19:57:50 She lives several houses from this particular site.

19:57:53 She spent many hours canvassing the neighborhood,
19:57:57 speaking individually with her neighbors, and due to
19:58:01 her efforts, four of the households that previously
19:58:04 signed a petition against have now reversed their
19:58:08 position and are supporting the rezoning.
19:58:12 In total, and zoning is certainly not and should not
19:58:16 be a popularity contest, but we do, as of -- at this
19:58:20 time have 33 petitions in support of the application,
19:58:25 and to the best of our knowledge 14 remain opposed.
19:58:30 So what we have done, what you asked us to do, and I
19:58:34 think in a very conscientious manner, we have also
19:58:37 responded to every concern raised by the myriad of
19:58:40 reviewers that one confronts throughout this process.
19:58:45 But I do want to highlight some of the features of the
19:58:47 application that were detailed in our prior hearing.
19:58:52 This is in fact in-fill development.
19:58:55 And it's in-fill development of absolutely the most
19:58:59 appropriate and desirable kind.
19:59:01 And that's not just my view.
19:59:03 That view is confirmed by both professional staffs,
19:59:06 whose duty it is to evaluate this application against
19:59:09 the adopted goals, objectives and policies of the comp

19:59:13 plan with technical criteria of all city ordinances.
19:59:18 This application will provide workforce housing,
19:59:23 housing that can accommodate people such as teachers,
19:59:28 police, firefighters, and even urban planners.
19:59:32 So I guess you have to take some of the good with the
19:59:34 bad.
19:59:36 It enables the demolition of the small dilapidated
19:59:39 house that is historically been used for rental
19:59:42 purposes and replaces it with two new highly desirable
19:59:45 homes for new families.
19:59:50 This is a very desirable neighborhood.
19:59:55 It is well located neighborhood.
19:59:59 But it's also a neighborhood that can only benefit
20:00:02 from new investment.
20:00:04 Recently, the city launched operation spring cleaning
20:00:12 3 in this general area, a number of homes benefited
20:00:15 from the efforts of city staff, and volunteers, and
20:00:19 two homes on this very block received new paint jobs
20:00:23 from these volunteer efforts.
20:00:34 Council members, as you know, zoning is a
20:00:36 quasi-judicial procedure, and we think that all
20:00:39 evidence in the record supports only your approval of

20:00:42 this petition.
20:00:45 Among the factors of the case we are providing two new
20:00:52 homes of the style that is not only compatible to size
20:00:55 and design, but in fact represents a significant
20:00:58 upgrade to the existing housing stock.
20:01:05 The lots are slightly smaller than houses nearby, but
20:01:08 due to careful site planning we have them oriented in
20:01:12 a manner that the relationships with surrounding
20:01:19 properties -- and this was just confirmed by your
20:01:22 staff -- are virtually identical to those that are
20:01:24 enabled under current zoning.
20:01:26 Both professional staffs have thoroughly evaluated
20:01:29 this application, found it fully compatible with the
20:01:32 neighborhood, and completely consistent with
20:01:35 applicable goals and policies of the city.
20:01:41 We will also submit into the record a transportation
20:01:43 report from city staff.
20:01:46 Your transportation staff has confirmed firmed what to
20:01:52 anyone would seem obvious, the transportation impacts
20:01:54 associated with the petitioner indeed negligible, and
20:02:00 there would be no compromise to traffic movements or
20:02:04 to traffic safety associated with this development.

20:02:08 We are also engaged sort of like arborists to provide
20:02:13 a tree survey of the property, and we have committed
20:02:17 to the appropriate -- to appropriate techniques to
20:02:20 preserve all desirable trees on-site.
20:02:24 Council members, in my view, there's no doubt that
20:02:29 approval of this application is the right thing to do,
20:02:34 not only for the petitioner, but it will undoubtedly
20:02:38 yield tangible, positive benefits for this
20:02:40 neighborhood in the future.
20:02:43 I ask you to say yes to appropriate in-fill
20:02:46 development, yes to workforce housing, and we
20:02:51 respectfully request your approval.
20:02:54 Lisa and I are available for questions.
20:02:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions from council members?
20:02:57 Subpoena there anyone in the public that wants to
20:02:58 speak on item number 11?
20:03:01 You may come up and speak.
20:03:08 >> My name is Nick DeOrio, 3247 east Linebaugh,
20:03:16 probably less than a half mile from the property, and
20:03:18 I also own a house that my daughter lives at, at 4724
20:03:24 east 98th Avenue.
20:03:26 Probably even closer to the property.

20:03:28 And I'm in complete support of it.
20:03:30 I think that anytime we can add something to look --
20:03:34 add something that looks as nice as that it's going to
20:03:37 add a lot of value to the community.
20:03:39 I also have a lot at 9810 Oklahawa but I
20:03:44 essentially -- intended to build a house similar to
20:03:48 that probably three years ago and it was going to be
20:03:50 for my mother.
20:03:51 The only reason is because she had passed away so I
20:03:53 did sell that lot and somebody built a very nice house
20:03:56 there.
20:03:57 I invested a lot of money in my home, in my lawn, and
20:04:03 what I have seen by doing that is the people around me
20:04:05 have started investing a little more money in the
20:04:07 property.
20:04:08 And they painted their house. The lady across the
20:04:10 street now decides to water her lawn so it gets green.
20:04:13 So I see when you start to do that -- I hope she's not
20:04:16 watching tonight -- but when you start doing that
20:04:20 stuff, I think that you really make the community look
20:04:24 a lot better.
20:04:25 And I think the homes are nice and I definitely

20:04:32 support it.
20:04:34 >> Thank you.
20:04:37 >>> Marty Miller.
20:04:38 I have been sworn in.
20:04:42 Me and my wife own the adjoining property at 9706
20:04:46 Pawnee.
20:04:47 I have several objections to this rezoning.
20:04:50 The first objection deals with the northern lots.
20:04:53 That would be lot 12.
20:04:55 I can find no other lots that are narrow, as small as
20:05:01 lots this size.
20:05:02 It's not consistent with the land use in this area.
20:05:05 Also, if you allow this kind of rezoning, it will set
20:05:11 a precedent for other properties, to sub dived their
20:05:14 lots for overdevelopment.
20:05:17 It's out of character with the use that's currently
20:05:21 going on in the neighborhood.
20:05:22 I also object to the size of proposed dwellings.
20:05:27 They have got less living area than a proper double
20:05:31 wide home.
20:05:32 The clearance on the trash bin enclosure, you see --
20:05:44 if you look at this red line here, this is a ten-foot

20:05:49 garage.
20:05:50 There is then a four-foot enclosure for the garbage,
20:05:56 which is required by city.
20:05:57 And then there's a two-foot area to walk to.
20:06:02 Now, this whole area only allows a two-foot area
20:06:05 between my property line and the trash enclosure.
20:06:12 That's a recipe for disaster.
20:06:15 I understand somebody could put a fence between these
20:06:19 two properties, which they are perfectly within their
20:06:21 rights to do. If there was any sort of disaster or
20:06:23 any kind of emergency, that could very well be a major
20:06:28 trouble spot.
20:06:29 And what I would also like to address, the other
20:06:33 driveway with the lot that I believe is 14.
20:06:37 Now, this lot will have on its driveway an apron that
20:06:52 will apparently engulf an existing stop sign.
20:06:56 This would soon be trouble if you consider that
20:07:00 there's another lot here that's approximately diamond
20:07:04 shaped.
20:07:04 This is actually a hair-pin turn.
20:07:07 You have a culvert here that's yellow.
20:07:12 There's a culvert across the street at the apex.

20:07:16 Then there's another culvert.
20:07:18 Obviously there's a lot of water.
20:07:21 That kind of -- this road is only 18-foot across.
20:07:27 The designing road is a hair-pin turn, is not much
20:07:31 wider.
20:07:32 And again there's going to be a driveway where people
20:07:36 will be backing out into a three-way intersection.
20:07:41 I see this as a major source of trouble, and a
20:07:44 possible liability to the city in the future.
20:07:49 And there's two power poles, too.
20:07:52 One on the apex and one on the sidewalk across the
20:07:55 street.
20:07:55 These can be -- this can be a real problem.
20:07:59 You add that to the fire hydrant here, water,
20:08:03 electricity, you know, and plus there's going to be a
20:08:07 garbage truck coming by here in the early --
20:08:10 (Bell sounds).
20:08:11 Excuse me, thank you very much.
20:08:14 >> I have two questions for you, sir.
20:08:16 Do you live immediately next door?
20:08:18 >>> I own the property at 9706 Pawnee, me and my wife
20:08:22 do.

20:08:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
20:08:24 What is the width of your property?
20:08:28 >>> 90.
20:08:31 90 wide by 100 deep.
20:08:33 >> Thank you.
20:08:33 And you have a single-family home on there?
20:08:36 >>> Yes, we do.
20:08:38 >> Thank you very much.
20:08:39 >>> Thank you.
20:08:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
20:08:47 >>> I'm the opposing person who has been here. This
20:08:49 is the third time.
20:08:51 And my name is Kathy Miller.
20:08:52 I live at 9706 Pawnee and I have been sworn in.
20:08:56 The reason that I did not respond to the letter that
20:08:58 was given to me is I had the flu first of all, and so
20:09:02 did most of my family, and it was given to me three
20:09:05 days before the final site plans were due so it was
20:09:07 just not going to happen. Anyway, I lived in my home
20:09:12 for over 30 years, my most major investment.
20:09:16 I live directly next door to the rezoned property, and
20:09:18 I oppose the rezoning.

20:09:20 I have signatures from properties directly affected,
20:09:23 and also others who oppose.
20:09:26 This is in addition to the last time, which had 26
20:09:29 signatures on it, and these are people, I didn't get a
20:09:35 chance to go out for another, also got the second
20:09:38 page.
20:09:38 I'll give it to you in a second.
20:09:40 And I have the original petition without the
20:09:43 signatures because that's been filed and just in case
20:09:47 anyone wants to read it.
20:09:48 I want it to be known that the property directly
20:09:51 across 9704 Takomah originally signed the petition,
20:09:56 and then -- in other words what I am trying to say is
20:10:00 you can look at it and it shows -- there's both
20:10:05 adjacent properties were here, and there are several
20:10:08 others that signed petitions.
20:10:11 So I'll let you look at that.
20:10:17 I know that some of the people in the area originally
20:10:20 signed my petition, and then subsequently have signed
20:10:23 letters for the petitioner.
20:10:25 My theory in that is the good salesman always tells
20:10:29 the good things about something and never points out

20:10:31 the bad things.
20:10:31 And frankly I just didn't see the point to getting
20:10:34 everyone stirred up because it was such a
20:10:36 controversial thing.
20:10:39 Then you talk to them and they say something else.
20:10:41 So I think the opinions of those of us that are
20:10:44 directly affected that live on the property borderline
20:10:47 should have a little bit more weight to our opinions.
20:10:51 Most of the properties in this area own their lot.
20:10:55 The proposed property site next to me is substandard
20:10:58 in size. The smallest lots are on an average frontage
20:11:01 of 60 feet, and after researching I found one that was
20:11:05 51 feet but it was on the corner lot.
20:11:07 I didn't subtract any of the setbacks.
20:11:09 The setbacks distances between the two proposed is
20:11:13 well or below properly allowances and will lead to
20:11:16 excesses of noise and fire hazards.
20:11:23 Not expecting to adhere to them and where are visitors
20:11:26 going to be parked with this so close to the front?
20:11:30 I have the placement of the driveway on the south side
20:11:32 home about to go over the current stop sign. The
20:11:36 meeting is at a 45-degree angle, making it an acute

20:11:41 term and if someone is coming south on Pawnee, south
20:11:44 on Takomah, turning onto Pawnee and the homeowner
20:11:47 would then go into the driveway there would likely be
20:11:51 an accident therefore making it a dangerous corner.
20:11:54 And I will show you that.
20:11:59 This is the stop sign.
20:12:00 The driveway right up there.
20:12:04 This is just -- a pretty good clip, 25 at least.
20:12:11 So, you know, it's going to be a disaster looking for
20:12:15 a place to happen.
20:12:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ma'am?
20:12:23 What's the width of your property?
20:12:27 >>> It's actually the same as before.
20:12:29 95, 100.
20:12:32 We are the same one.
20:12:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
20:12:37 >>> My name is Jim Michael.
20:12:39 I live -- I have been sworn in.
20:12:40 I live at 4801 east 98th Avenue, which is -- I can
20:12:47 show you where it is.
20:12:49 On this diagram.
20:12:52 This is my house right here on the corner.

20:12:56 And this is -- my main objection to the placement of
20:13:02 the driveway on the south property is that -- they are
20:13:12 going to be backing out into this why-shaped
20:13:15 intersection, the city should update their map because
20:13:19 this street does not go through.
20:13:21 Every map that's been put up here shows the street
20:13:23 going through and it doesn't.
20:13:27 Backing out into this intersection, the drains, on all
20:13:33 of those corners around, and this is a portion of
20:13:41 street that's had a long history of accidents, this
20:13:44 corner here, there was an accident last weekend there.
20:13:48 The petitioner has been involved in an accident on
20:13:50 that corner as well.
20:13:51 So she should well know the tragic impact that exists
20:13:58 there.
20:13:58 I was a little humbled when this was presented.
20:14:01 I believe you said it was a request from RM-16 to PD.
20:14:07 I thought it started out as an RS-60 to an RS-50.
20:14:17 If that's the case, I would ask that standard be
20:14:19 applied earlier in the evening for a request for a PD
20:14:21 zoning.
20:14:22 Thank you.

20:14:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
20:14:29 >>> Good evening.
20:14:29 My name is Johna Floyd.
20:14:31 I live at 4804 east 99th Avenue.
20:14:34 I have been sworn in.
20:14:35 My house is at the corner of 99th and Pawnee, like
20:14:39 one house back.
20:14:40 And I drive by this property every day at least two,
20:14:43 three times a day.
20:14:45 And we bought our house in October of '06.
20:14:48 And the biggest reason we bought the house is we lived
20:14:51 in Temple Terrace for seven years, my favorite area of
20:14:54 Tampa.
20:14:54 And I wanted an area of town that I could raise my
20:14:58 children, keep them safe.
20:15:00 And when we looked at our house, we looked at the
20:15:03 neighborhood, and we seen people that do take care of
20:15:07 their homes and their yards, and I noticed in the last
20:15:13 six months that people are starting to take care of
20:15:15 their house as little better, their yard, and the
20:15:18 community really works together.
20:15:19 For me, anything that would make my neighborhood

20:15:23 prettier, safer, nicer, right now the house that's on
20:15:27 that property has boards on the window. I would
20:15:30 rather see two house was pretty curtains than see a
20:15:33 house sitting there with boards on the window.
20:15:35 So I paid a fortune for my house.
20:15:40 And I would like to know that my house, the property
20:15:42 is going to go up than down.
20:15:44 And I think that I am definitely for this project.
20:15:48 Thank you.
20:15:57 >>> Cynthia Britain, and I live at 9617 N. Oklawaha,
20:16:02 which is the adjacent property to the south of the
20:16:03 proposed.
20:16:03 I object to this.
20:16:06 The lot is very small for two homes.
20:16:10 I believe the home on there needs something done with
20:16:12 it.
20:16:12 It is an eyesore.
20:16:13 My thoughts are, why put two houses on the lot?
20:16:16 Why not build one medium home that would sell?
20:16:23 My fear is that when they put in the affordable home,
20:16:26 villa, whatever they are going to call it, it's going
20:16:29 to decrease my property values.

20:16:32 I have never heard where putting those homes into a
20:16:34 community has increased the value.
20:16:37 It will increase the noise in my backyard two fold.
20:16:40 You have the tiny little backyard.
20:16:42 It's going to be very noisy.
20:16:44 I spend a lot of time sitting in my backyard and
20:16:47 enjoying it.
20:16:50 The driveway being next to my property line, the air
20:16:53 conditioner being next to my property line, I'm not
20:16:55 looking forward to that.
20:16:58 At this point it said that they will be family homes.
20:17:02 My experience in our neighborhood is the homes that
20:17:04 are built like this may be a family home that's owned
20:17:07 for a year or so.
20:17:08 Then they become rentals.
20:17:10 And at that point, I can't see where it's going to be
20:17:16 an advantage to have them in our neighborhood.
20:17:19 I feel for the developer that she bought this property
20:17:25 and is having to build two homes in order to recoup
20:17:29 the money from it instead of one.
20:17:31 And I really do feel bad for that.
20:17:33 But I cannot see them putting this in our

20:17:35 neighborhood.
20:17:35 And it eventually be something that we are not going
20:17:38 to want.
20:17:38 I really would like to see it cleaned up, and
20:17:41 something new put there.
20:17:42 But not two on that small of a lot.
20:17:44 It is setting a precedent for other people to come
20:17:47 into our neighborhood, buy out the older homes that
20:17:50 are not so well kept, have them rezoned and put that
20:17:53 other type of housing in there, also.
20:17:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn in?
20:17:59 >>> Yes, I am, I'm sorry.
20:18:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:18:08 >>> I live at 4804 east 98th Avenue.
20:18:12 I have been sworn in.
20:18:13 I'm for this project.
20:18:17 I've seen it now, where I don't like the way it looks
20:18:22 as it is right now.
20:18:23 Maybe put one home might be all right.
20:18:30 And as far as the safety goes, you know, I drive
20:18:32 through there, also, the turn beyond the curve.
20:18:35 And I -- as someone pointed out, they are doing that

20:18:48 in that other accident-prone corner of 98th and
20:18:51 Pawnee.
20:18:52 But that's not even -- it's on the end of the block, I
20:18:57 guess.
20:19:00 The traffic and safety wouldn't have nothing to do
20:19:03 with it, I don't believe, because I drive through
20:19:05 there three or four times a day.
20:19:07 And I don't have any problems of like looking out or
20:19:11 stuff.
20:19:11 And I'm for it.
20:19:14 I think it would be an added value.
20:19:16 Even though people might think it might not be,
20:19:19 because it might bring down the property.
20:19:27 It looks better and there would be more homes there.
20:19:29 Might encourage people to maybe take down an old home
20:19:35 and rebuild a nice one-family home, not, you know,
20:19:39 building it like that but just a nice home around
20:19:41 there.
20:19:42 And that's what people encourage people to do that it
20:19:45 would be nice.
20:19:46 And thank you for your time.
20:19:55 >>> I'm Eloise lucky.

20:19:56 I live at 480298th Avenue.
20:20:01 North of the property.
20:20:02 Lived there since 1953.
20:20:05 Seen a lot of accidents.
20:20:10 The light pole has been changed in my yard three
20:20:12 times, trash thrown in my yard, knocking poles.
20:20:17 And the location of this lot concerns me, because it
20:20:22 is at an angle coming off of Takomah Trail, which is a
20:20:25 lot of traffic.
20:20:28 And the pictures they are showing is, it look like,
20:20:33 two nice big houses there, but reality, the size of
20:20:38 duplex and I don't think it's going to help our
20:20:41 neighborhood, and the traffic problems and projects
20:20:45 coming up on Pawnee, people think they are going to
20:20:51 get houses are not looking for what's in their way as
20:20:54 has been shown in our neighborhood.
20:20:56 I am in favor of one family homes there.
20:21:00 But for two I do not agree.
20:21:02 Thank you.
20:21:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:21:09 >>> Josh Murray.
20:21:11 I have been sworn.

20:21:11 I live at 9814 north Pawnee.
20:21:14 I'm in full support of the two developed homes there.
20:21:19 To address the issue but the traffic.
20:21:20 I have done lots of work on that property actually
20:21:22 trying to avoid -- cut trees down there for her that
20:21:26 we were allowed to cut down.
20:21:27 And I was there many times Mace and I see no issue
20:21:31 with getting hit by anybody.
20:21:33 I come up that street many times, many times, and you
20:21:39 can see around that corner.
20:21:41 And two new homes will be great for the neighborhood,
20:21:45 I believe.
20:21:46 It will increase the values of everybody's house.
20:21:48 Even the people that are against, it will help their
20:21:51 value if they try to sell.
20:21:53 And to address the issue about they are saying people
20:21:56 are tearing their houses down.
20:21:58 I think it's a good thing.
20:22:00 Get rid of some of these shacky houses, put new ones
20:22:03 in, eventually people are going to move there.
20:22:06 Like I say, New Tampa area, not so much New Tampa, but
20:22:10 north of Tampa, up in Seminole Heights and stuff,

20:22:13 people put new homes, tear down older ones.
20:22:16 They fix them up nice.
20:22:17 And then eventually the value of homes keeps going up.
20:22:20 Two new homes can only increase the value.
20:22:24 If you happen to drive through there you'll see what
20:22:27 we are talking about.
20:22:27 It cannot help but make it better there.
20:22:30 So I'm fully in support of these two houses.
20:22:34 The traffic issue, there is no issue there with the
20:22:36 traffic.
20:22:36 I have lived there for five years now.
20:22:39 And it's the other intersection that you have to which
20:22:44 is a ways from where the house is.
20:22:46 What they need to do is four-way stop there.
20:22:49 It has nothing to do with this intersection that the
20:22:51 opposition is talking about.
20:22:55 Put a four-way stop there.
20:22:57 That's where the problem is.
20:22:58 But I'm in full support of it.
20:23:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:23:08 >> Bruce Britt, 96 Oklawaha Avenue, the property just
20:23:13 south of the property.

20:23:16 My objection is -- and as you all probably know-if you
20:23:21 put two houses there on a single lot, that sets a
20:23:25 precedent for everything else to go down the tubes.
20:23:28 You are going to have effectively double the
20:23:33 population density in the area, because every
20:23:39 developer that comes in and buys a single property
20:23:42 house is going to want to knock it down and build two.
20:23:47 I really think that that's probably not good for the
20:23:51 neighborhood.
20:23:52 I object for all the other reasons, also.
20:23:55 Thank you.
20:23:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in for the record?
20:23:58 I didn't hear.
20:23:59 >>> I was sworn in.
20:24:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, sir.
20:24:04 >>> My name is Judy Mobley and I have been sworn in.
20:24:08 My address is 9707 Takomah Trail.
20:24:10 And I live directly -- my house faces the property
20:24:15 that's in question here.
20:24:18 I am definitely opposed to this.
20:24:20 I have pictures showing -- this is the property that
20:24:24 wants to be rezoned.

20:24:25 And my house is right here.
20:24:27 And I look directly at it.
20:24:37 >> This is my house.
20:24:38 If you notice they all have lots of property.
20:24:40 They are not like crammed together, squished together.
20:24:44 Everybody everyone in the immediate area that you can
20:24:46 see this property from all has large properties.
20:24:49 There's nothing crammed in at all.
20:25:05 All the properties, also, I don't know is the if you
20:25:09 noticed, but they are well kept.
20:25:11 Everyone takes care of the property.
20:25:13 They were taken in the winter so of course they are
20:25:14 not going to have green grass and everything.
20:25:17 But the undersized lot is not going to be, with two
20:25:21 houses on it, is not going to be compatible with
20:25:23 what's established already in our neighborhood.
20:25:26 Another concern is that if they put two houses there,
20:25:29 there's going to be no place, if there's children
20:25:31 involved, there's no area for them to play in.
20:25:34 They are going to have visitors.
20:25:37 They have to park in the street.
20:25:39 There's absolutely no parking for them if there's

20:25:41 houses right up almost to the road.
20:25:43 And I also want to show this map.
20:25:47 I live right here on this corner.
20:25:49 And I'm using a third of the traffic, comes south on
20:25:57 Takomah, and then turn north onto Pawnee, put cut
20:26:02 through over to the main road.
20:26:03 So there's a very lot of traffic actually that does go
20:26:07 through that area.
20:26:14 That's it.
20:26:15 Thank you.
20:26:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the width of the front of
20:26:19 your property?
20:26:20 >>> I don't know.
20:26:21 I didn't look that up.
20:26:23 We have actually four lots on our property.
20:26:25 We are right on the corner.
20:26:26 So we have very wide --
20:26:30 >> Thank you.
20:26:30 >>> Thank you.
20:26:33 >>> Good evening, council.
20:26:35 My name is Marge Kennedy Gibson.
20:26:39 I live on 9710 north Pawnee and I'm the house north of

20:26:45 the property.
20:26:46 And I am in favor of the zoning.
20:26:50 My husband is a retired detective, and he can tell
20:26:52 you, we have Post Office Box.
20:26:55 We go to the grocery store, to the drugstore, and
20:27:02 there is never any traffic that I have to wait on, or
20:27:06 come in and out.
20:27:07 And I work in my yard a lot.
20:27:09 I don't see where there's a lot of traffic there.
20:27:12 There is no drainage problems.
20:27:13 I've never seen water standing.
20:27:16 And I am in favor of the two houses, because I feel
20:27:19 that it would be a good improvement to our
20:27:22 neighborhood.
20:27:23 This has been an eye H eyesore.
20:27:26 I have been there 18 years and it's been an eye store.
20:27:28 I have relatives out of town and friends that always
20:27:32 say to us, what is it with this corner?
20:27:35 And rental properties, sometimes do you have this, but
20:27:40 they never tried to fix it up.
20:27:42 I have rent areas cross from me -- and I'm not against
20:27:46 rental people.

20:27:47 Some people can't afford to buy.
20:27:49 But they are as good a neighbors as you would want.
20:27:53 And they are going to sell the place.
20:27:55 And I'm sorry to see them go.
20:27:57 That's how much I think of them.
20:27:58 So I'm against talking about rental people.
20:28:01 But, anyway, I think this would make a very good
20:28:05 improvement for our neighborhood.
20:28:08 It would help the value of our home.
20:28:11 And this property has, like I say, the trees on it are
20:28:17 terrible looking, even if we cut them down.
20:28:20 They are leaning over like they are going to fall.
20:28:22 It's just a real bad thing.
20:28:24 And our neighbors are good hard-working people, and
20:28:28 they deserve improvement.
20:28:32 We all know our city is growing very fast.
20:28:35 And land is scarce.
20:28:38 And I would welcome any new neighbors coming in,
20:28:41 whether rental-or owners.
20:28:46 I think this would help the value of our property and
20:28:49 improve everything.
20:28:50 And like I say, I have never had any trouble with the

20:28:53 traffic.
20:28:53 And we are through there all the time.
20:28:55 And I've never seen an accident there.
20:28:57 So the accident is actually north of me on Pawnee and
20:29:04 98th.
20:29:05 And they do need four-way stop signs there.
20:29:09 There was an accident last weekend.
20:29:11 But this has nothing to do with the intersection of
20:29:14 Pawnee and Takomah Trail.
20:29:17 I have never had to wait on traffic.
20:29:20 Never had any problem at all.
20:29:22 And I have never seen any drainage problems, no water
20:29:25 standing or nothing.
20:29:26 And I cannot see where they think that it will be a
20:29:29 problem backing out.
20:29:32 Children don't play in the streets like they used to.
20:29:36 People keep their children -- they are either at
20:29:39 little league or the clubs.
20:29:41 They just don't play in the streets like they used to
20:29:43 because my grandchildren don't.
20:29:45 So I don't see where that would be a problem with
20:29:47 children.

20:29:48 But I am in favor of the rezoning.
20:29:50 And I think it would make a big improvement for our
20:29:53 whole neighborhood.
20:29:55 >>>
20:29:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You were sworn in, is that correct?
20:29:59 >>> I was sworn in.
20:30:07 >>> My name is Reg Alford, 4900 east 98th Avenue,
20:30:12 Tampa, Florida 33617.
20:30:16 I have been sworn in.
20:30:18 Yes, sir.
20:30:19 First of all, I would like to mention that I have
20:30:21 lived in this area for 18 years myself.
20:30:24 I bought the house there in 1988, and is the lot size
20:30:28 is 50 by 100.
20:30:30 I probably have one of the largest houses in the
20:30:32 neighborhood.
20:30:33 This is a two-story house.
20:30:35 And when you have RS-50 zoning, because that's what
20:30:39 the zoning criteria on my lot is, is RS-50, you have
20:30:43 certain setback criterias that you have to meet.
20:30:46 You have front yard, side yard, rear yard.
20:30:49 And I can assure you, you have ample room in regards

20:30:52 to rear yard because you have the 25-foot front yard
20:30:55 and 20-foot rear yard with seven on the sides.
20:30:59 And every other weekend, I just about have to cut it
20:31:04 and clean it and take care of it.
20:31:07 It's a very nice lot in the neighborhood.
20:31:11 It has been growing.
20:31:14 Since I have lived there for 18 years, I can tell you
20:31:17 just about every house that's been built, every house
20:31:21 that's been torn down, in this particular
20:31:23 neighborhood, and some of the houses that I have tried
20:31:25 to buy and tear down myself in order to build other
20:31:28 houses.
20:31:29 And also the Takomah Trail, 99th Avenue, I was
20:31:34 instrumental in doing that subdivision around 23, 26
20:31:38 lots there that was built there.
20:31:40 I also did Takomah Trail approximately 9 lots in that
20:31:45 area that I plotted in that particular area and I can
20:31:50 name several more.
20:31:51 There's been houses at the end of my street, 98th
20:31:54 Avenue.
20:31:55 It also dead-ends down there, going eastbound.
20:31:58 And there's been three, five houses built down there.

20:32:02 These houses are very affordable.
20:32:06 They are in-fill.
20:32:07 And I strongly support that
20:32:11 The accidents, you drive this road every day, I drive
20:32:13 98th Avenue every day, I drive Takomah Trail every
20:32:16 day, and the bulk of the traffic and traffic accidents
20:32:19 are at 98th and Pawnee.
20:32:22 I can honestly tell that you Pawnee and 98th
20:32:26 really needs to be a 4-way stop sign.
20:32:29 As far as property in Takomah Trail, I can tell you,
20:32:32 you never wait.
20:32:33 You never hardly ever see any vehicles that go down
20:32:35 there, because I drive it numerous times a day in
20:32:41 order to come down to City Council, and also come
20:32:44 downtown and do a lot of work, but I have been around
20:32:48 there for many, many years.
20:32:50 I think the two houses that are being proposed would
20:32:54 be a tremendous asset, and I strongly support it and
20:32:57 hope this council will approve this request.
20:33:00 Thank you.
20:33:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:33:01 Would anyone else like to speak?

20:33:04 Petitioner, do you want to come back for rebuttal?
20:33:19 >>> Steve Allison for the record.
20:33:21 I wish that our letters would have been responded to.
20:33:24 I think that some of the information that's been
20:33:26 presented to you -- and I'm in no way suggesting it
20:33:30 would have changed minds -- but we could have
20:33:33 addressed several of the points of the people that
20:33:37 were brought up in opposition.
20:33:39 Some of it is flat-out incorrect.
20:33:45 In terms of the transportation data, we do have from
20:33:48 your staff transportation technician 2 data on traffic
20:33:54 conditions in this intersection.
20:33:58 Suffice to the say there is no traffic issue
20:34:00 associated with this application.
20:34:02 There has been one accident in the last three years at
20:34:05 the intersection of Takomah and north Pawnee.
20:34:09 And when you look at the site plan and have concerns
20:34:11 about people backing out into that, you're looking at
20:34:15 right-of-way on those streets.
20:34:16 You're not looking at actual pavements.
20:34:18 There's plenty of room to make turning movements out,
20:34:22 backing out of these driveways.

20:34:25 Also, the notion that a stop sign would be somehow
20:34:30 interfered with by the driveway is simply erroneous.
20:34:37 Relative to the size of the dwellings, which some
20:34:40 people have brought up, we are within 15 square feet
20:34:45 of the medium size of housing in this entire area.
20:34:50 In addition to that we are providing garages.
20:34:53 Garages -- while most houses in the area have garages,
20:34:58 that's certainly a feature that we wanted to have
20:35:01 here.
20:35:01 I guess we could take them out and make the houses
20:35:03 then exceed the medium square footage.
20:35:06 We don't think that's the appropriate way to go.
20:35:11 In terms of general compatibility issues, again both
20:35:14 your professional staff says this is compatible.
20:35:17 There are things you will accept if you want to
20:35:22 actually promote in-fill housing as your comp plan
20:35:25 says you are to do -- to do.
20:35:28 Put housing in where there is available
20:35:29 infrastructure.
20:35:30 Provide housing for workforce people.
20:35:33 Yes.
20:35:33 The lots are smaller.

20:35:35 But what does that actually mean in reality?
20:35:39 In terms of the setbacks relative to what's required
20:35:41 by zoning currently and what's being provided here.
20:35:46 There's one deviation on the north property line where
20:35:49 the garage is one foot less than the current setback
20:35:53 required of the current zoning.
20:35:55 The only other encroachment to setbacks is in the
20:35:59 front yard, and that's where the front porch is.
20:36:03 We can take off the front porches and thereby better
20:36:07 comply with your setback.
20:36:08 But we think the front porches are a good thing.
20:36:10 We think that you think that they are a good thing.
20:36:14 Compatibility.
20:36:16 These are of the size and the scale of the design of
20:36:20 the height fully consistent with this neighborhood.
20:36:23 The only thing that they differ in is they are going
20:36:27 to have less grass than most.
20:36:31 As the owner of a lot with too big of a front yard I
20:36:33 wish that was the case for me.
20:36:35 It's not.
20:36:36 And I rue the day that a loud such a large front yard
20:36:41 to become my home, because I'm not the greatest person

20:36:46 taking care of it and I don't really like mowing
20:36:49 lawns.
20:36:52 Again, there are trade-offs you have to make to get
20:36:56 into a house.
20:36:58 This is absolutely appropriate in-fill housing with
20:37:00 the benefit to the neighborhood. Do you want to say
20:37:06 anything?
20:37:07 >>> Lisa Montlione, Pawnee Avenue, and I have been
20:37:12 sworn.
20:37:13 I lived in this neighborhood.
20:37:14 I live six houses from where this site is.
20:37:17 I lived there for nine and a half years.
20:37:21 I invested everything I have in my own home, and when
20:37:25 I went out, as directed by council to talk to the
20:37:29 neighbors.
20:37:33 I cringed when someone here mentioned a good salesman.
20:37:39 I have invested in this neighborhood, because I want
20:37:41 to see something nice built in this neighborhood.
20:37:44 I bought this property an overextended myself, not
20:37:48 financially, but doing all the work and I work full
20:37:52 time, and taking on this project, because I'm putting
20:37:55 my money where my mouth is.

20:37:58 If people want to see positive results in their
20:38:01 neighborhoods, they go out and do something about it.
20:38:03 I was in the position to go out and do something about
20:38:05 it.
20:38:06 And I purchased these properties, these three lots, in
20:38:10 order to make this neighborhood someplace where I want
20:38:16 to stay.
20:38:19 A lot of the area, in the immediate area, and about a
20:38:23 six-block area, has been for sale recently.
20:38:27 There have been a lot of rental properties.
20:38:29 And, you know, that doesn't mean that the people who
20:38:32 are going to live in those houses are going to degrade
20:38:36 the neighborhood.
20:38:39 These houses are 1500 square foot under roof houses.
20:38:43 My house is 1400 square foot under roof.
20:38:49 I have a 6-foot 2 son, I have a 6-foot 3 partner, I
20:38:54 have two dogs that are over 100 pounds.
20:38:57 We live just nicely in my 1400 square feet.
20:39:00 I love it because I don't have a MEGA house to take
20:39:03 care of.
20:39:04 And I think it's appropriate.
20:39:05 I think for environmental reasons, for in-fill

20:39:09 reasons, for social reasons, and economic reasons,
20:39:12 housing is much space as you need, rather than having
20:39:18 a space just so you can say "I have a huge house."
20:39:23 I think this is appropriate.
20:39:24 And that's all I am trying to do.
20:39:28 All I'm trying to do what's right and what's good for
20:39:30 my neighborhood.
20:39:33 And I guess the only other point I wanted to say was
20:39:36 about children.
20:39:37 These back yards are larger than is required by the
20:39:40 standards.
20:39:41 One backyard is 37 feet deep, and the other one, I
20:39:45 think, is nearly 32 feet deep.
20:39:49 There's plenty of room to play.
20:39:52 And beautiful yards.
20:39:53 Some of the trees, yes, will have to come out because
20:39:55 of city code, they are exotic.
20:40:00 But some will stay, and some will grow and some will
20:40:02 be planted.
20:40:05 If you have any questions, I would be more than happy
20:40:07 to address your concerns.
20:40:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

20:40:10 I just have one question.
20:40:11 You said that you purchased this property with the
20:40:15 intention of doing it.
20:40:16 I was going to say as a general statement, it's not a
20:40:20 good idea to buy property where you can't do what you
20:40:22 want with it until you get the zoning.
20:40:25 Usually people have a contract pending getting the
20:40:31 zoning that they need to do what they want with it.
20:40:34 Were you aware that you didn't have the correct zoning
20:40:36 to put two houses on this when you bought it?
20:40:40 >>> Well, you know, I guess I'm a novice.
20:40:43 You know, I was called a very bad word by one of my
20:40:47 neighbors and said, you're a speculator.
20:40:49 And I said, no, I'm a neighbor.
20:40:51 I thought it was a good thing to do.
20:40:53 And that's why I did it.
20:40:55 And you're right.
20:40:56 Of course.
20:40:57 But.
20:41:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thanks.
20:41:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Hindsight is 20-20, right?
20:41:05 >>> Yes, sir.

20:41:05 >> I was curious, do you know the total square
20:41:10 footage?
20:41:10 Or do you know the total square footage?
20:41:17 >>> A little over 96.
20:41:19 Essentially a lot and a half.
20:41:20 A little more than a lot and a half.
20:41:21 >> 9600?
20:41:23 >>> Yes.
20:41:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I couldn't find it.
20:41:25 >>> On the tree table at the bottom of the tree table.
20:41:32 Under landscape requirements.
20:41:35 We have square footage impervious and percentage
20:41:37 pervious.
20:41:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Allison, a lot of terminology
20:41:49 talking about affordable housing, workforce housing.
20:41:53 When you talk about workforce housing, first of all,
20:41:57 are these homes going to be for sale or for rent?
20:42:00 >>> Yes, sir.
20:42:01 >> For sale.
20:42:06 And you use the terminology saying they are going to
20:42:08 be for policemen, teachers --
20:42:14 >>> And urban planners.

20:42:16 [ Laughter ]
20:42:20 >> Anyone know what the going rate of a home in that
20:42:22 area is?
20:42:25 >>> What they have been selling at?
20:42:29 I believe -- I looked at the numbers.
20:42:33 But I have to dig it out.
20:42:37 The low end would be about 140.
20:42:44 135.
20:42:45 >> That is affordable housing, workforce housing.
20:42:52 The average house today in Hillsborough County is
20:42:55 $235,000.
20:42:59 Teachers and firemen and policemen cannot afford a 200
20:43:05 something-home.
20:43:08 I am a very strong advocate for workforce housing.
20:43:11 Those homes are going at that price, and this
20:43:14 particular neighborhood from what I can see, it looked
20:43:16 to be very nice.
20:43:17 I would support this project.
20:43:22 This is a huge issue for us in this town.
20:43:25 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question for you.
20:43:28 You said you purchased -- I might have missed this at
20:43:31 the beginning but you said you purchased three lots.

20:43:33 >>> Yes, ma'am.
20:43:34 >> Three lots.
20:43:34 >>> Yes, it is.
20:43:36 >> Is it because of the diagonal street that you
20:43:38 needed three lots to build two homes on?
20:43:42 >>> The property, when I purchased it from the former
20:43:44 owner, is three lots, so the existing home, which is
20:43:53 in a state of disrepair, and that's the way it was
20:43:56 when I bought it in September of 2005.
20:44:02 That home sits on one lot.
20:44:07 The fence as you saw, in one of the photos, the photo
20:44:12 that the opposition had earlier --
20:44:16 >> To clarify, those are platted lots.
20:44:18 Those are lots not large enough to meet minimum zoning
20:44:21 requirements.
20:44:22 >>> Thank you.
20:44:37 >>> On Mr. Scott's focus on affordable housing, and
20:44:41 said about 130,000.
20:44:43 And it will probably be a little more but it's still
20:44:46 within reach for those type of people.
20:44:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
20:44:52 >> Move to close.

20:44:53 >> Second.
20:44:53 (Motion carried).
20:44:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have an ordinance?
20:44:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm going to move this particular
20:45:03 application.
20:45:05 Again, I think that it will be an improvement to this
20:45:08 particular area, to this particular neighborhood.
20:45:09 And in reading the backup, there seemed to be no
20:45:13 objection from the staff, from the review committee,
20:45:15 or the county commission.
20:45:18 So I am going to move the ordinance.
20:45:22 An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
20:45:27 of 9704 north Pawnee Avenue in the City of Tampa,
20:45:33 Florida, and more particularly described in section 1
20:45:36 traffic issue zoning district classification RS-60
20:45:39 residential single family to PD, planned development
20:45:41 single family detached residential, providing an
20:45:44 effective date.
20:45:47 >> Second.
20:45:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
20:45:49 Question on the motion.
20:45:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is really tough.

20:45:52 You have a neighborhood where it seems to be about
20:45:54 half the neighbors think it's a good idea and about
20:45:56 half don't.
20:45:57 You have got the average home frontage in this
20:45:59 neighborhood that's larger than most.
20:46:02 Affordable housing is a laudable goal.
20:46:06 What I am going to base my vote not to support this
20:46:10 petition on is that the people who are most directly
20:46:13 affected, the people who live behind it, on one side,
20:46:16 on the other, and across the street, all have homes
20:46:22 that are on lots that are larger. The reason this is
20:46:25 coming before us as a request for a PD is because they
20:46:35 would not be able to construct these homes with the
20:46:38 existing zoning, RS-60.
20:46:40 So I am not going to be able to support the petition.
20:46:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
20:46:44 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:46:46 Opposed, Nay.
20:46:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nay.
20:46:54 >>> The motion carried with Saul-Sena voting no.
20:46:57 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 12.
20:47:00 >> So moved.

20:47:00 >> Second.
20:47:01 (Motion carried).
20:47:04 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Item number 12.
20:47:06 Land Development Coordination.
20:47:08 I have been sworn.
20:47:10 V 07-12.
20:47:12 Bayshore beautification located at 2901ate Alline
20:47:19 Avenue is the petitioner.
20:47:21 DRC has reviewed the proposed project and has no
20:47:24 objections.
20:47:25 Current zoning is RS-60 residential single family,
20:47:28 proposed special use, public service facility,
20:47:32 specifically for stormwater lift station.
20:47:34 There are no waivers requested, nor are any being
20:47:38 proposed for this.
20:47:40 The petitioner is requesting a special use for the
20:47:42 property at 2921 west Alline Avenue to construct a
20:47:48 structure to house the City of Tampa lift station for
20:47:50 stormwater.
20:47:51 The proposed structure will look like a normal
20:47:54 residential home with a driveway in front and a
20:47:57 driveway in the rear for up to three service vehicles.

20:48:01 The proposed structure meets all IS 60 setback
20:48:05 requirements and has a 6-foot fence around both sides
20:48:09 and rear of the parcel, as required by city code
20:48:18 The Elmo, please.
20:48:27 As you can see it fronts on two streets.
20:48:30 Here's Alline.
20:48:32 Here's subject property.
20:48:34 This is MacDill Avenue here.
20:48:37 And Richard's court over on east.
20:48:41 This gives you a little better aerial perspective of
20:48:45 the subject parcel.
20:48:47 Currently, there is a house on the property.
20:48:49 This is the subject property from the front on Alline
20:48:53 street. This is the subject property currently on the
20:48:55 rear, on Asbury street.
20:48:58 This is looking down Asbury street towards the west.
20:49:03 This is looking down Asbury street towards the east.
20:49:07 These are the homes on Alline street directly across
20:49:13 from the subject property.
20:49:14 As you can see if you compare these photos with the
20:49:18 elevations that you have been provided, the housing is
20:49:21 very comparable and similar in nature, which is one of

20:49:25 the things that the stormwater department attempted to
20:49:30 do. If there are any questions I'll be available.
20:49:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is this the one he will be living
20:49:40 in?
20:49:41 >> I will let you ask him that question.
20:49:53 >> The residents have not seen a picture of this
20:49:55 house.
20:49:55 >> They just handed us the picture.
20:49:58 We'll give it to you.
20:50:00 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
20:50:08 I have been sworn in.
20:50:15 The proposed request is located just east --
20:50:29 Single-family detached.
20:50:30 As far as the request for a public service facility
20:50:34 with the appearance of a single family detached
20:50:36 residence.
20:50:37 The request is consistent as is applicable to the
20:50:39 future land use elements, particularly D-4.6 which
20:50:45 talks about the location and construction of public
20:50:46 facilities may be considered in any land use plan
20:50:49 category.
20:50:50 Also, the public facilities and utilities shall be

20:50:53 located to maximize the efficiency of services
20:50:56 provided to minimize their cost and maximize their
20:50:58 impacts upon the national and historic environments
20:51:01 and to minimize social and neighborhood disruptions.
20:51:07 Policy D-3.1 which speaks of development and
20:51:09 redevelopment integrated with adjacent land uses
20:51:12 through the creation of like uses.
20:51:15 These three policies, the predominant uses in the
20:51:19 surrounding area are single family detached
20:51:20 residences.
20:51:21 That is what the proposed use will look like. The
20:51:23 proposed use will be single a single family detached
20:51:28 residence. This type of public facility is allowed in
20:51:31 any land use category.
20:51:32 Therefore based on those findings, these policies and
20:51:35 the future land use element, Planning Commission staff
20:51:37 has no objections to the proposed request.
20:51:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:51:48 >> Good evening, council.
20:51:50 Chuck Walter, director of stormwater development.
20:51:51 I'm here representing city today.
20:51:53 The city is the applicant.

20:51:55 We are here to request a rezoning.
20:51:58 >> Which city?
20:51:58 >> City of Tampa, sir.
20:52:01 >> Have you been sworn?
20:52:02 >>> I have been sworn.
20:52:04 I'm just going to go over a brief presentation on this
20:52:07 project.
20:52:08 As you may recall, this project area is an area where
20:52:12 we have had flooding over the years.
20:52:14 Flooding is one issue but this area where we have had
20:52:18 flooding, the flood waters have been co-mixed with
20:52:21 wastewater.
20:52:21 So we have had sewage on the streets in this
20:52:24 neighborhood.
20:52:24 The Bayshore pump station is basically eliminated the
20:52:27 sewage issue from this neighborhood, that this project
20:52:31 is intended to reduce the flooding in the
20:52:33 neighborhood.
20:52:41 The contributing area for this project, in you will --
20:52:44 if you will notice on the east side of the project
20:52:46 area, is the bank.
20:52:47 Everything within the pink basically needs to drain

20:52:49 through this neighborhood.
20:52:52 So it's quite a large contributing drainage area that
20:52:54 has to go through the Asbury, Alline neighborhood.
20:53:03 This is a box culvert that goes out to the bay and
20:53:05 this neighborhood if you will look at the cross
20:53:07 sections A-A, B, B, and C-C, this neighborhood is a
20:53:12 bowl and is historically a lake bed that was filled.
20:53:17 Because of that the stormwater actually flows
20:53:19 backwards out through the inlets in this neighborhood,
20:53:21 and that's one of the reasons that it floods so bad.
20:53:24 So we have basically come up with a design concept
20:53:28 that will hold the stormwater that's coming from that
20:53:30 whole large pink area, in a pipe, through the
20:53:33 neighborhood.
20:53:34 Now, once we do that, we will then have to pump the
20:53:36 water from this neighborhood out, because it will have
20:53:39 nothing to drain into.
20:53:41 When we came up with this design concept, this project
20:53:44 is actually pretty far along in our planning horizon.
20:53:48 We had not planned on starting this project until
20:53:50 2011.
20:53:51 But we did drive through the neighborhood

20:53:52 periodically, looking at the project and the problems
20:53:55 in the neighborhood, and fortunately one of the
20:53:58 properties came up for sale, and we said, well, gee,
20:54:01 if a property is up for sale, this is probably how we
20:54:03 are going to have to fix this problem anyway.
20:54:06 Let's take the property up for sale and look at this a
20:54:09 little more closely.
20:54:10 And it got the property for sale right in the lowest
20:54:14 part of the neighborhood.
20:54:17 And you will see it there in the pink.
20:54:19 That is the low point, in both the north, south and
20:54:23 east-west direction, and right adjacent to the Alline
20:54:27 box.
20:54:27 We are here today to basically talk about a rezone for
20:54:29 this property, because frankly we don't have the
20:54:31 design complete.
20:54:33 But if you looked at the land and you looked at the
20:54:35 area you would say, this is the logical place to put
20:54:37 something.
20:54:38 So that's why we are before you here today, is to
20:54:41 rezone this property.
20:54:42 We don't have the design complete.

20:54:44 Not by a long shot.
20:54:45 We don't have an engineer on staff to fin usual out
20:54:47 our design.
20:54:48 But we do feel like this property is in the right
20:54:51 place in the landscape to take care of this problem.
20:54:54 It's a traditional lot.
20:54:55 67 by 136.
20:54:56 And we are asking that it go to a special use, public
20:55:00 use facility.
20:55:02 You have seen in your packet the plan view.
20:55:04 This is going to look like a house in the
20:55:06 neighborhood.
20:55:07 It will look very similar in size, and in character.
20:55:09 This is just a plan view.
20:55:12 The area that you see with behind the property will
20:55:16 all be underground so you won't see any of that.
20:55:18 So that will be all underground.
20:55:21 You won't see any of it.
20:55:22 All you will see is the structure itself.
20:55:24 That's the plan view.
20:55:25 That's the view from the rear.
20:55:27 This is what you will be looking from, Asbury from the

20:55:34 north.
20:55:36 This will be the view from Alline.
20:55:45 This is the view from the east and west respectively.
20:55:52 Basically we are going to stick to our existing
20:55:54 schedule.
20:55:57 Well, we think that we can go ahead of schedule
20:56:00 frankly.
20:56:00 We want to go to design and get this thing built
20:56:03 because frankly there will be no project that we are
20:56:05 kind of bumping out of the way.
20:56:06 We had this scheduled for 2011 but if we have got the
20:56:09 land, construction prices are doing nothing but going
20:56:11 up faster than inflation.
20:56:12 So we might as well build it as soon as we can.
20:56:15 Again as long as we aren't putting any other project
20:56:18 that will be in front of it in jeopardy, we feel like
20:56:21 we should move ahead as quickly as we can.
20:56:23 So we are here before you today to request this
20:56:25 rezoning.
20:56:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What is the nearest home to the
20:56:35 proposed structure, number one?
20:56:37 Number two, how about noise?

20:56:39 What are you doing -- I don't know how noisy it is.
20:56:43 What are you doing about noise attenuation from the
20:56:46 structure?
20:56:47 >>> The structure itself really does not have much to
20:56:49 do with the pump. The structure itself is really just
20:56:52 an ancillary building for an emergency generator.
20:56:55 So these pumps will basically be running off
20:56:58 commercial power all of the time and the only reason
20:57:00 we are building the building there is for emergency
20:57:02 power.
20:57:03 If we are going to isolate this neighborhood from the
20:57:05 entire drainage system, it will have to have power.
20:57:08 Every drop of water that will fall into this
20:57:10 neighborhood from this point on will have to be
20:57:12 pumped.
20:57:13 So we felt like emergency power was required.
20:57:16 And that's all that this structure is for, is when
20:57:19 power would be lost.
20:57:20 Also, today, on the sound of the generator, this is
20:57:26 for the generator, is tremendous.
20:57:31 I stood next to these pumps and you can barely hear
20:57:34 them running when you are standing them outside and

20:57:37 this will be inside the building so the noise will be
20:57:39 insignificant.
20:57:40 >> This is just for the electric generators?
20:57:43 >> correct. The pumps will be underground in those
20:57:47 vault systems in the backyard.
20:57:48 >> How about the closest home?
20:57:50 >>> This is in a residential neighborhood.
20:57:52 There's a house on each side.
20:57:53 They are 67-foot lots.
20:57:55 We have met with all the neighbors immediately
20:57:57 adjacent.
20:57:58 In a very small group setting.
20:58:00 We met with all of the neighbors in a residential
20:58:03 setting within the notification requirements and had
20:58:06 that conversation.
20:58:06 Basically, the biggest issue that we had with
20:58:09 residents is that they were concerned about the
20:58:11 driveway entrance on the north side because no one
20:58:14 else has one there.
20:58:16 And some people said, well, we don't want it there.
20:58:18 And we said, well, if we don't put one there and we
20:58:21 have to come in and out you are going to end up with

20:58:23 muddy entrance in and out.
20:58:25 So what we are basically proposing in the site plan is
20:58:28 a stamped concrete feature that we'll paint and color
20:58:31 appropriately so it won't look like a driveway.
20:58:33 There will also be a stockade fence there so it won't
20:58:36 look like or be used like a driveway.
20:58:38 >> Asbury, on the back?
20:58:42 >>> Yes.
20:58:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
20:58:46 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
20:58:48 item number 12?
20:58:50 Come up an and speak.
20:58:55 >>> My name is Len Collier.
20:58:57 I have been sworn.
20:58:57 I live just behind the pump station proposed.
20:59:01 And I'm generally in favor of it.
20:59:03 I don't like seeing our neighbors being flooded so I
20:59:06 think it's going to help.
20:59:08 Like the gentleman stated, my only concern was that on
20:59:11 the driveway, there are no driveways that come off of
20:59:14 Asbury.
20:59:17 There's only houses on one side so my front yard, I

20:59:20 will be looking at my front door directly to this
20:59:23 house and it's going to be elevated quite high.
20:59:25 The only thing we requested, and we finally got it
20:59:28 tonight, was a nice picture of what they were going to
20:59:30 do with the back.
20:59:31 We wanted the back to look as good as the front.
20:59:34 And since there's no driveways going down Asbury on
20:59:40 any of the back yards we don't want to set a
20:59:42 precedent. So we would like them to do maybe the
20:59:44 concrete block where they let the grass grow up in
20:59:47 between it.
20:59:48 Something like that.
20:59:49 And the only other thing would be that they maybe
20:59:53 plant some bamboo or something.
20:59:54 Because if you look at the picture, the back, the
20:59:56 house is going to be so high, the fence, it's going to
21:00:00 stick way up above the house.
21:00:01 I mean, above the fence.
21:00:03 So we just request they put more trees there, some
21:00:06 bamboo, some kind of landscaping so it will make it
21:00:10 look nice.
21:00:11 The last thing would be that this thing, when they

21:00:15 zone this, it would only be for a stormwater pump,
21:00:18 that they couldn't change this to a sewage pump or
21:00:20 something.
21:00:23 But other than that I'm for it and it's about time.
21:00:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:00:30 >>> Mark Zewat, coachman Avenue.
21:00:33 I have been sworn.
21:00:34 I looked at this item.
21:00:38 We have in our streets three feet of standing water
21:00:43 several times a year during the rainy season.
21:00:45 That's what caused the sewage systems to back up.
21:00:47 That's what led to the consent agreement with the
21:00:50 federal government that led us down this path.
21:00:55 There's also going to be some ancillary construction
21:00:57 to our neighborhood to lay in some more pipes.
21:00:59 That's going to go down my driveway.
21:01:01 It's going to go down one of my neighbor's driveways.
21:01:09 Start digging.
21:01:10 Bring the shuffles.
21:01:11 I'll park my car elsewhere for however long it takes.
21:01:15 Bring it on.
21:01:15 Thank you.

21:01:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:01:23 >>> My name is Jim sandman.
21:01:25 I have been sworn.
21:01:26 I live at 3021 west Asbury place.
21:01:30 About a third of this property is directly across from
21:01:34 part of my property, and I'm in favor of the program.
21:01:40 If you start tomorrow it would be okay with me.
21:01:42 I'm just glad we finally got a picture of what it's
21:01:45 going to look like.
21:01:46 Thank you.
21:01:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:01:51 >>> Marty KATERNO, 2922 west, right in front of the
21:02:00 property.
21:02:00 Even in a nonhurricane year we have already been
21:02:02 flooded six times and that pipe is going to run down
21:02:05 the side of our house and I am really appreciative the
21:02:08 city is going to take positive action before 2007.
21:02:11 So thank you.
21:02:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:02:20 >>> My name is Sue Lyon.
21:02:22 I live on Fairoaks Avenue.
21:02:23 And this is my neighborhood.

21:02:25 And I came out of retirement just to tell you all,
21:02:31 please vote for this.
21:02:32 Please.
21:02:33 This is something we wanted for years.
21:02:36 We have been working at this for 20 years.
21:02:38 And they went out in their hip boots in the sewer to
21:02:43 look at this.
21:02:45 He wants it.
21:02:46 We want it.
21:02:47 Everybody wants it.
21:02:50 It is something that -- we got a whole audience full
21:02:53 of people here who will up and tell you the same thing
21:02:55 I'm going to tell you.
21:02:57 But, please.
21:02:58 This is something you can vote for without any trouble
21:03:02 with the neighborhood is going to complain.
21:03:04 The neighborhood wants it.
21:03:06 You're doing something for the neighborhood, in the
21:03:09 neighborhood, not anybody else's house.
21:03:15 This is going to solve these people's lots.
21:03:17 And Mr. Zewal has done it -- he's got newspaper
21:03:23 clippings, since before Charlie and Linda were on the

21:03:26 board.
21:03:28 [ Laughter ]
21:03:29 Please vote for it.
21:03:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are taking out three grand
21:03:33 trees.
21:03:33 You don't care about it?
21:03:34 >>> I don't care.
21:03:35 [ Laughter ]
21:03:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We don't need no rebuttal.
21:03:44 Close the public hearing.
21:03:46 >> So moved.
21:03:47 I have a quick question.
21:03:48 I know, I'm cautious to do this.
21:03:50 But one gentleman said, we want to be sure that this
21:03:52 is only used for a stormwater system.
21:03:56 And I don't know that there's that kind of limitation
21:03:58 on the site plan.
21:03:59 If the neighborhood is comfortable with it, I'm
21:04:01 comfortable with Mr. Walter putting it on the record
21:04:05 under oath, if that's all this is going to be used for
21:04:09 is the generators for the pumping -- for stormwater
21:04:12 pumping station as compared to this concern that was

21:04:14 mentioned which is a sewage lift station or something
21:04:17 like that.
21:04:19 >>> Sir, yes, chuck Walter, director of stormwater, I
21:04:21 have been sworn.
21:04:22 Yes, that is the intent of the application and spells
21:04:25 it out, that is for stormwater pump station.
21:04:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to close.
21:04:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One quick question, Mr. Walters.
21:04:34 The gentleman who lives right across the street north
21:04:37 on Asbury who said the building is high and he want
21:04:40 sod landscaping, can you all do that?
21:04:42 >>> Yes.
21:04:43 I think over time we will be able to accommodate that.
21:04:45 And again I think on our rear view, if I could have
21:04:49 the presentation back --
21:04:53 >> By the way, it's a really attractive pumping
21:04:57 station.
21:04:57 >>> Thank you.
21:04:59 [ Laughter ]
21:05:00 Anyway, that's the one difference that the structure
21:05:05 will have to some of the other homes, that it will be
21:05:07 a little bit higher because when do want to be able to

21:05:10 keep it out of storm surge.
21:05:12 >> It won't be over 35 feet.
21:05:14 >>> No, no.
21:05:15 It's a one-story structure.
21:05:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Has the city purchased this house yet?
21:05:22 >>> We have a contract pending.
21:05:30 Once it's rezoned.
21:05:32 >> Motion and second to close.
21:05:33 (Motion carried).
21:05:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to bring to council's
21:05:36 attention that when you do look at that ordinance and
21:05:38 read that ordinance it does make specific reference to
21:05:41 stormwater.
21:05:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Oh, good.
21:05:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It will be my honor to move an
21:05:49 ordinance approving a special use permit S-2 approving
21:05:52 a public service facility stormwater lift station in
21:05:56 an RS-60 zoning district in the general vicinity of
21:05:58 2901 west Alline -- all line, providing an effective
21:06:05 date known as the Steve Otto house.
21:06:13 >> Second.
21:06:14 >>> We have a motion and second.

21:06:15 (Motion carried).
21:06:16 Item 13 is a continued public hearing.
21:07:04 >>JAMES COOK: Land Development Coordination.
21:07:24 I have been sworn.
21:07:25 Petitioner is requesting to vacate a portion of
21:07:27 Waverly Court, lying between Bayshore Boulevard and
21:07:30 MacDill Avenue and running from Waverly Avenue to
21:07:32 Euclid Avenue.
21:07:35 If I could have the he will movement this is Waverly
21:07:37 Avenue to the north.
21:07:39 Euclid Avenue to the south.
21:07:40 This is Waverly Court.
21:07:41 Petitioner, they joined in on this petition.
21:07:51 This is the portion of Waverly Court they would like
21:07:53 to vacate.
21:07:58 Photos.
21:07:58 This is Waverly Court looking south from Waverly
21:08:01 Avenue.
21:08:05 This is a shot of Waverly Court looking north from
21:08:08 Euclid.
21:08:09 I would like to point out the notice on the aerial.
21:08:11 The south 100 feet is not included in this petition.

21:08:19 This shot of Waverly Court looking north from the mid
21:08:22 block.
21:08:25 This is a shot of Waverly Court looking south from mid
21:08:28 block.
21:08:29 And this is a shot of the intersection of Waverly
21:08:32 Avenue at Waverly Court looking north from Waverly
21:08:35 Court.
21:08:36 Based on objections that we did receive from the
21:08:38 department of public works, staff does object to this
21:08:40 vacating request.
21:08:42 I would also like to point out that although staff
21:08:44 objects to this vacating request as it's submitted,
21:08:47 petitioner's representative did meet with some of the
21:08:49 transportation staff earlier, I believe this week, to
21:08:54 look at other solutions.
21:08:55 With that I'll turn it over to petitioner.
21:08:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
21:09:05 >>> Good evening, Madam Chairwoman, members of
21:09:07 council.
21:09:08 My name is Gina Grimes, attorney with the law firm of
21:09:10 hill, ward and Henderson, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard,
21:09:14 suite 3700, and I have been sworn.

21:09:24 As Jimmy followed you, this is a petition to -- told
21:09:27 you, this is a petition to vacate only a portion of
21:09:29 Waverly Court.
21:09:30 We are handing out some presentation slips.
21:09:34 And I am going to -- hand out certain documents as I
21:09:39 go through my presentation.
21:09:40 Would like to begin with again giving you an overview
21:09:44 of the area that we are seeking to vacate.
21:09:53 I also want to point out that we represent all of the
21:09:57 property owners that abut this portion of Waverly
21:10:00 Court.
21:10:03 My clients are Jim and Susan weeks, Lori Ann Burton,
21:10:08 James Campbell Burton, Owen and Patricia rice, Don
21:10:14 Burton, and Don Burton, Jr.
21:10:16 Those are the six property owners that abut this
21:10:18 portion of Waverly Court.
21:10:20 If you will turn to tab 2 in the presentation book,
21:10:24 you will see the sketch that we provided that shows
21:10:31 Waverly Court in the area that we are seeking to
21:10:34 vacate.
21:10:35 I want to point out to you that the grain area, this
21:10:38 cross-hatch, it's previously vacated.

21:10:42 Mr. Dingfelder, do you have a question?
21:10:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just as a point of order.
21:10:45 There was a reference to transportation comments.
21:10:49 We didn't hear from transportation.
21:10:55 >>> Transportation is here.
21:10:56 >> No, city transportation.
21:10:57 >>> Yes.
21:11:02 >> Phil referred to him.
21:11:03 He never came up.
21:11:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Cook made the presentation.
21:11:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just so we stay in the right
21:11:11 sequence, I could hear from transportation staff on
21:11:13 this, please?
21:11:14 Sorry, Ms. Grimes.
21:11:16 >>> Transportation.
21:11:16 I have been sworn.
21:11:17 I heard about this vacating yesterday for the first
21:11:19 time.
21:11:19 Transportation staff has been working on it.
21:11:23 It's my understanding that there's an attempt to
21:11:26 traffic calm, to keep the parking from the
21:11:31 right-of-way, and cut-through traffic by vacating.

21:11:35 The city does have procedures in place.
21:11:37 I actually spoke with someone this afternoon who does
21:11:41 studies and told me that he could lay some tubes down
21:11:44 to get some volume counts, to see if that supports,
21:11:49 that people are cutting through, the speeds that they
21:11:52 are going.
21:11:54 With reference to the parking in the right-of-way,
21:11:58 there's a sign that can be posted.
21:12:00 It is chapter 15, section 43-A, states five minutes in
21:12:04 front of a residential dwelling, and in some cases the
21:12:08 right-of-way is actually so narrow, I believe maybe 20
21:12:12 feet in areas, where 18 is paved, where if you were to
21:12:15 park on the side, it's not right-of-way, it is private
21:12:18 property.
21:12:18 And then vacating might be the way to go.
21:12:24 But it's my personal opinion that maybe we should
21:12:28 follow some other leads first, even meet with the
21:12:31 neighborhood, with the petitioner, with the
21:12:33 transportation manager, and see if we can work
21:12:35 anything out.
21:12:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the formal transportation
21:12:43 department opinion as of today is?

21:12:45 >>> Object.
21:12:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
21:12:51 >>GINA GRIMES: Mr. Dingfelder, and council members, I
21:12:54 will address a lot of the suggestions that Brian made.
21:12:59 I'll tell you right now up front that all of those
21:13:01 avenues have already been attempted and have not
21:13:05 worked.
21:13:06 And if they hadn't been attempted, I could see council
21:13:10 directing us to go back and attempt them.
21:13:12 But they have.
21:13:13 And that is why the petitioners, the properties owners
21:13:16 that live on Waverly Court are petitioning for this
21:13:19 vacate because they feel like they have no other
21:13:21 alternative or solution.
21:13:22 Again, as I said, the portion of Waverly Court that
21:13:25 was previously vacated is shown in green on the
21:13:28 sketch, and then the area in pink is the area that we
21:13:30 are seeking to vacate right now.
21:13:36 I want to also go through the pictures again.
21:13:38 I know Jimmy showed you some pictures of Waverly
21:13:41 Court.
21:13:41 There's a couple things I want to point out as you

21:13:43 look at these pictures.
21:13:46 Of all as Brian mentioned the street is very narrow.
21:13:48 Even though the dedicated right-of-way is somewhere
21:13:50 between 10 and 20 feet, and that's up for discussion,
21:13:54 at least by the property owners, they believe it's
21:13:57 less than 20 feet dedicated right-of-way.
21:13:59 But at this point we are moving forward.
21:14:01 It's 20 feet of dedicated right-of-way, that the
21:14:04 pavement width ranges between 17.5 feet and 18.5 feet
21:14:08 wide.
21:14:09 The other thing I would like for you to see -- and
21:14:12 this is Waverly Court looking north to Waverly Avenue,
21:14:15 is the tree canopy that exists overhanging the street.
21:14:18 And almost is all the way up and down Waverly Court.
21:14:21 Again, looking further to the north on Waverly Avenue,
21:14:24 and -- or Waverly Court.
21:14:25 Then as you approach Waverly Avenue, I also want you
21:14:28 to take note of the Alagon condo project and also take
21:14:37 note of the service vehicles that are parked up and
21:14:39 down the street.
21:14:39 And the last picture I have included in your documents
21:14:42 is a picture of Waverly Court looking north to Waverly

21:14:46 Avenue.
21:14:47 And you can see the height of the Alagon project and
21:14:51 how it towers over the street.
21:14:56 The one thing to point out, if you go back to the next
21:14:59 to the last picture, you will also see where the
21:15:01 garage is to the Alagon project, just slightly
21:15:07 diagonal from the end of Waverly Court.
21:15:09 And here's another picture, a closer picture of the
21:15:12 garage.
21:15:13 And that has a tremendous impact on the situation and
21:15:17 one of the reasons why this vacating is being
21:15:19 requested.
21:15:19 The remaining pictures are pictures of Waverly Court
21:15:23 looking south to Euclid, and this is generally in here
21:15:27 is the area not being petition for the vacating, and
21:15:32 I'll explain why in just a few moments.
21:15:37 Lastly, I wanted to show you, again, the service
21:15:40 vehicles that park up and down Waverly Avenue, along
21:15:42 the Alagon project.
21:15:46 And then also, one street to the north, closer towards
21:15:49 MacDill is a street referred to as Carter street.
21:15:52 And Carter street, if you look down Carter street, you

21:15:55 will see it's dead-ended.
21:15:57 That's the way Carter street was originally platted.
21:15:59 And that was the situation at Waverly Court was
21:16:03 originally platted as well.
21:16:05 I also want to talk a little about what this vacating
21:16:09 is not because I know you all received letters of
21:16:11 objection, and there are some misstatements in those
21:16:13 letters of objection, and there are also
21:16:15 misassumptions.
21:16:16 It's not the typical vacating where the petitioner is
21:16:19 coming in seeking to vacate city right-of-way in order
21:16:21 to use it for part of the development or part of their
21:16:24 project or to gain acreage.
21:16:26 It's also not a vacating or an attempt to keep other
21:16:31 members of the public off the street, either
21:16:34 pedestrians or vehicles.
21:16:37 We are not proposing to gate the street.
21:16:39 We are not proposing to fence the street.
21:16:42 The street is going to remain open and we'll agree to
21:16:45 conditions to that effect.
21:16:46 It's also not an attempt to make a land grab.
21:16:50 And that was one of the misstatements made in one of

21:16:52 the letters of objection, that there was some
21:16:55 misconception that these abutting property owners,
21:16:58 these six families, were going to assemble this land,
21:17:01 put it together, vacate the right-of-way, and then put
21:17:03 it up for sale to develop some kind of project.
21:17:06 Nothing could be further from the truth, and the
21:17:10 homeowners themselves are going to discuss that issue
21:17:12 when they make their presentation at the end of mine.
21:17:15 What this vacating is, it is a request by these
21:17:19 property owners on this street to implement a
21:17:23 neighborhood-calming traffic measure, and it's being
21:17:26 proposed to prevent cut-through traffic in this
21:17:29 neighborhood.
21:17:33 It's also a request to help this neighborhood
21:17:35 implement what's called a self-help provision, and
21:17:39 that's a specific term referred to in your
21:17:41 comprehensive plan, in the neighborhood element, the
21:17:44 city has determined that it's appropriate to encourage
21:17:46 neighbors to implement self help provisions.
21:17:50 And the last thing that I want to address is that this
21:17:53 is in fact a vacating request intended to return this
21:17:58 street to the condition that it existed in when this

21:18:01 property was first platted.
21:18:04 The property was platted in 1904.
21:18:07 At that point in time it was approximately a 50 or
21:18:10 60-fat right-of-way.
21:18:13 The original plat was a Planhurst plat, and Waverly
21:18:19 Court was a dead-end street at that time.
21:18:23 In 1938, a lot in the designing plat was conveyed to
21:18:28 actually in the county at that time, was conveyed to
21:18:30 the county, and at that point in time it was made a
21:18:32 cut-through street.
21:18:33 But what's interesting in, and this document is in
21:18:35 your presentation book, at tab 4, is three years
21:18:41 later, in 1941, Hillsborough County vacated 40-foot of
21:18:47 the platted 60-foot of right-of-way and they stated in
21:18:49 that resolution that they determined, even though they
21:18:53 had bought, and made it a through street, they
21:18:57 determined that it was no longer needed, the 60-foot
21:19:01 right-of-way, and that 20-foot right-of-way was all
21:19:04 that would be necessary.
21:19:07 And you can see at tab 4, the resolution adopted by
21:19:10 the Hillsborough county commission saying that 40 feet
21:19:14 of the 60-foot of right-of-way was vacated

21:19:21 So what we have left right now is 20-foot of
21:19:24 right-of-way with approximately 17.5 to 18.5 feet of
21:19:28 pavement.
21:19:29 That's how we got to the point we are at today.
21:19:32 We have a very narrow street that was originally
21:19:35 platted to provide access, only to the property owners
21:19:38 that owned property on that street, and it was
21:19:40 originally platted as a dead-end street.
21:19:44 I'd like to refer you next to the zone maps that I
21:19:46 have included in the package of materials.
21:19:48 And you will see on the north side of Waverly Avenue
21:19:51 over the past 20 years or so that there have been
21:19:54 several PD rezonings that have increased the density
21:19:58 along Waverly Avenue.
21:19:59 But what's most significant about all the rezoning
21:20:03 that took place on the north side of Waverly Avenue is
21:20:05 the RM 75 on the corner of Waverly Avenue and Bayshore
21:20:09 Boulevard.
21:20:10 And you can see on this zoning map at tab 5 the yellow
21:20:16 area is Waverly Court and the RM 75 is immediately to
21:20:19 the north of that. The RM 75 site is the site of the
21:20:22 Alagon development.

21:20:25 Unlike most developments of that size, this
21:20:29 development was not required to go through the
21:20:31 rezoning process, because the RM 75 in fact allowed
21:20:35 the development of that size and of that height.
21:20:38 I know in situations before, council members have
21:20:40 often -- held public hearings just like you had
21:20:44 tonight, where residents can come forward and say, we
21:20:46 think this project is a large project.
21:20:48 We think it's going to impact our neighborhood, and
21:20:50 council members, we would like for you to implement
21:20:52 some sort of mitigation of the adverse impacts of this
21:20:56 development.
21:20:56 That opportunity was never provided to these
21:20:59 homeowners, residents on Waverly Court, because the
21:21:02 rezoning wasn't needed to develop the Alagon without
21:21:07 rezoning.
21:21:08 Unfortunately, however, this was the straw that broke
21:21:10 the camel's back.
21:21:12 And when the Alagon first began construction, the
21:21:15 residents thought that the impact of the development,
21:21:18 the contractors vehicles, the people parking up and
21:21:20 down their street, was going to be a temporary

21:21:23 situation, once construction was complete, that the
21:21:27 impacts would not be as severe, would not.
21:21:30 Be as bad, and in fact what they will tell you they
21:21:33 found just the opposite.
21:21:34 What happened now is you have 53 units, two parking
21:21:37 spaces per unit, 12 guest spaces, which is a total of
21:21:40 118 parking spaces for cars to come in and out of a
21:21:44 garage, where the entrance is lined up almost directly
21:21:48 with Waverly Court.
21:21:50 And now, instead of contractors vehicles parking up
21:21:52 and down Waverly Avenue, and sometimes on Waverly
21:21:54 Court, instead, you have landscapers, exterminators,
21:22:00 you have furniture delivery trucks, several of which
21:22:02 have damaged the tree canopy on Waverly Court, and
21:22:05 then, most importantly, tough residents of the Alagon
21:22:11 that in the residents words race up and down Waverly
21:22:13 Court and use it as a cut-through street.
21:22:19 In the past, what the residents attempted to do, and
21:22:22 this is back in 2003, when Alvin Smith was still the
21:22:26 transportation manager, they met when they were first
21:22:29 experiencing the impacts from all the construction of
21:22:30 the Alagon and the parking problem, and Elton -- and

21:22:34 he was probably correct -- said his hands were tied,
21:22:37 they didn't need a rezoning there, was no way for him
21:22:39 to impose or implement any kind of mitigation to
21:22:41 address these adverse impacts.
21:22:43 And he also told them the traffic calming was not
21:22:46 simply a priority for such a small street in this
21:22:50 neighborhood.
21:22:52 I know in the past rezoning applications, there's been
21:22:56 several examples, several precedents set, where when
21:23:00 there has been a development along a major street,
21:23:03 like a Bayshore, that council has imposed a
21:23:05 requirement on the developer to cul-de-sac a Street or
21:23:10 dead-end a street. In fact the one best is the one
21:23:13 along Kennedy Boulevard and Beach Park.
21:23:15 And some of you were on council then, and you may
21:23:18 recall, there was a lot of -- and there was a very
21:23:22 significant voice in the City of Tampa that was
21:23:27 adamantly opposed to stacking in those streets but
21:23:30 nonetheless council found it appropriate to protect
21:23:33 the Beach Park neighborhood to cul-de-sac several
21:23:35 streets to prevent the cut-through traffic that was
21:23:37 predicted to occur by people not wanting to go to the

21:23:40 intersection of Westshore and Kennedy, and instead
21:23:43 cutting through Beach Park, and those streets were
21:23:45 cul-de-sacked.
21:23:46 Those streets were cul-de-sacked at the city's expense
21:23:48 or the developer's expense.
21:23:49 In this instance, my clients are willing to cul-de-sac
21:23:52 or dead-end the street, I should say, at their own
21:23:55 expense.
21:23:56 Another example more recently, when I sat with
21:23:59 council, was the rezoning that was on Kennedy
21:24:01 Boulevard.
21:24:04 You may remember Mr. Turanchik lived on that street
21:24:07 and they were very concerned, not really a very small
21:24:10 neighborhood street, not a lot of residents, very
21:24:12 concerned about the cut-through traffic from the bank
21:24:14 and the office that was going to be built at the end
21:24:16 of their street at Kennedy.
21:24:19 Council imposed a condition to cul-de-sac that street
21:24:22 to dead-end it.
21:24:24 I went out and saw the cul-de-sac and it's wonderful.
21:24:26 It's perfect.
21:24:27 It's exact exactly what the neighborhood wanted and

21:24:29 needed and it inconvenienced a few people because I'm
21:24:33 sure a lot of people took parental to go out Kennedy,
21:24:36 especially the residents, but nonetheless council
21:24:39 found it appropriate to do it.
21:24:40 And the last example I'll get to -- and I'm sure
21:24:43 there's a lot more that I can't cite -- park land
21:24:47 Boulevard on Parkland Estates.
21:24:49 There was a lot of cut through traffic in that a
21:24:52 neighborhood.
21:24:52 I know there were a lot of traffic calming measures
21:24:55 such as speed bunches but the city decided it was
21:24:58 appropriate to close that street.
21:25:05 Our request.
21:25:05 As I mentioned before, our request is not to make this
21:25:08 a private street or to gate it.
21:25:09 In fact, what we did, what my clients did is they
21:25:12 engaged an engineer who came up with a drawing.
21:25:15 The drawing in your book at tab 6.
21:25:23 And what it shows is the design of the dead-end
21:25:26 street.
21:25:28 If council deems it appropriate to vacate this portion
21:25:30 of Waverly Court.

21:25:32 It showed if turn-around at the end.
21:25:35 He went out and met with the residents on-site,
21:25:37 examined the site conditions, found that there was an
21:25:40 existing tree and a water meter and utility pole.
21:25:43 So the width of that turn around is 55 feet.
21:25:46 Transportation division had said that they said 60
21:25:50 feet is appropriate.
21:25:51 And that's really a question for council to decide if
21:25:53 you approve this vacating how wide that should be.
21:25:56 We think 55 feet based on our engineers'
21:25:59 recommendation is sufficient.
21:26:00 But if you think that, you know, that is more
21:26:02 important for it to be 60 feet wide, not withstanding
21:26:05 the existing tree, then so be it.
21:26:11 Let me go back -- I want to address transportation's
21:26:14 comments.
21:26:14 Because yesterday when I spoke to Calvin, he mentioned
21:26:20 something.
21:26:21 I can't say to you that he recommended this
21:26:23 alternative.
21:26:24 But it's certainly an alternative that we would
21:26:26 consider.

21:26:27 And that is, we are not married to this proposal.
21:26:29 We are not saying that we have to vacate all of
21:26:32 Waverly Court.
21:26:33 All we are trying to do is make it a dead-end street.
21:26:37 The suggestion, the discussion was had with Calvin,
21:26:41 why don't we just vacate the first -- the northerly
21:26:45 ten or twenty feet of Waverly Court and leave the rest
21:26:48 open as publicly dedicated right-of-way with the
21:26:50 turn-around?
21:26:51 That way the public would have the right to drive down
21:26:54 Waverly Court, turn around if they wanted to,
21:26:56 pedestrians would have the right to walk up and down
21:26:58 Waverly Court.
21:26:59 We have no objection to that at all.
21:27:03 If that's not acceptable, we'll agree also to reserve
21:27:06 a transportation easement over Waverly Court over the
21:27:08 portion of Waverly Court that we vacate.
21:27:11 Again, the intent is and we want to improve the intent
21:27:15 is not to keep the public from using Waverly Court.
21:27:17 We simply don't want it to be used as a cut-through
21:27:20 street.
21:27:20 It was never intended to be that.

21:27:22 And it's just not a sufficient size to support that.
21:27:29 Some of the legal issues.
21:27:31 Usually, when you hear these vacating petitions, I've
21:27:34 seen Julie provide to you the memorandum prepared by
21:27:38 Roland Santiago dated July 13th, 2006, that talks
21:27:41 about the criteria that you are supposed to consider
21:27:43 when you are looking at a vacating petition.
21:27:46 And I have included a copy of that in our materials at
21:27:51 tab 7.
21:27:51 And the memo states that the generally recognized
21:27:56 principle of law relating to public right-of-way is
21:27:58 that when a street is dedicated to the city, the city
21:28:01 hold it in trust for the public.
21:28:03 Keep in mind when a street is dedicated Todd Pressman
21:28:05 to the city, it's the owners of that adjacent
21:28:08 property, my clients' predecessors, who dedicated this
21:28:12 street to the county, and now is being held in trust
21:28:15 by the city.
21:28:16 The city did not acquire this property.
21:28:18 The city did not pay for the property.
21:28:21 The property was dedicated for a public street.
21:28:26 And at that point in time when it was dedicated by

21:28:29 plat it was dedicated to be a dead-end street
21:28:31 providing access to these six properties.
21:28:33 And nothing more.
21:28:36 Now we are in a situation where the City Council hold
21:28:38 in trust for the public.
21:28:41 When can you vacate a Street?
21:28:42 The memorandum provided by the legal department said
21:28:44 that in determining whether a vacating is in the
21:28:48 public interest, wide latitude of discretion is
21:28:51 accorded to the public body making that decision.
21:28:55 It also says, you should consider the following types
21:28:58 of criteria when considering the petition to vacate.
21:29:02 Really, it could be stated in one sentence.
21:29:04 Is it in the interest of the general welfare to vacate
21:29:07 subject street or alley?
21:29:09 And they give you examples.
21:29:11 Things that have been held to be in the general
21:29:13 welfare of the public, as if it were the vacating will
21:29:18 alleviate or lead the public from the cost of
21:29:20 maintaining the street, or if the vacating will
21:29:23 alleviate a public nuisance.
21:29:25 We believe it will do both.

21:29:26 We would be willing to maintain the street, even
21:29:30 though it would be able to be used by members of the
21:29:33 public.
21:29:34 We also think that the vacating would alleviate a
21:29:37 public nuisance because it would prevent a local road,
21:29:40 a neighborhood street, from being used as a
21:29:42 cut-through street.
21:29:46 Another thing you might want to consider when
21:29:48 determining whether this vacating is in the public
21:29:50 interest, because that is in fact the standard, is
21:29:53 probably the guiding principle across the board in the
21:29:57 City of Tampa for what is in the public interest, the
21:30:00 comprehensive plan.
21:30:00 You can always look to the comprehensive plan to
21:30:02 determine what is in the public interest.
21:30:04 And I have included -- and I am not going to go
21:30:06 through all of them for this time -- but I have
21:30:10 included three separate elements from the Tampa
21:30:13 comprehensive plan, and excerpts from those elements
21:30:16 and goals and objectives and policies.
21:30:18 The first is the land use element.
21:30:20 I am not going to read all of these.

21:30:21 They are under tab A.
21:30:23 But one policy in the comprehensive plan says that if
21:30:26 the intent of the city that residential development
21:30:29 projects are supposed to be minimally disruptive to
21:30:32 adjacent areas, and in order to achieve that, this T
21:30:34 city should require mitigation of negative off-site
21:30:38 impacts consistent with the comp plan.
21:30:43 Policy D-3.1 says that development and redevelopment
21:30:48 shall be integrated, and you shall mitigate adverse
21:30:52 impact and transportation connections or other
21:30:54 appropriate mechanism.
21:30:55 The neighborhood element.
21:30:57 This has some of the best language in it regarding a
21:30:59 situation like this.
21:31:00 The city is supposed to encourage neighborhood-based
21:31:03 organizations and groups to initiate self-help
21:31:06 projects.
21:31:07 Unlike a lot of the other projects where streets were
21:31:09 dead-ended or cul-de-sacked, that was going to the
21:31:12 expense of the developer tore city. This is a
21:31:14 neighborhood self-help project to build a stronger
21:31:16 sense of community.

21:31:18 On the next page you will see several other objectives
21:31:20 and policies, to make neighbor streets safe for
21:31:24 children, pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists.
21:31:28 The city is supposed to develop alternative strategies
21:31:30 to reduce speeding and discourage cut-through traffic
21:31:33 on residential streets.
21:31:35 The last policy I'll read to you, the city shall
21:31:38 encourage self-help solutions and neighborhood
21:31:41 initiatives.
21:31:42 Again this is a neighborhood initiative to institute a
21:31:45 traffic calming measure to prevent cut-through
21:31:49 traffic.
21:31:50 The last policy that I have included in this package
21:31:51 of materials is in the transportation element.
21:31:54 And in there it says the city shall implement traffic
21:31:56 control measures, to protect residential
21:31:59 neighborhoods, by minimizing traffic intrusion on
21:32:03 neighborhood streets.
21:32:05 Measures may include but not limited to speed humps,
21:32:07 signage, enforcement, traffic diverters, cul-de-sacs
21:32:13 and appropriate speed limits.
21:32:15 Another document that you need to look at when you are

21:32:17 determining is vacating in the public interest is the
21:32:20 transportation department's own technical manual.
21:32:24 Technical manual is included in your package of
21:32:27 materials at tab 9.
21:32:30 Quickly I would like to go over some of the
21:32:32 requirements the first of which, I don't know if you
21:32:36 are aware of this but whenever the city considers a
21:32:39 city plat or plat for recording, they require 50 feet
21:32:42 of dedicated right-of-way.
21:32:44 50 feet.
21:32:45 If it's less than 50 feet, I'm told that they won't
21:32:48 accept it as a public street, that you have to
21:32:49 maintain it as a private street.
21:32:51 This is a street with 20 feet, not even half that
21:32:54 amount, and the pavement width is substantially less.
21:32:58 Your transportation technical manual also requires the
21:33:02 roads to be ten feet.
21:33:03 Here we have the lane width of the roads to be 17.5 to
21:33:07 18.5 feet.
21:33:08 Eights substandard road.
21:33:09 Another states that interior streets are supposed to
21:33:13 be arranged so cut-through traffic is discouraged.

21:33:15 Lastly, local streets like Waverly Court, it's
21:33:20 principle function is to provide access to property.
21:33:23 As opposed to movement of traffic.
21:33:26 And that's exactly how Waverly Court was platted, to
21:33:30 provide access to the property.
21:33:31 And what's interesting is transportation department's
21:33:34 position and their objection is based on their belief
21:33:38 that Waverly Court needs to remain open to provide
21:33:42 circulation.
21:33:42 In fact, Jim burnside's comment under the last tab
21:33:47 says that needs circulation between Bayshore and
21:33:52 MacDill.
21:33:53 That's contrary to the city's technical --
21:33:55 transportation technical manual and to the
21:33:58 comprehensive plan.
21:34:00 We believe all the evidence and testimony supports the
21:34:02 vacating is serving the general welfare, because it
21:34:06 will implement the policies that you have in your comp
21:34:08 plan.
21:34:09 It will be consistent with the transportation
21:34:13 technical manual, would be willing to allow the public
21:34:16 to continue to travel on that street, pedestrians to

21:34:19 continue to walk on that street.
21:34:21 You will prevent the public nuisances, that the
21:34:23 residents on that street are about to tell you about,
21:34:26 about to testify to.
21:34:27 And we also think it will serve the public interest
21:34:29 that's been found before by this council many times,
21:34:31 because it will relieve the city of the cost of
21:34:34 maintenance.
21:34:35 So with that I would like to turn it over to Lori Ann
21:34:39 Burton, who is one of the residents whose family
21:34:43 members, other family members, own four of the six
21:34:46 properties, and Lori Ann is the one that sort of
21:34:49 initiated this proposal after being basically
21:34:53 exasperated with all other efforts that she made to
21:34:56 try to get some relief from the impact of the Alagon.
21:35:02 I am going to turn it over the Lori Ann.
21:35:04 Then you will hear from Mr. Rice, a neighboring
21:35:06 abutting property owner, and Mr. Jim weeks.
21:35:09 And I think we are still pretty well within our half
21:35:12 hour.
21:35:12 We'll try to close as quickly as possible.
21:35:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A quick question, Ms. Grimes.

21:35:16 Let me preface it by saying, you know, I have the
21:35:20 deepest admiration for you.
21:35:21 I think you're one of the best land use attorneys in
21:35:24 town.
21:35:24 But I have a problem about the -- the issue of calling
21:35:28 this cut-through traffic.
21:35:29 And the main reason was the examples you gave, the
21:35:31 Beach Park dead-ends, Beach Park dead-ends as I
21:35:35 picture them were cut throughs from Kennedy over to
21:35:39 Platt, strangers cutting through those neighborhoods.
21:35:43 Strangers cutting from Kennedy over to Cleveland.
21:35:47 And Parkland, same thing, strangers cutting through
21:35:51 your neighborhood, through the Parkland Estates
21:35:53 neighborhood cutting from Swann down to MacDill.
21:35:55 I was one of them.
21:36:01 And this council has been very supportive, as you
21:36:04 described, of trying to eliminate this cut-through
21:36:08 traffic of strangers cutting through your
21:36:10 neighborhood.
21:36:11 But what I'm very familiar with that, I have worked
21:36:14 with Ms. Burton, and trying to help them mitigate some
21:36:18 of the Alagon issues.

21:36:21 But my concern is, this to me appears to be part of
21:36:25 the regular neighborhood grid, at least for the last
21:36:28 70 years, you know, and I don't see strangers leaving
21:36:36 Bayshore or leaving Euclid specifically to cutting
21:36:39 through Waverly Court.
21:36:41 I see the folks who live up and down Waverly or Euclid
21:36:44 using it.
21:36:45 They are the neighbors.
21:36:45 This is part of their grid.
21:36:49 At some point either now or. Org during rebuttal I
21:36:52 would like to hear your response.
21:36:53 >>GINA GRIMES: I don't know the technical manual or
21:36:56 comprehensive plan distinguishes people that know
21:36:59 people on the street or people that live in the
21:37:01 neighborhood versus strangers.
21:37:03 A commercial development like a bank or office, at the
21:37:06 corner of Kennedy and frontal, those people will
21:37:09 probably be there longer than most people are in their
21:37:11 residence.
21:37:12 Those don't necessarily have to be strangers.
21:37:14 The fact of the matter is, they are people that are
21:37:17 entitled to use the streets.

21:37:18 They are members of the public, whether they are
21:37:20 strange to the neighborhood or just cutting through
21:37:23 the neighborhood versus living in the neighborhood.
21:37:24 I don't know that there's a distinction.
21:37:27 Our point is this road was intended, and was built as
21:37:30 a local road.
21:37:30 It's not intended to handle the amount of traffic that
21:37:33 is now being placed on it as a result of the Alagon
21:37:37 project, and we think it doesn't meet the city
21:37:40 standards for that kind of traffic.
21:37:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Have you all run a tape in terms of
21:37:45 traffic count?
21:37:46 >>> No, we haven't.
21:37:47 These residents are just six property owners.
21:37:50 They spent a lot of money, not just paying for my fee
21:37:53 but for an engineer as well to try to come up with a
21:37:56 plan to show you that they are serious about doing
21:37:58 this, and they are willing to spend the money to do
21:38:00 this.
21:38:00 But, no, they haven't hired a traffic engineer to
21:38:03 measure the impact of the Alagon project.
21:38:06 Usually it's the other way around. The developer is

21:38:08 up here trying to establish to you that his project
21:38:11 isn't going to have the impact that the residents are
21:38:13 concerned about.
21:38:14 I think you are also going to hear from members,
21:38:16 residents of the Alagon who have been living there six
21:38:20 months and now take the position, we have the right to
21:38:22 travel down this street.
21:38:23 This street was never intended for that purpose.
21:38:25 It was never platted for that purpose and these
21:38:27 residents Don don't feel they should have to bear the
21:38:31 impact of that development.
21:38:31 They reached a point where they agreed to go to the
21:38:34 time and expense to try to implement this neighborhood
21:38:39 self-help measure.
21:38:40 This isn't going to be a situation where the
21:38:43 neighbors, the residents in the area, can't go up and
21:38:45 down the street.
21:38:46 We are not trying to prevent access.
21:38:48 But should not be a cut-through street.
21:38:52 Cut through streets don't just mean people who don't
21:38:54 belong in the neighborhood out cutting through.
21:38:56 It means local, small streets are being used to

21:38:58 circulate traffic.
21:39:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing you said, you said
21:39:03 you would be willing to give --
21:39:05 [Sounding gavel]
21:39:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Pleas don't speak out.
21:39:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A transportation easement, usually
21:39:10 transportation easement means that you continue to let
21:39:12 the traffic flow freely.
21:39:13 But --
21:39:14 >>GINA GRIMES: No, no.
21:39:17 Transportation for vehicles as well, not just for
21:39:20 pedestrians.
21:39:20 I know of a particular situation where someone wanted
21:39:23 to gate a right-of-way they sought to vacate and the
21:39:27 city requested to retain a transportation easement so
21:39:30 that they would have the right for their trucks or
21:39:32 cars, members of the public, to go walking down the
21:39:35 street.
21:39:36 I have a copy of the ordinance.
21:39:39 >> You don't want to allow it but you are going to
21:39:41 allow it? I don't understand.
21:39:43 >>> To allow the public to use it as a public street,

21:39:45 but as a dead-end street.
21:39:47 It's not a cut-through traffic.
21:39:50 >> You said dead-end.
21:39:51 Thank you very much.
21:39:51 So they wouldn't have any reason to go on it.
21:39:54 >>> Correct.
21:39:54 And they shouldn't because it was never intended to be
21:39:56 anything more than access to these peoples property.
21:39:59 Dipping ding okay.
21:40:00 Thank you.
21:40:08 >> My name is glory Ann Burton, 4603 Waverly Court and
21:40:13 I was not sworn in.
21:40:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Did anyone else come in that was not
21:40:16 sworn in?
21:40:17 You need to stand and raise your right hand.
21:40:22 (Oath administered by Clerk)
21:40:35 >>> I thought I would offer you a little background
21:40:37 today on the petitioners and how we have arrived in
21:40:40 front of you.
21:40:41 We are not developers.
21:40:44 We are six homeowners who have lived in our
21:40:46 neighborhood for many years.

21:40:49 The residents are pat and Owen rice, who own the
21:40:52 property in yellow on the Elmo.
21:40:56 The long piece of yellow. Purchased their homes 41
21:41:00 years ago in 1966.
21:41:02 My parents, Campbell and Don Burton, Sr., are in the
21:41:06 long piece that is blue.
21:41:08 They purchased their home 29 years ago in 1978.
21:41:12 During the 70s and 80s, my neighborhood saw every
21:41:19 single-family home on the north side of Waverly Avenue
21:41:22 rezoned multi-familiar family, save one.
21:41:25 With the Bayshore frontage zoned for what is now the
21:41:28 Alagon.
21:41:30 During the same period, developers trade
21:41:32 unsuccessfully to purchase the land on the corner of
21:41:35 Waverly Avenue and Waverly Court, in the green, and
21:41:40 rezone it for townhouses.
21:41:42 They were unsuccessful in this bid of the adjacent
21:41:45 land owners, in 1981, to maintain the single-family
21:41:50 home next to their house.
21:41:52 This property is 2904 west Waverly Avenue, and has
21:41:56 subsequently been sold to their son, Don Burton, Jr.,
21:42:00 who resides there.

21:42:01 In 1987, the land immediately to the west of the
21:42:04 Burtons Bayshore residence, in pink, came for sale,
21:42:09 and was purchased as the home from Mr. Burton's
21:42:12 mother, after her passing this property was sold to
21:42:15 me, in 2000, and I now live here.
21:42:19 In 1995, with the death of Ethel Jeffries, property at
21:42:24 3605 Waverly Court, in orange, came for sale, and once
21:42:28 again a developer was trying to package this parcel
21:42:31 with land behind it backing up to Carter.
21:42:35 For, yes, another multifamily development.
21:42:38 Again, my parents stepped in, and after a bidding war
21:42:42 with the developer purchased the property.
21:42:45 In 2000 this property was sold to their son, James
21:42:48 Campbell Burton, who now lives in the home with his
21:42:50 wife.
21:42:52 In 2002, Jim and Susan weeks purchased the home at
21:42:56 30023 west Waverly Avenue, in yellow (3002) and after
21:43:03 extensive renovation now live there.
21:43:05 We are nine homeowners and residents who have no
21:43:09 aspirations to develop this land.
21:43:10 We are simply homeowners trying to protect the eroding
21:43:14 quality of our immediate surroundings.

21:43:16 It has been suggested that the Burtons tried to
21:43:18 develop this land previously, and I would like to take
21:43:21 this opportunity to refute that statement.
21:43:24 In 1971, seven years prior to the purchase of their
21:43:27 home on Bayshore, the previous owners did try to
21:43:31 rezone this for high rise and were turned down by the
21:43:35 city.
21:43:35 Please note this was previous owners to the Burtons.
21:43:41 Notice.
21:43:42 When we first talked about vacating our street, I
21:43:44 spoke with our abutting land owners, Dr. Jones and the
21:43:50 Nelsons, who abut Waverly Court at the corner of
21:43:53 Euclid, but are not a party to this petition.
21:43:56 It was my understanding when we spoke in the beginning
21:43:59 that they were not opposed to this vacating in theory.
21:44:03 At that time, their concerns seemed to include the
21:44:06 possible financial burden and liability concerns of
21:44:09 the vacating.
21:44:11 Since their right-of-way had not been previously
21:44:14 vacated, they would not in fact be part of the
21:44:17 petitioning group.
21:44:18 So we moved ahead with our petition.

21:44:24 Ms. Grimes notified all the abutting property holders
21:44:27 by certified mail.
21:44:28 However, I wanted to go further.
21:44:30 I wanted my neighbors to know what we were trying to
21:44:35 do and I wanted to be up front and aboveboard with
21:44:38 them.
21:44:39 I e-mailed our intentions to 38 of our makes.
21:44:42 All of the e-mail addresses that I have for residents
21:44:44 on Waverly Avenue, and Euclid Avenue, between Bayshore
21:44:48 and MacDill.
21:44:49 And I have the list if you need it.
21:44:53 I explained what we were doing, why we were doing it
21:44:56 and encouraged them to e-mail me or call me with
21:44:59 questions and comments.
21:45:00 I met with many of the neighbors on my daily route,
21:45:03 and we also met with Ms. Grimes, Dr. Jones, and the
21:45:07 Nelsons, to further clarify our contentions and
21:45:10 explain the machinations in the petition.
21:45:14 How did we get here?
21:45:16 I spent countless hours over the past few years
21:45:19 fighting every multifamily development that has come
21:45:22 along in a two-block radius of my home.

21:45:25 (Bell sounds).
21:45:25 I have gone door to door talking to my neighbors,
21:45:28 starting an e-mail list and have made numerous
21:45:31 appearances here to block more high density projects
21:45:34 in my neighborhood.
21:45:36 Some of you may even recognize me.
21:45:38 >>GWEN MILLER: How much longer have you got?
21:45:41 >> Half page.
21:45:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
21:45:43 >>> However, the corner parcel of Waverly and Bayshore
21:45:46 was rezoned high density at the Euclidean rezoning in
21:45:49 the 70s, and this neighborhood was unable to comment
21:45:52 on many of the issues.
21:45:54 I did meet with Elton Smith in 2003 before
21:45:58 construction began and urged them to put some of the
21:46:01 traffic flow of the building onto Bayshore.
21:46:04 Given the small size of the parcel, it was considered
21:46:07 unsafe.
21:46:09 I asked to move the driveway closer to Bayshore so it
21:46:12 wouldn't align with Waverly Court.
21:46:15 Again, this was deemed unsafe.
21:46:17 I urged immediate traffic calming devices on Waverly

21:46:20 Court and Waverly Avenue, before construction began,
21:46:25 and was told with budget constraints it was not a
21:46:27 priority.
21:46:28 With only four interior lots on Waverly Court, traffic
21:46:33 calming measures would never be a priority by the city
21:46:37 with budget constraints.
21:46:46 As the Alagon began to complete construction, we
21:46:51 breathed a sigh of relieve, no more construction
21:46:54 debris, parking in our yards, trash.
21:46:56 Was it finally over?
21:46:57 No.
21:46:57 We had new problems.
21:46:58 Instead of construction trucks breaking the canopy it
21:47:05 was now moving trucks.
21:47:07 It's now the lawn crew that tends the grass.
21:47:10 We also have a new traffic from the new tenants and
21:47:13 the building isn't even full.
21:47:15 With more residents to come.
21:47:17 We have stood in the street with survey in hand trying
21:47:21 to have the survey of Tampa enforce parking standard
21:47:24 on our street and have gotten nowhere.
21:47:26 Councilman Dingfelder visited on us site this past

21:47:29 November to review violations of the Alagon and at
21:47:34 that time was able to become personally acquainted
21:47:35 with the situation and the direct impact that the
21:47:38 Alagon is having.
21:47:44 These are not issues that are going to go away with
21:47:46 construction.
21:47:48 The problem here isn't just the parking or just volume
21:47:51 of traffic, or just the height of the trucks or just
21:47:54 the speed of the traffic.
21:47:56 It's all of the above.
21:47:59 Parking on the street and the yard and the volume of
21:48:02 the traffic, and the speed of the traffic.
21:48:07 It's a thousand cuts with no relief in site.
21:48:12 I believe a dead-end street is the only solution to
21:48:16 our problem, the only solution that addresses the
21:48:18 parking, and the traffic volume, and the traffic
21:48:22 speed.
21:48:22 There is no other traffic calming method in the city's
21:48:26 tool box that can address these three basic issues.
21:48:29 We ask that you take this measure to protect our
21:48:32 neighborhood and approve this petition.
21:48:34 Thank you.

21:48:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:48:41 >>> There were two other petitioners that wanted to
21:48:43 give remarks but I'll just wait till the rebuttal and
21:48:45 let them get up at that time if that's okay, if I
21:48:47 could just get a few extra minutes.
21:48:49 Technically, Mr. Dingfelder asked me some questions,
21:48:53 that kind of deviates.
21:48:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually the stop was clocked.
21:49:00 >>> I assumed would you take care of that.
21:49:02 >>GWEN MILLER: we go to the audience portion.
21:49:04 Anyone -- anyone that wants to speak on item 13.
21:49:10 If you are going to speak, come on up.
21:49:11 Start speaking.
21:49:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For those people who came in late,
21:49:16 who were recently sworn in, I put a little sign up to
21:49:19 remained you, when you state your name, reaffirm that
21:49:22 you have been sworn.
21:49:23 Thank you.
21:49:24 >>> I have been sworn.
21:49:26 My name is James Murphy.
21:49:28 I have lived in Tampa for well over 40 years.
21:49:31 We now live on Waverly Avenue between MacDill and

21:49:35 Bayshore.
21:49:36 Along with several other residents and condominiums.
21:49:45 We use Waverly Court almost daily as our safe way to
21:49:49 Dale Mabry, Britain plaza and the Selmon Crosstown
21:49:53 expressway.
21:49:54 Without Waverly Court, we will be forced to enter
21:49:58 either MacDill Avenue, or Bayshore Boulevard, both
21:50:03 without traffic lights.
21:50:04 And then slow down almost immediately to make a turn
21:50:08 onto Euclid.
21:50:11 Both of these maneuvers involve heavy traffic and some
21:50:14 danger.
21:50:15 It is so much safer to use Waverly court to access
21:50:20 Euclid.
21:50:21 Please multiply my concerns by 50, because there are
21:50:25 50 other families that live in our condominium
21:50:28 building and face the same dilemma every day.
21:50:32 Pleas do not close Waverly Court.
21:50:34 Thank you.
21:50:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:50:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Could you leave that up?
21:50:47 If folks could look on the overhead.

21:50:51 I believe you said you are in the alley.
21:50:53 >>> Yes, I am.
21:51:00 >>> We live here in the Alagon.
21:51:03 Next door is another condominium near me.
21:51:05 Next door is another.
21:51:07 Over here there's another.
21:51:12 Alagon.
21:51:18 >>> My name is Michael and I'm an owner and resident
21:51:22 of the Alagon.
21:51:24 I would like to begin by reading two of the points in
21:51:26 the request to vacate.
21:51:35 The first is that the right-of-way is sub standard at
21:51:37 20 feet wide.
21:51:38 That is not unusual for South Tampa.
21:51:40 In fact, the Bellamy, another highrise right down the
21:51:46 street, has a similarly sized street to the south of
21:51:50 it and a Street to the north of it is actually a foot
21:51:54 narrower.
21:51:56 So the width of our street is not unusual for South
21:52:00 Tampa.
21:52:01 In fact, it is the norm.
21:52:10 Oh also traffic generated by the new development, the

21:52:13 Alagon.
21:52:15 The Alagon has been open for ten months.
21:52:18 In that period, there has not been a will traffic
21:52:21 accident on Waverly Court.
21:52:26 The Alagon.
21:52:33 In order for an automobile to come out of the Alagon
21:52:36 and go through Waverly Court, it must first stop full,
21:52:42 because there are gates that require them to do that.
21:52:47 By contrast, on Bayshore Boulevard, which would be a
21:52:53 major egress, there were two traffic accidents within
21:53:00 the last 60 days, one of which involved a personal
21:53:04 injury.
21:53:08 Not at all safe.
21:53:11 If on the other hand we have to go to MacDill, to
21:53:19 the north is blocked by a privacy wall, which was
21:53:22 permitted.
21:53:25 Deciding to the south is blocked by an automobile
21:53:30 parking lot, which frequently is full of cars during
21:53:33 commuting hours, and you can't see a car coming up
21:53:35 over the roof of those cars that are parked there.
21:53:38 So it's unsafe to go either way.
21:53:43 I will grant that the Alagon has not been a good

21:53:47 neighbor during its construction period.
21:53:50 However, we now have a guard which tells people not to
21:53:54 park on Waverly Court, and it is incorrect to say that
21:54:00 the police are not enforcing the parking rules,
21:54:04 because there was an officer handing out tickets
21:54:06 yesterday, all morning.
21:54:17 Also wave 118 parking spaces for the units, and at
21:54:21 maximum we are going to have 46 residents.
21:54:24 At maximum.
21:54:26 If they have two cars apiece, that is still more than
21:54:30 ample, once the construction period is over.
21:54:34 Which will be the next 60 or 90 days.
21:54:43 For the Alagon.
21:55:06 Please do not close Waverly Court.
21:55:09 >>> Were you sworn in.
21:55:10 >>> Yes, sir.
21:55:11 >> My name is Brad Haskins.
21:55:13 I am a resident of the Alagon.
21:55:15 My wife and I are considered safe drivers.
21:55:18 We do not speed.
21:55:19 We don't like to be involved in accidents.
21:55:21 I leave every morning and I go to downtown Tampa and I

21:55:27 find it's almost deadly to try to leave the Alagon and
21:55:31 to cross the Bayshore and go northeast toward downtown
21:55:36 Tampa, to go to work.
21:55:38 In the afternoons, I find that the Bayshore again is
21:55:42 not always the easiest to travel on to come back.
21:55:49 My wife leaves during the day to do her shopping and
21:55:51 she find it almost impossible to make a left turn out
21:55:55 of the Alagon and cross the Bayshore to go northeast
21:55:59 again, because in the traffic flow, which is speeding
21:56:03 almost, we find that to leave the Alagon, go across
21:56:12 Waverly Court, make a right turn, where there's a
21:56:15 light at the corner of Euclid and MacDill, at
21:56:20 least we can flow with the traffic with a light there.
21:56:25 So I am asking you not to vacate, because I feel that
21:56:28 the residents that I met, and who are my neighbors,
21:56:32 are all safe drivers, and we are only interested in
21:56:37 being good citizens.
21:56:38 So I implore you to not eliminate a safe street for us
21:56:42 to utilize.
21:56:44 And I don't believe that anyone could drive down that
21:56:46 street and do more than 15 miles an hour.
21:56:50 I just can't imagine anyone speeding down that street.

21:56:53 First off it's too short.
21:56:55 So by the time we leave our residence and access
21:56:58 Waverly Court, I don't think anyone is going more than
21:57:01 12 to 15 miles an hour.
21:57:05 You have to either make a right turn or left turn.
21:57:07 Thank you.
21:57:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, were you sworn in for the
21:57:10 record?
21:57:11 >>> Yes, I was.
21:57:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I hate to ask that so if you just
21:57:16 state it up front it will help.
21:57:18 >>> I was sworn in.
21:57:19 This is so important I'm missing Grey's anatomy to
21:57:24 speak.
21:57:25 To go along with Mr. Dingfelder this is not a
21:57:28 cut-through street.
21:57:29 A cut-through street is a shortcut. This is not a
21:57:32 short-cut.
21:57:33 But I need to make that left-hand turn to get to
21:57:35 Euclid where there's a traffic light Moreda to get to
21:57:39 Britain plaza, to my daughter who lives on Waverly
21:57:44 place.

21:57:44 You saw Mr. Haskins.
21:57:46 You have seen me.
21:57:46 We are representatives of the building this is a
21:57:48 senior citizen community.
21:57:49 I hope I'm not offending anybody.
21:57:51 We do not race.
21:57:52 We drive carefully.
21:57:53 We drive to the grocery store.
21:57:56 There are very few young people in our building.
21:57:58 And we are young at heart.
21:58:02 And I also ask you, please, do not close the street.
21:58:07 This is my left-hand turn to safety.
21:58:09 This is my right hand turn to the light.
21:58:11 And I need it.
21:58:12 And my husband buckie was born and raised here.
21:58:17 Our children, our grandchildren, fourth generation
21:58:21 Tampans.
21:58:22 Maybe that shouldn't have been said.
21:58:23 [ Laughter ]
21:58:26 But I know the people on that street, seem to be all
21:58:32 the -- the Burtons and other versus an inconvenience.
21:58:36 I'm sorry about that.

21:58:37 The troubles there now are probably the -- not
21:58:41 landscaping.
21:58:42 We don't have landscaping.
21:58:43 But it will only get better.
21:58:45 Please bear with us.
21:58:46 And thank you for your time.
21:58:48 >> Mrs. Beckham, when you were referring to seniors
21:58:52 you were referral just to your husband, right?
21:58:55 [ Laughter ]
21:58:59 >>> I'm Susan lane and I have been sworn in.
21:59:03 If you want a history lesson about the neighborhood I
21:59:05 can give it to you.
21:59:06 My family has lived either on Waverly and Euclid or
21:59:11 El Prado in that same general vicinity since 1921.
21:59:16 I live at 3010 Euclid Avenue, and four house as way
21:59:19 from Waverly Court.
21:59:20 I also grew up at the corner of Waverly Court and
21:59:23 Euclid.
21:59:24 My parents, Mr. and Mrs. Julian lane, purchased that
21:59:27 lot in about 1950 and we moved in in 1952.
21:59:32 I learned to drive on Waverly Court.
21:59:35 There is absolutely no reason to close off Waverly

21:59:37 Court.
21:59:38 This is a very short street with almost no traffic on
21:59:42 it.
21:59:42 Waverly Court provides a nice, convenient, and safe
21:59:46 route to the neighbors, whether walking around the
21:59:48 block, or as an easier access to crossing Bayshore
21:59:50 Boulevard or crossing MacDill Avenue at the light
21:59:55 at Euclid.
21:59:57 The traffic on this street is from the people in the
22:00:01 neighborhood.
22:00:02 Motorist that is don't live in the neighborhood don't
22:00:03 know about this short, quiet, shaded street.
22:00:07 I drive and walk this street all the time, and I have
22:00:11 not noticed any increased traffic.
22:00:16 Plus I have lived in this neighborhood for many years.
22:00:18 Almost the same petitioners requested the closing of
22:00:21 Waverly Court a number of years ago.
22:00:24 And in my opinion, not much has changed in the way of
22:00:27 traffic since then.
22:00:28 It was denied then.
22:00:29 And I would ask that you please deny it this time,
22:00:33 because I would like to continue to be able to use

22:00:36 Waverly Court.
22:00:39 And I thank you.
22:00:45 >>> I have been sworn.
22:00:46 I'm Bob Nelson.
22:00:48 My wife and I live at 3001 west Euclid on the corner
22:00:52 of Waverly Court and Euclid.
22:00:55 In a house that Susan lane grew up in.
22:00:58 We lived there for approximately nine years.
22:01:07 I want to be very brief.
22:01:08 I would emphasize a couple points that others have
22:01:10 made, which is, these modifications of traffic flow on
22:01:20 this street has been attempted multiple times in the
22:01:26 past, including -- well, while the Alagon was being
22:01:30 built, and the city has seen fit not to change that.
22:01:37 We have not seen a significant changes in the traffic
22:01:44 pattern, especially now since the major part of the
22:01:49 construction is done.
22:01:51 I was pleased to hear the city traffic people to
22:01:56 suggest objective data.
22:02:02 And if such data was available, perhaps we would
22:02:05 change our opinion.
22:02:07 We are also concerned about any unintended

22:02:10 consequences for those of us who live on the Euclid
22:02:15 and Waverly Court by blocking the other end.
22:02:21 And because of that, at least for now, we have to
22:02:24 oppose the petition.
22:02:25 Thank you.
22:02:35 >>> I have been sworn in.
22:02:38 My name is Carl Loefy.
22:02:43 I am the eldest son of my mother who has short-term
22:02:47 health concerns, and she could not appear tonight but
22:02:51 she asked me to read a prepared statement.
22:02:54 And I'll keep it as brief as possible.
22:02:57 And I'm quoting her.
22:02:58 This is the prepared statement.
22:03:01 I am not newcomer.
22:03:02 I have lived in my house for 55 years on the south
22:03:04 side of Euclid Avenue, facing the south end of the
22:03:07 street that petitioner is proposing to close.
22:03:11 I use Waverly Court when I come home late in the
22:03:13 afternoon because I am not able to turn left from
22:03:16 MacDill Avenue.
22:03:17 Traffic is heavy from 3 p.m. thereafter.
22:03:21 Now, with the townhouse project recently approved by

22:03:24 City Council just north of Euclid Avenue, MacDill
22:03:27 Avenue last fall, it will be even worse.
22:03:30 Emergency vehicles, postal delivery vehicles, garbage
22:03:34 and trash collection, UPS and fire trucks, will have
22:03:37 even less access.
22:03:38 And the traffic is going to get worse than it is now,
22:03:42 new condominium projects have already put more traffic
22:03:45 on Bayshore, Euclid and MacDill Avenue.
22:03:47 If you grant the proposed petition to close the street
22:03:51 it will be for the sole benefit of the petitioner and
22:03:53 no one else.
22:03:55 Please don't close the street.
22:03:57 My neighbors are on Euclid Avenue and I use it all the
22:04:02 time.
22:04:04 And I would just make one last statement, because my
22:04:09 mother and I have taken -- a viewpoint on what is
22:04:15 happening.
22:04:16 And I think what we concluded is that we are asking a
22:04:23 question of each person on the City Council, each
22:04:27 representative, just a general question.
22:04:31 Why is the City Council considering granting a
22:04:33 petition which would decrease street traffic flow

22:04:39 options for automobiles after increasing vehicle
22:04:43 traffic by approving new hair density development
22:04:47 projects within the immediate neighborhood?
22:04:49 And the Alagon is one example of that.
22:04:52 Right immediately just to the street.
22:04:55 And I know some of the petitioners and I have great
22:05:00 respect with them and I am very impressed by legal
22:05:03 counsel's presentation on their behalf.
22:05:05 But I'm afraid I'm going to have to go back to my
22:05:08 mother tonight and inform her that she rightfully so
22:05:15 would be labeled as a cut-through driver.
22:05:17 Thank you.
22:05:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn?
22:05:38 >>> Sue Lyon: Yes.
22:05:39 I wasn't sworn last time.
22:05:41 >>> Was everything you said the truth?
22:05:43 >>> Yes.
22:05:43 I begged for it.
22:05:44 This time I won't beg for.
22:05:47 This neighborhood -- and it's the neighborhood that I
22:05:49 worked at for years -- I'm retired now.
22:05:52 I don't have any positions at all.

22:05:57 >> We don't believe that, Sue.
22:06:00 We know you can't retire from the city.
22:06:04 >>> The neighborhood has put up with a lot.
22:06:08 They have put up with the Alagon for, I think, three
22:06:11 years.
22:06:13 We were promised many, many nice things when the
22:06:16 Alagon went up.
22:06:18 Each time there was a new construction, came and said
22:06:22 we are not going to have this, the construction people
22:06:24 are going to park in the church parking lot, we are
22:06:27 not going to be upset by anything, it's going to be a
22:06:32 wonderful thing.
22:06:33 Then they left the bombs off to put the bores down
22:06:38 into the ground to show that they could build a
22:06:42 building this big.
22:06:43 They didn't tell anybody.
22:06:44 We had people who had lived through the 9/11 problems
22:06:49 who thought the City of Tampa was being bombed.
22:06:51 Nobody told us anything.
22:06:54 We have lived through this mess.
22:06:58 We have now got a whole bunch of new -- not
22:07:02 condominiums, townhouses on MacDill.

22:07:06 This neighborhood keeps getting pushed more stuff in
22:07:11 and push more stuff in and pushed more stuff in.
22:07:14 These people don't know what else to do.
22:07:16 They are asking for your help.
22:07:18 They have come up with a plan they think is good.
22:07:22 You see the people from the Alagon saying, we like
22:07:25 this little street, it's great.
22:07:27 It is!
22:07:30 But normally, when we build a big project like that,
22:07:33 we don't let them use the side street at all.
22:07:38 They have to come out on the main street.
22:07:40 They are not supposed to use the side street.
22:07:42 How many times have we fought not to have a
22:07:44 development use the side street at all?
22:07:47 They don't want to just use Waverly.
22:07:49 They want to use Waverly Court as well.
22:07:52 They don't want to come out on Bayshore.
22:07:54 They want to go out the back way.
22:07:56 Well, I did, too.
22:07:57 It's very nice not to have traffic.
22:08:00 That's why I am here all the time saying please don't
22:08:04 give us any more traffic.

22:08:05 But people want to live in South Tampa.
22:08:07 They want things.
22:08:08 But they don't want to be faced with this.
22:08:12 The man came up and said, I use the street and 50 my
22:08:18 neighbors use it.
22:08:19 There's also 50 of the neighbors in the townhouses
22:08:21 there, and 50 more on the other one.
22:08:26 It's easier to go out the back way.
22:08:28 It's always easier to use -- we have arterials.
22:08:34 We have collectors.
22:08:35 Those are the ones that are supposed to use.
22:08:37 They are not supposed to use itty-bitty back streets.
22:08:40 I know we all tree to do it.
22:08:42 But you are not supposed to.
22:08:47 So I would like for you all to consider this
22:08:49 seriously.
22:08:51 Thank you very much.
22:08:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:08:53 Does anyone else want to speak?
22:09:00 >>> My name is Jacob butler, and I live at the Alagon
22:09:04 on Bayshore.
22:09:08 I wasn't going to say anything.

22:09:09 But I think Ms. Lions is a very nice person.
22:09:14 I think they will be good neighbors and everything.
22:09:18 But I also think times have changed.
22:09:20 Maybe the intent originally was I found out to close
22:09:22 the street, 30 years later, 30 years later.
22:09:25 Now we are 2007.
22:09:31 Just to accommodate six people, six families.
22:09:33 That's the way life is now.
22:09:35 It's not family anymore.
22:09:36 Everybody is one big family.
22:09:38 Now something?
22:09:38 Families grow.
22:09:40 The Alagon came in.
22:09:45 Right next to townhouses, right next to single-family
22:09:48 homes.
22:09:49 But everybody is growing.
22:09:52 I go through that neighborhood.
22:09:56 If they feel that it's less than 20 feet and says in
22:09:58 the records we are supposed to be 20 feet, well, let's
22:10:01 get the street to exactly 20 feet, then we won't have
22:10:04 any objection to it.
22:10:06 And they'll be smaller.

22:10:08 And I think Ms. Lyons was a little off record when she
22:10:12 felt that talking to us, she didn't have an opinion,
22:10:17 but evidently she must have an opinion because she
22:10:20 feels that six families should be able to rule 100
22:10:28 families.
22:10:28 I don't think that's right.
22:10:30 I didn't want to go back and say anything Ms. Grimes
22:10:33 said or say anything that the city said.
22:10:35 I really appreciated you all taking into
22:10:39 consideration, and I also want to congratulate the new
22:10:42 members of the board, part of the old members.
22:10:46 I know some of the old ones.
22:10:48 But now Mrs. Mulhern, Mr. Katana, you have some good
22:10:58 people that can become mentors for you on the old
22:11:00 board.
22:11:01 Thank you very much.
22:11:02 Oh, I was sworn in.
22:11:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Grimes.
22:11:14 >>> Transportation, I was sworn.
22:11:15 I was asked by legal just to kind of elaborate on what
22:11:18 was proposed.
22:11:19 I have an e-mail from Ms. Grimes to Calvin Thornton,

22:11:27 and it was attached with the plan showing the proposed
22:11:29 T-type turn-around, if they were to dead-end it to see
22:11:34 if it meets the minimum standards.
22:11:37 It does not.
22:11:38 It is 20 by 55.
22:11:40 And we require a 20 by 60.
22:11:43 Not to say we couldn't work something out.
22:11:45 I'm not even sure there is enough right-of-way there.
22:11:47 I think --
22:11:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
22:11:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think that I shall to you me
22:11:55 seems to be aside issue.
22:11:58 I heard transportation, maybe before your time,
22:12:00 standing back at that microphone and say, we oppose
22:12:03 any change to the grid system: Period.
22:12:07 I mean, you know, we heard it over on north A, north
22:12:11 B, not too long ago.
22:12:13 Somebody wanted to trim down a little portion of it
22:12:15 that had never been used.
22:12:17 And probably never will be used.
22:12:18 But transportation said, no, this is part of our
22:12:21 street system, and we oppose any change to the grid

22:12:25 system.
22:12:26 Now, you might have lost, you might have won.
22:12:29 I don't remember.
22:12:29 But have you been part of those discussions in your
22:12:31 department?
22:12:33 >>> No.
22:12:34 It's been my experience that everything is handled on
22:12:36 a case-by-case scenario.
22:12:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena.
22:12:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
22:12:43 Nothing.
22:12:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Grimes, come back.
22:12:51 >>GINA GRIMES: Mr. Dingfelder, Mr. Bernside, we met
22:12:56 with him before we even saw this petition.
22:12:58 Did he tell us up front that he wants this street for
22:13:01 circulation.
22:13:01 He doesn't want it changed to the grid.
22:13:04 But we believe that's contrary to the transportation
22:13:07 manual department.
22:13:09 It's not supposed to be used for that purpose.
22:13:11 But in my short closing remarks, I addressed that
22:13:16 issue.

22:13:16 I would like to call on Mr. Weeks who lives on the
22:13:19 corner of Waverly Court and Waverly Ave. to quickly
22:13:23 give you a view of what occurred on the street in
22:13:25 recent weeks.
22:13:27 >>> My name is Jim Weeks.
22:13:30 I have been sworn.
22:13:30 I'm amused by the number of people who state their
22:13:34 linear agency.
22:13:36 I would like to state for the record my settled in
22:13:38 Lake City eleven generations ago and statistically
22:13:41 only I should be here talking.
22:13:43 So everybody else sit down.
22:13:45 Of course that's not true.
22:13:47 Of course we have to get along and I am going to cut
22:13:49 all the remarks I had prepared.
22:13:51 This has degenerated unfortunately into a series of
22:13:55 debates about who has the rights to travel the streets
22:13:57 and that is not the issue.
22:13:59 The issue at hand is the safety of the street.
22:14:01 My wife and I bought and renovated a 105-year-old home
22:14:04 it was a pedestrian walkway.
22:14:06 Every evening families were gathered.

22:14:08 They would push baby carriages.
22:14:11 They would walk their dogs, sit and talk.
22:14:13 We plan taught our son to ride a bicycle in the
22:14:18 street.
22:14:19 That is no longer possible.
22:14:21 It is a speedway now.
22:14:23 It is a cut-through street.
22:14:27 The attitude should tell you something.
22:14:30 It is a cut-through street.
22:14:31 By cut-through I mean the Bayshore.
22:14:34 I am currently a student at southwestern Bayshore
22:14:38 seminary.
22:14:40 From the sun room I can clear see the Bayshore and I
22:14:43 can see the Alagon traffic garage exit and I can see
22:14:45 most of the length of Waverly Court.
22:14:47 And way see is people coming off the Bayshore,
22:14:50 speeding up Waverly Avenue, making a very severe,
22:14:53 quick turn on Waverly Court, speeding down that road.
22:14:55 I also see people coming out of the Alagon garage.
22:14:58 They speed very quickly across Waverly Court to the
22:15:02 point that they have to careen around the corner.
22:15:04 You can see my landscape is damaged, the grass is torn

22:15:09 up, there are tire prints every day in my street that
22:15:12 I rake out.
22:15:13 It is a speedway.
22:15:14 It is not uncommon once or twice an hour to see a
22:15:16 motorist traveling at 50 miles per hour as they pass
22:15:19 my house and continuing to accelerate.
22:15:21 Now I know that the folks behind me are law abiding
22:15:24 citizens and they are not the ones doing the speeding
22:15:25 but the people coming off the Bayshore make it a
22:15:28 speedway.
22:15:29 They make it completely possible for someone to safely
22:15:31 walk a dog or stand on the street and talk, much less
22:15:34 ever ride a bicycle.
22:15:35 My wife is constantly terrorized.
22:15:37 And that's the word she uses when she tries to back
22:15:40 her car out of the driveway.
22:15:41 She drives an SUV.
22:15:44 She is terrorized by motorists speeding up and down
22:15:47 the road traveling up Bayshore or the Alagon.
22:15:52 It is not possible for to us enjoy our neighborhood
22:15:53 the way we once did and all we are asking is that the
22:15:56 neighborhood be restored, the City Council and the

22:15:59 mayor have for many years talked about preserving
22:16:01 neighborhoods.
22:16:01 It's an opportunity that we have tonight to see this
22:16:03 neighborhood preserved.
22:16:05 It is not possible again to safely travel up and down
22:16:08 our street.
22:16:10 The City Council recently affirmed that Mac R's
22:16:14 traffic is only 52% of its capacity.
22:16:17 That was the reason they used in passing -- the town
22:16:21 homes at Euclid and MacDill so I would offer up
22:16:23 the fact that MacDill would seem to be a safe
22:16:25 enough street but there's no need to cut through our
22:16:28 street.
22:16:29 Thank you.
22:16:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:16:36 >>> I have been sworn.
22:16:37 My name is Owen Rice.
22:16:40 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
22:16:43 I'm reminded, in our neighborhood, that you heard so
22:16:45 much about, we have two kinds -- we have cats that go
22:16:53 to the end and we have possums that come to the point
22:16:56 quickly.

22:16:56 I am going to be like the possum and not like the cat.
22:17:00 Mrs. Rice and I lived on the property that you heard
22:17:02 about, approximately 40 years, and we purchased this
22:17:05 property from my law partner and mentor, J.K. Reeves.
22:17:10 He was the one along with Mrs. Reeves lived there a
22:17:13 more than 45 years and they were the ones that
22:17:15 originally instituted giving up part of the
22:17:20 right-of-way in pine hurts and narrowing it down to --
22:17:25 let's see, either 10 feet or 20 feet about which
22:17:28 there's an argument.
22:17:29 It's important for council to realize that originally
22:17:32 this was a dead-end street.
22:17:35 It's in the record.
22:17:36 It did not go through Euclid.
22:17:38 Just as today Carter street does not go through.
22:17:42 In absolute terms prior to 2000 there weren't very
22:17:46 many cars in the course of a day, and there were no
22:17:49 trucks.
22:17:51 A mail truck, we hardly even saw federal express in
22:17:54 those days.
22:17:55 But there were just the people coming on the street,
22:18:00 the destination of a home on the street.

22:18:06 Susan lane.
22:18:07 Elaine's grandchildren.
22:18:09 We played games.
22:18:10 We chased balls.
22:18:12 We rode bicycles.
22:18:13 We taught people to ride tricycles.
22:18:16 We stood in the middle of the street.
22:18:17 We didn't say look left and right before you cross
22:18:21 Waverly Court because there wasn't any reason to.
22:18:25 And we didn't have to worry about cars or safety.
22:18:29 I'm one who started becoming concerned about the
22:18:32 growing numbers of cars using our little one block
22:18:35 narrow street as a cut-through.
22:18:39 When traffic was going northward from Euclid up to
22:18:44 Waverly, out to Bayshore.
22:18:46 And that was about 15 years ago.
22:18:49 So I went to the neighbors, and trade to persuade that
22:18:54 them that I didn't care which end, but we ought to try
22:18:56 to close one end or the other so the people could
22:19:00 walk, they could ride their bikes, but they wouldn't
22:19:03 be driving their cars.
22:19:06 The main objections I had were from the two ladies who

22:19:10 somebody else mentioned so I'll use their name.
22:19:13 Heckle and Dicky Jeffries who had been born in the
22:19:16 house across the street from me, lived there for 87
22:19:19 years until they died.
22:19:21 And they said, they just liked the personal
22:19:24 convenience of being able to go out, either on any
22:19:30 particular day whichever they wanted so I didn't press
22:19:32 the issue.
22:19:35 When the Alagon came on, which we heard so much about,
22:19:39 all of us were really -- you know, we didn't have to
22:19:42 be very smart to see what was going to happen.
22:19:45 But we couldn't do anything.
22:19:46 We tried.
22:19:47 We tried to get promises out of Owen construction
22:19:53 company and out of their contracting company.
22:19:58 What promises they made they didn't keep.
22:20:00 So all of this process didn't come before you at that
22:20:04 time, and now here it is three years later.
22:20:09 I expected Mr. Weeks to tell you how many sets of
22:20:11 tires he had to buy from people instrumenting nails in
22:20:15 the street.
22:20:19 So I then raised the question again with the residents

22:20:23 along Waverly Court with two things, the residents of
22:20:27 the Alagon and the motorists traveling on Bayshore
22:20:31 Boulevard west of MacDill Avenue would cut through
22:20:35 Waverly Court this time the other direction.
22:20:38 It used to be Euclid to Waverly to Bayshore. This
22:20:41 time it would be Bayshore to Waverly down to Euclid to
22:20:46 get out.
22:20:47 And that's what's happened.
22:20:51 Those few residents at the Alagon are not the whole
22:20:54 problem.
22:20:55 You have a lot of workmen over there and a lot of
22:20:57 people, young men, who have been working there a long
22:21:01 time who now know about the street.
22:21:03 And I recall it now.
22:21:06 We need the City Council to shut down the Waverly
22:21:07 Court drag strip.
22:21:11 I have seen more cars than I can count, start
22:21:15 accelerating at the corner of Waverly Court and
22:21:20 Waverly, and quit accelerating when they reached my
22:21:25 property, which is about 100 feet from Euclid and slam
22:21:29 on their brakes.
22:21:30 These aren't residents of the Alagon.

22:21:33 These are drywell men, these are plumbers, these are
22:21:40 laborers.
22:21:40 But they know the streets there and they use them.
22:21:45 All the residents along Waverly Court, I believe that
22:21:48 Mrs. Rice and I, and Mr. and Mrs. Weeks, are the
22:21:51 only ones that are at home a good part of every day.
22:21:55 I gave up my office downtown.
22:21:56 I have an office at my home.
22:22:01 Vehicles, the large vehicles that are coming down, we
22:22:03 never have.
22:22:04 I'm talking about Home Depot, tractor trailers.
22:22:08 I'm talking about large, single-bodied vans.
22:22:15 And they have already damaged the canopy over Waverly
22:22:17 Court.
22:22:20 There's still some of it as you can see from the
22:22:21 pictures, but that's just because the trucks aren't
22:22:27 big enough.
22:22:27 When the street was laid out, you know, the vehicles
22:22:30 were 1940 vehicles.
22:22:32 And now your code says that a parking space has to be
22:22:40 ten feet.
22:22:41 Or nine feet.

22:22:42 Nine feet for a parking space.
22:22:44 So you can't really have a parking space.
22:22:49 I have seen some passenger cars -- I don't know how
22:22:54 you are going to do it.
22:22:55 I will find this, if you grant my petition, our
22:22:58 petition, I'm going to find it personally
22:23:01 inconvenient, because I was one who, given a choice
22:23:06 over these 40 years, would more often than not go
22:23:10 north to Waverly and go out to Bayshore that way.
22:23:15 But in light of the foreseeable further increase in
22:23:19 traffic, I concluded that this older man ought to
22:23:27 change his personal habits, and inconvenient himself,
22:23:32 because it's a prudent thing for the safety of
22:23:34 everybody, and it's the neighborly thing to do.
22:23:39 In recent years some candidates for City Council have
22:23:42 cited the protection of neighborhoods as a priority.
22:23:45 We appreciate your focus on neighborhoods, because
22:23:48 your decisions affect our everyday lives.
22:23:51 We believe our request, whichever one of the several
22:23:55 alternatives we presented you deem appropriate,
22:23:59 provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate your
22:24:02 commitment to protecting our neighborhood.

22:24:05 Thank you.
22:24:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:24:15 >>GINA GRIMES: Just to focus --
22:24:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move we waive the recalls for an
22:24:21 extra minute.
22:24:23 >> Second.
22:24:24 (Motion carried).
22:24:24 >>> Just to focus you back on the decision that you
22:24:27 have to make and I know it's not going to be an easy
22:24:29 one and we appreciate you listening to all of us but
22:24:32 the legal standard is vacating the street serve the
22:24:35 general interest or general welfare.
22:24:37 You want to consider the comprehensive plan revision
22:24:39 that is we cited including materials about protecting
22:24:42 neighborhoods, self-help measures like this
22:24:45 neighborhood is taking on.
22:24:47 Consider the technical manual adopted by the ordinance
22:24:50 of the City of Tampa, local streets, principle
22:24:52 function, to provide access to property as opposed to
22:24:56 efficient movement of traffic.
22:24:58 Consider the fact that Waverly Court was intended to
22:25:00 be a dead-end street when it was first created.

22:25:03 And consider high clients' willingness to consider
22:25:08 other measures to dead-end the street.
22:25:09 It doesn't have to be a complete vacating.
22:25:11 We'll agree -- I think when you consider all that
22:25:16 evidence and balance it against the opposition
22:25:18 testimony which is basically this is a convenient
22:25:22 route for us and the collector street, they are saying
22:25:25 you have approved too much development, and they are
22:25:28 not safe.
22:25:31 All of the arguments that we made against that
22:25:33 argument, that this is a convenient route and these
22:25:36 other routes aren't safe, I think you will find the
22:25:38 evidence supports finding that the vacating is
22:25:41 appropriate because it does serve the general welfare
22:25:43 of the public interest.
22:25:44 And we request your approval.
22:25:46 Thank you.
22:25:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:25:50 Mr. Dingfelder.
22:25:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
22:25:53 (Bell sounds).
22:25:59 My time is up.

22:26:00 [ Laughter ]
22:26:01 There are plenty of tough ones taint.
22:26:04 And this is one of them.
22:26:07 Mr. Clerk, if I could.
22:26:14 We haven't closed the public hearing.
22:26:15 Okay.
22:26:19 Mr. Cook is our long-term expert on vacating.
22:26:22 And I appreciate you being here.
22:26:26 And I'm always trying to look for a little compromise
22:26:29 and a little middle ground.
22:26:31 And what I was thinking about was, Ms. Burton started
22:26:35 off by saying -- of course I know what they really
22:26:37 like, they would like to close one end of the street
22:26:39 or the other.
22:26:40 We have heard a lot of objection to that.
22:26:44 But Ms. Burton also indicated that as an alternative
22:26:48 she would really like speed bumps.
22:26:50 And traffic calming I think is what you said, right,
22:26:55 Ms. Burton?
22:27:02 >>> (without microphone).
22:27:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One of the things you looked into
22:27:09 but felt you could never get from the city was speed

22:27:13 bumps, traffic bumps.
22:27:14 And I think that although I am not sure we can help
22:27:19 you with volume, at least I don't think I can help you
22:27:21 with volume from the testimony that I've heard from
22:27:25 your long-term neighbors and some of your short-term
22:27:28 neighbors, I think that we could perhaps help you get
22:27:35 speed bumps, not in terms of our ability to pay for
22:27:37 them, because we have trouble paying for them on big,
22:27:41 long streets.
22:27:43 And you're right.
22:27:44 Would you be way down on the list.
22:27:46 But what I was thinking about was if we vacated the
22:27:49 street, but it was conditioned upon a complete
22:27:53 transportation easement all the way through, so
22:27:55 effectively they have to leave this open, just like it
22:27:59 is today, but then, once it's a private street as one
22:28:04 of the conditions of the vacating, we would say, go
22:28:06 ahead and put in speed bumps, because now it's a
22:28:09 little private road.
22:28:12 And of course they would have to conform to our
22:28:14 standard and they would have to be maintained.
22:28:17 And then they could put up no truck as loud signs.

22:28:20 They could put up no parking signs because it's a
22:28:22 little private lane.
22:28:24 And we could make sure that there's enough room at
22:28:27 Waverly for that turn-around issue, whatever that
22:28:30 issue is.
22:28:31 But it just seems like there might be some middle
22:28:33 ground along those lines.
22:28:34 And I know it's a little -- probably quite
22:28:37 unprecedented, Jimmy, but, you know, do you feel
22:28:40 there's any hope for any of that?
22:28:42 >>JAMES COOK: Something that Brian and transportation
22:28:46 are going to have to study and I believe that's what
22:28:48 he alluded to, that this plan was presented to him
22:28:50 this week and they really haven't had a chance to
22:28:53 study other alternatives to control the speeding on
22:28:55 the street.
22:28:56 And keep in mind the street is only 400 feet long.
22:28:59 So, I mean, getting from zero to 60, I'm not a
22:29:03 mechanical engineer.
22:29:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Ladies and gentlemen, if you can't be
22:29:07 quiet, would you please step outside?
22:29:09 We can't hear.

22:29:10 >>JAMES COOK: I mean, it is a unique situation.
22:29:14 You go to the Elmo.
22:29:15 And the other issue that I think transportation would
22:29:17 have on this, not even looked at this plan to see if
22:29:21 that's adequate.
22:29:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am not talking about that plan at
22:29:24 all.
22:29:24 I'm talking about --
22:29:25 >>JAMES COOK: dead-end the street.
22:29:29 The owners are going to have to agree to, you have
22:29:31 individuals driving over private property.
22:29:34 >> Exactly.
22:29:36 They have a whole series of conditions and legal
22:29:39 parameters and everything else.
22:29:40 >>> It would be something new that we have never done
22:29:43 but I'm sure working with legal we could work
22:29:45 something out the way you want to go.
22:29:48 >> Just see it as perhaps accomplishing the speed
22:29:50 calming that they are looking for, while still
22:29:52 allowing the traffic to go through there in
22:29:55 perpetuity.
22:29:57 >>JAMES COOK: It's an alternative that we can look at.

22:30:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
22:30:05 >>MARY MULHERN: My question is, following up on that
22:30:07 idea, speed bumps, do you have to vacate in order to
22:30:10 do that, in order for private individuals to pay for
22:30:15 some improvement on the road?
22:30:17 It seems like rather than going through the process of
22:30:21 vacating, we only want traffic calming.
22:30:25 >>> I'm not sure about that.
22:30:26 But I understand that when a rezoning takes place you
22:30:29 can have them out, the developer out to that area.
22:30:33 But I don't know, if transportation department is set
22:30:37 up to accept private money to do an improvement on
22:30:39 public right-of-way.
22:30:41 I'm not sure if Brian knows, or legal knows.
22:30:46 That's the way I understand.
22:30:50 We don't accept private funds on that particular
22:30:52 street.
22:30:57 >>GWEN MILLER: You say they will be driving over
22:31:00 private property?
22:31:03 >>JAMES COOK: If we vacate and preserve an easement it
22:31:06 is in fact a vacated right-of-way.
22:31:08 It's just an easement to a --

22:31:10 >> We have it in alleys.
22:31:15 >>> The traffic is a little different but the property
22:31:17 owners are taking a risk in my opinion allowing people
22:31:20 to still drive over something that they own.
22:31:23 >>GWEN MILLER: I agree with that.
22:31:27 The one you were showing that they can do partial of
22:31:29 it, which one is that?
22:31:32 >>> This is the petitioner's plan.
22:31:33 What they presented to transportation.
22:31:36 Basically what they want to do is close it off, this
22:31:39 north end, and coming from the south, from Euclid, and
22:31:45 there would be a little turn-around.
22:31:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Everybody has done a great job
22:31:53 tonight.
22:31:53 I want you to know that everyone presented their
22:31:56 arguments, first I agree with this person, then that
22:32:00 person.
22:32:00 Everyone has really good points and this is tough.
22:32:02 I think the question before us boils down to, what is
22:32:06 the general public interest?
22:32:10 Is it most specifically the six property owners who
22:32:12 petition for this?

22:32:13 Or is it the general public folks who live in the
22:32:16 neighborhood, who would prefer the street remain open?
22:32:20 It seems to me that there's consensus, but trucks are
22:32:24 unsuitable for the street, and at the very least
22:32:26 immediately we can put up signs banning truck traffic
22:32:29 from the street with a beautiful tree cannon I.
22:32:33 In the interim what I might suggest is that we don't
22:32:36 go forward with this at this point.
22:32:39 We ask our transportation department to do a study of
22:32:42 what the speeds are, what the volume is, and we come
22:32:45 back and whatever you need, 30 or 60 days, and hear
22:32:48 what that is.
22:32:50 My inclination would be to not grant the request to
22:32:55 vacate this street, but to see if there are things
22:32:59 less than that that we can do to protect these six
22:33:01 property owners who have been truly inconvenienced.
22:33:04 So the motion I would like to make is that we continue
22:33:07 this for 60 days, and hear back from transportation.
22:33:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm going to second that for
22:33:19 discussion.
22:33:20 Every speaker that comes up for or against has
22:33:23 something that hits a nerve somewhere.

22:33:25 And as I am listening to all of you -- and I don't
22:33:28 even know if I voted for the Alagon, if I was here or
22:33:30 not.
22:33:31 I might have been in compile.
22:33:32 But I can say this.
22:33:33 I remember a curb cut that occurred at the Rouse
22:33:39 company building which was Tampa Bay mall.
22:33:41 We had a neighborhood meeting one day, asked for the
22:33:44 rezoning to put in a mall, and they said, oh, we are
22:33:47 not going to have any ingress or egress on MacDill
22:33:50 Avenue.
22:33:51 Well, Mayor Poe didn't know about it and he signed an
22:33:58 order for a curb cut.
22:33:59 But they knew.
22:34:00 That was my first days as an elected official in 1974.
22:34:03 And it so happens I was in public works.
22:34:08 And I looked at the thing and I said, I just remember
22:34:11 that a couple of months ago.
22:34:13 I went back to the mayor.
22:34:15 And he was kind enough and brave enough to call the
22:34:18 Rouse company and say your curb cut is canceled.
22:34:22 What does that mean?

22:34:23 That means that I have learned a lot today by sitting
22:34:26 here and saying, you know what?
22:34:30 If any big developer comes in and there's a little
22:34:32 street, I don't care what size, unless you go in and
22:34:35 out the same way, this guy isn't voting for it.
22:34:40 Because it does undue harm.
22:34:44 And it ain't about six individuals or 60 individuals.
22:34:47 It does undue harm to someone and it may be just one.
22:34:52 But those are the things that -- and I said, I may
22:34:55 have voted for the Alagon.
22:34:57 I don't know if I did or not.
22:34:58 But I can tell you one thing, not the neighbors, not
22:35:01 the people who live there, but by what they gave you
22:35:04 when you bought your nice living establishment, which
22:35:08 you should have.
22:35:09 You're entitled to it.
22:35:10 And those are the things that I'm mulling over moving
22:35:16 left to right or right to left.
22:35:18 And it's very difficult to understand the plea of the
22:35:21 neighbors, and also to understand the plea of the
22:35:24 other neighbors at the Alagon.
22:35:27 So it's a very hard case.

22:35:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to state that -- I think
22:35:35 the continuance to hear the evidence of what the
22:35:38 actual problem is reasonable, because I don't feel
22:35:42 that tonight we have really seen evidence of events,
22:35:48 pictures of some parked trucks outside Waverly, as to
22:35:51 what the problem is on this block.
22:35:53 So I would like to see the traffic study.
22:35:56 And I would also like to reiterate something that Mr.
22:36:01 Dingfelder said earlier, that we need to look at the
22:36:04 grid, and the city, and we need to take very seriously
22:36:07 the idea that we are going to cut off south ardson
22:36:10 place of that grid.
22:36:13 We live in a city.
22:36:14 We live in an urban environment.
22:36:16 And if we are going to do that, there has to be a real
22:36:21 definite, positive reason to do that.
22:36:23 And I think we need to take that really seriously.
22:36:29 >>GWEN MILLER: You have spoken.
22:36:29 You can't speak anymore.
22:36:31 That's it.
22:36:32 Only council members are discussing it now.
22:36:35 Mr. Dingfelder?

22:36:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm in support of the motion for
22:36:38 continuance on the basis of getting more information,
22:36:41 having a traffic study because of this issue of volume
22:36:46 of traffic is a little bit vague.
22:36:49 I believe it because I was out there and I know there
22:36:51 are problems.
22:36:52 But I think we could use the count.
22:36:54 But, at the same time, if it comes to -- if
22:36:58 transportation comes to a conclusion that it's
22:37:00 unrealistic that this city would ever put in speed
22:37:03 bumps there, but it might be a solution that the six
22:37:06 neighbors want to invest in, okay, then I would like
22:37:11 Ms. Grimes to be part of that conversation over the
22:37:13 next 60 days to, you know, so if you do come back,
22:37:16 then maybe my compromise might be something that you
22:37:18 all might consider.
22:37:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Grimes, are you in favor of the
22:37:26 continuance?
22:37:31 >>GINA GRIMES: It's not what I'd like.
22:37:34 I would rather have a continuance than a denial.
22:37:36 And I would be glad to meet with transportation
22:37:39 division to find out what options they can propose

22:37:41 that I can tell you my clients would like for the
22:37:45 street to be dead-ended, and as someone who lived on a
22:37:48 street for a long time with speed bumps it does not
22:37:51 affect traffic speed at all.
22:37:52 At all.
22:37:53 It feels good to have them but it doesn't do any good.
22:38:00 >>GWEN MILLER: I have it in my neighborhood.
22:38:02 >> So you have speed and noise instead of just speed.
22:38:05 In the spirit of compromise, in the spirit of
22:38:07 listening to any solutions that the city might have,
22:38:10 we would be glad to do that.
22:38:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To clarify the motion then, it
22:38:16 would be to request that transportation, and
22:38:18 particularly a senior transportation engineer, come
22:38:21 back in 60 days to report on the volume of traffic and
22:38:25 the speed of traffic.
22:38:27 And in the interim they work with Ms. Grimes, and the
22:38:31 neighbors to look at the slowing devices.
22:38:35 And then also --
22:38:36 >>> Including a dead-end?
22:38:37 >> No, to look at the slowing devices.
22:38:41 >>GWEN MILLER: They can look at it.

22:38:47 It won't hurt to look at it.
22:38:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That isn't my motion.
22:38:54 That isn't my motion.
22:38:55 But also immediately the transportation put up signs,
22:39:00 no truck signs on this street.
22:39:02 Because that's something everybody agrees on and can
22:39:04 be done immediately and have an immediate good effect.
22:39:07 >>GWEN MILLER: I am going to pass the gavel and amend
22:39:10 that and say that to look at the dead-end.
22:39:15 You can look at the dead-end and look at everything,
22:39:16 the speed and everything.
22:39:20 Just going and Todd Pressman look at it.
22:39:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Was there a second to Mrs.
22:39:25 Saul-Sena's motion?
22:39:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's no second to the motion.
22:39:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Then she clarified the motion.
22:39:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And then what happened -- I'm sorry.
22:39:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Shelby?
22:39:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair pro tem.
22:39:43 I believe what we have then in the case where there
22:39:46 was a motion to amend, which is a subsidiary motion,
22:39:49 if there's a second to that, then you will vote on

22:39:52 whether or not to amend that motion, and then go back
22:39:54 to vote on the main motion, depending on how that is
22:39:58 determined.
22:39:58 So if there's a second to Ms. Miller's motion to
22:40:03 amend, then you can vote on that.
22:40:08 >> There's a motion and second.
22:40:09 2 the motion to amend it is to include the possibility
22:40:14 of the dead-end.
22:40:16 The possibility of it in passing.
22:40:19 Any comments or questions on the motion?
22:40:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
22:40:24 I feel like the information that was derived from my
22:40:28 initial motion which is to look at the volume and
22:40:30 everything, then it will come back to us and we can
22:40:33 look at different things.
22:40:35 I won't be supporting the motion, because I don't
22:40:37 really support that.
22:40:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Motion and second on the amendment.
22:40:42 Question from council?
22:40:45 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
22:40:46 Couple of issues for clarification.
22:40:47 Continuance for 60 days.

22:40:48 Is that intended to be a day meeting or night meeting?
22:40:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Night.
22:40:55 >>> Then the soonest we would be able to come back at
22:40:57 the next open meeting would be July.
22:41:00 July 26th.
22:41:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We haven't gotten to that motion
22:41:04 yet.
22:41:06 >>> I just want to make that clear for the record.
22:41:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All in favor of Mrs. Miller's
22:41:10 motion say Aye.
22:41:12 All opposed?
22:41:15 That was 3-3.
22:41:19 Is Mr. Scott in the building?
22:41:21 >>GWEN MILLER: He's not coming back.
22:41:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, on a motion to amend, it dies.
22:41:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It didn't necessarily die.
22:41:33 >>GWEN MILLER: It has to come back next week.
22:41:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's let council confer and see
22:41:43 where we are going.
22:41:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Cole, do you want to opine?
22:41:59 Mr. Shelby is okay with that?
22:42:01 >>> Mr. Shelby knows better than I do generally --

22:42:04 there's a recollection in the back of my mind that it
22:42:09 would be as if no action was taken so you go back to
22:42:11 the original motion.
22:42:12 >> Correct.
22:42:13 That's what I think.
22:42:14 And I have got my law degree in Ybor City.
22:42:17 [ Laughter ]
22:42:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That motion would fail 3 to 3.
22:42:29 And we'll go back to the original motion which is Mrs.
22:42:33 Saul-Sena's motion which is a continuance for 60 days,
22:42:35 transportation to work with the various issues, not
22:42:37 including the dead-ending, and that would be to May --
22:42:44 excuse me, July 26th.
22:42:49 First item up on the agenda.
22:42:56 And definitely the signs, transportation would
22:42:58 immediately look at the signs, the availability of no
22:43:00 truck signs and the parking issue signs.
22:43:06 As council we can't tell them to do.
22:43:08 We can only request.
22:43:09 Okay.
22:43:09 Motion and second.
22:43:10 Any comments?

22:43:11 Questions?
22:43:12 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:43:14 Any opposed?
22:43:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Nay.
22:43:17 >> The motion passes with Ms. Miller voting no.
22:43:23 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Who was the second on that
22:43:24 motion, please?
22:43:26 >> Mr. Miranda.
22:43:30 >> Outside the scope of the hearing.
22:43:33 >> I want to raise the point anyway.
22:43:36 I'm sorry.
22:43:36 I think --
22:43:38 >> We concluded
22:43:40 The residents in these proceedings.
22:43:42 Because heretofore we have not been included.
22:43:45 We have not received postcards, letters, or what have
22:43:49 you.
22:43:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Talk to Brian and talk to zoning.
22:43:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open number 15.
22:44:07 We have a motion and sec.
22:44:08 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:44:16 Opposed?

22:44:17 (Motion carried).
22:44:17 [Sounding gavel]
22:44:20 We still have some items on the agenda we have to
22:44:22 attend to.
22:44:23 So would you please go out quietly?
22:44:25 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Land Development Coordination.
22:44:30 I have been sworn in.
22:44:30 The next item on the agenda is V 07-06.
22:44:34 District 7.
22:44:37 Ed address 401 west Bougainvillea Avenue, church of
22:44:40 God of the prophecy is the petitioner.
22:44:45 BOC has reviewed the petition and has objections to
22:44:48 the request for placing religious assembly, fellowship
22:44:51 hall and increased parking to the site plan submitted.
22:44:55 2-23-07 current zoning was RS-60 residential single
22:44:59 family, proposed special use, at place of religious
22:45:04 assembly, fellowship hall.
22:45:06 Waivers being requested are section 27-246-K, to allow
22:45:10 more than 50% alternative parking spaces on grass.
22:45:16 Petitioner is requesting a special use of the property
22:45:18 at 401 west Bougainvillea Avenue to construct a 3,992
22:45:23 square foot fellowship hall onto the existing church,

22:45:26 and provide additional parking.
22:45:27 The church has a current seating capacity of 112 that
22:45:31 requires 34 parking spaces.
22:45:33 This project will add 19 parking spaces to exceed the
22:45:37 required off-street parking.
22:45:39 The proposed fellowship hall, while still being 2,992,
22:45:44 will not increase the sanctuary seating and therefore
22:45:47 no additional parking. The new addition has a front
22:45:49 yard setback of 95.1 feet, 64.6 on the west side yard,
22:45:58 36.1 existing east side yard, and a 79.1 existing rear
22:46:05 yard.
22:46:05 There are three divisions who have objections, and in
22:46:10 looking at this, we find out that the architect for
22:46:15 petitioner was not given all of our comments at the
22:46:18 revised level.
22:46:19 We have since talked to the petitioner.
22:46:22 The petitioner now has a new agent.
22:46:24 She is here to indicate their willingness to make all
22:46:30 of the revisions that didn't get to the architect.
22:46:33 And proceed with a continuance.
22:46:37 To further --
22:46:39 >>: I don't understand.

22:46:40 >> To further explain the project, mole, please.
22:46:43 Here is an aerial photo. Here is Bougainvillea.
22:46:47 This is north Ola.
22:46:53 As you can see it's still a fairly large parcel.
22:47:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The whole point of this is to ask
22:47:04 for a continuance.
22:47:06 >> Well, they would like to have two things.
22:47:08 First they would like input from council.
22:47:09 Secondly, they would like input from the neighborhood
22:47:12 so that they can --
22:47:13 >> That's shopping.
22:47:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's what I trade to address
22:47:24 earlier in the meeting.
22:47:25 I'm not addressing you specifically.
22:47:27 But I don't think we can open a meeting and then get
22:47:29 feedback without us saying yes or no on the hearing
22:47:32 itself.
22:47:32 If we are going to take testimony and we are going to
22:47:35 hear from the residents, we are going to hear from any
22:47:37 opposition, there's something wrong with the process
22:47:40 that we are doing, because it doesn't make -- doesn't
22:47:45 make sense to me that we are going to continue this

22:47:47 thing possibly the way it seems.
22:47:50 Because I don't understand, these petitions come here
22:47:53 and all of a sudden at the eleventh hour they don't
22:47:55 have all the ducks in order.
22:47:58 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
22:48:00 We sort of talked about this issue awe little bit at
22:48:02 the beginning.
22:48:03 But as I said previously, the petitioner has the right
22:48:06 to have the case heard, petitioner has the right to
22:48:08 have the case heard and the form submitted.
22:48:10 There is no obligation on your part to continue the
22:48:12 matter.
22:48:14 >> He's going to have the case heard.
22:48:16 >>> The petitioner can explain why they would at the
22:48:20 end of this hearing like to have it continued, and
22:48:24 that would be for the petitioner to describe, but the
22:48:28 same scenario would apply as would apply earlier.
22:48:34 >>> For the record, Laura Belltower for the church of
22:48:38 God of prophesy of Forest Hill.
22:48:41 Unfortunately, I have been asked to come into this
22:48:43 process very late in the process, and we do have staff
22:48:49 objections but I think if you look at them they are

22:48:51 really more technical issues.
22:48:53 They aren't really objecting to the use.
22:48:55 They are not objecting to the expansion.
22:48:59 We didn't show all the landscaping details.
22:49:01 Unfortunately, the church was trying to work through
22:49:04 every single detail before the public hearing, and
22:49:09 instead of realize wag they needed to do was commit to
22:49:12 meeting the code requirements, and then work out any
22:49:15 final issues that there might be with staff after the
22:49:18 special use has been approved.
22:49:20 So we apologize for it not being in perfect order.
22:49:23 We don't think that there's any reason to believe that
22:49:25 we cannot comply with all the requirements.
22:49:28 There's not a space issue, setback issue, any of those
22:49:33 things.
22:49:33 So we would ask -- we just found out today that there
22:49:36 may be some objection from neighbors.
22:49:38 We would like to understand their concerns so that we
22:49:40 can perhaps address those, any revisions to the site
22:49:43 plan, and if you have any concerns or anything so that
22:49:47 when we come back with a final site plan it will
22:49:49 address everybody's concerns.

22:49:54 >> I apologize to you.
22:49:57 But you came in late into this process.
22:50:00 I understand that.
22:50:00 But if you have concern with the neighbors, why are we
22:50:03 going to listen to it and take no action tonight, and
22:50:06 listen to it again another time?
22:50:08 Why don't you meet with the neighbors, come back,
22:50:11 delay this thing, come back, get it full force, so
22:50:14 that we don't waste the public's time?
22:50:17 >>> We fried to meet with the neighbors.
22:50:19 The only thing we had that there was an issue but was
22:50:22 there was an apparent misunderstanding of what a
22:50:25 special use means.
22:50:26 I think the neighbors felt that it was a rezoning and
22:50:28 it could be something other than a church.
22:50:30 So we thought, well, I did not find out that there may
22:50:33 be an issue about parking on the front yard so today
22:50:36 the pastor offered to meet with the president of the
22:50:39 homeowners association at their meeting, that they
22:50:42 chose not to do that.
22:50:44 We will be glad to meet with them.
22:50:49 Unfortunately, we have been sitting here, they have

22:50:50 been signature here.
22:50:51 If there is anybody here to this late hour.
22:50:55 We would ask if possible to please take the comments
22:50:58 so we can integrate them and have revised plans to
22:51:01 you.
22:51:02 >>GWEN MILLER: What's the pleasure of council?
22:51:06 >> I mean, we are here.
22:51:07 Let's press on.
22:51:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Schulz, continue on.
22:51:11 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
22:51:17 Here's a zoning of the area.
22:51:19 As you can see, it's predominantly RS-60.
22:51:24 Here's a photograph of the existing church.
22:51:27 You can see --
22:51:29 >> I'm sorry, Mr. Schulz, I'm going to interrupt just
22:51:31 a minute.
22:51:32 Council, I just want to point out for the purposes of
22:51:34 the record, you have four members present, which
22:51:38 constitutes a quorum.
22:51:41 In order for you to take any action tonight, it would
22:51:44 require unanimous vote, and of course should any one
22:51:48 of you leave the room, you will lose your quorum.

22:51:52 So --
22:51:55 >> Maybe council members will come back.
22:51:57 >> I don't know where they are.
22:51:58 If you want me to check while Mr. Schulz continues I
22:52:00 will do that.
22:52:01 But I want to warn you under your rules once one of
22:52:05 you leafs the ram the meeting is suspended, adjourned,
22:52:08 and will have to be started up again with a new roll
22:52:10 call.
22:52:11 Do you wish me to see if anybody is coming back?
22:52:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Can you see if they will come back?
22:52:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's something wrong in the
22:52:19 process.
22:52:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue, Mr. Schulz.
22:52:28 >>PHIL SCHULZ: Here's a picture looking back north
22:52:30 Ola, the house as cross the street from the church.
22:52:33 This is looking down to the east of Bougainvillea.
22:52:39 This is looking down the west of Bougainvillea.
22:52:43 This is the school and parked directly across the
22:52:46 street.
22:52:49 And this is another side picture of the existing
22:52:52 facility.

22:52:59 Mr. Tony Garcia will be up next if you have any
22:53:02 questions, I will be glad to answer them.
22:53:10 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
22:53:13 I have been sworn.
22:53:13 Just a couple of additional comments.
22:53:15 The land use category to the proposed expansion is
22:53:17 residential 10 which is the land use category that
22:53:22 allows neighborhood service uses such as daycare
22:53:27 centers and churches.
22:53:28 The church has been in the area for awhile, has been
22:53:31 serving the community for quite a few years now, has
22:53:34 become a fabric of the community.
22:53:35 Planning Commission staff has no objections to the
22:53:37 proposed request.
22:53:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
22:53:45 >> Laura Bellflower for the record, speaking today as
22:53:48 an attorney and a planner.
22:53:50 So as a land planner I have been sworn.
22:53:54 The details of this site is it is a request to add a
22:53:57 fellowship hall to an existing church.
22:53:59 The church has been on the site for more than 40
22:54:02 years.

22:54:03 As was shown in the graphic, the extension or
22:54:16 expansion of the church will not be any closer to any
22:54:18 property than the existing church.
22:54:21 So it's fitting into the niche of the existing church,
22:54:25 because ifs a church, with more infrequent use of the
22:54:29 parking area.
22:54:30 The church has asked that a portion of the parking, of
22:54:34 the required parking be allowed to be grass of the
22:54:37 alternative surface.
22:54:38 We are not asking that more than 50% of the required
22:54:41 parking be grass.
22:54:43 I need to clarify that.
22:54:44 We are asking to be consistent with the city standards
22:54:48 of up to 50% being able to be an alternative surface.
22:54:52 We are just asking that alternative surface be allowed
22:54:54 to be grass.
22:54:55 That is how the church is currently using the
22:54:57 property.
22:54:58 That's how they deal with the overflow parking or
22:55:01 additional parking that is needed.
22:55:02 And I believe that that is consistent with what has
22:55:04 been allowed for other churches.

22:55:07 I do want to address the question about why is it
22:55:12 special use, and what it means to be a special use.
22:55:14 This is a special use request because it is an
22:55:18 expansion of more than 5%.
22:55:21 Any expansion of more than 5% or 150 square feet has
22:55:23 to go through the special use process even though it
22:55:26 is an existing church.
22:55:28 I think that as I indicated earlier, there may be a
22:55:32 neighbor that was concerned that this special use is
22:55:35 in actuality a rezoning.
22:55:36 I wanted, as you already know, to clarify for anyone
22:55:40 interested, information, that as a special use, if the
22:55:45 special use is approved, it will actually lock in the
22:55:47 site for use as a church or for the uses that are
22:55:50 allowed in the existing RS-60 zoning district.
22:55:53 This is not a rezoning.
22:55:55 It does not change the existing zone.
22:55:58 In summary this is a request to expand an existing
22:56:02 church.
22:56:03 The church is committed to addressing staff's
22:56:07 concerns.
22:56:07 And to work with you and with the neighbors to address

22:56:09 any other issues.
22:56:11 We feel that the applicant has met all the SU-2
22:56:14 criteria, both general and specific.
22:56:17 I can go through all of those.
22:56:19 But in brevity given the hour I won't unless you would
22:56:22 like me to.
22:56:23 We do ask for your positive review and we ask that do
22:56:26 you allow us to bring back corrected plans for either
22:56:30 the May 3rd if that is possible or for the May
22:56:33 24th hearing.
22:56:35 We would agree to have it at night.
22:56:36 I unfortunately have a conflict on May 10th and I
22:56:39 would not be able to attend that day so we ask for
22:56:43 that review.
22:56:43 And I thank you.
22:56:44 I'm here to answer any questions you have.
22:56:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
22:56:48 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
22:56:50 item 15?
22:57:06 >> Good evening, council.
22:57:07 Thank you for this late hour for being patient and
22:57:10 hearing this petition.

22:57:13 The reference the attorney is making -- I'm sorry, my
22:57:16 name is Dale Matson, 107409 cliff circle.
22:57:22 I have been sworn.
22:57:23 I am the president of Forest Hills neighborhood
22:57:26 association.
22:57:26 And I am speaking on part of our board, not that this
22:57:34 particular church lies within our Forest Hills
22:57:36 boundary but it is within one block of one of our
22:57:39 boundaries, that being Bougainvillea Avenue.
22:57:45 Our concern, I must state this right off.
22:57:50 No one offered to meet with me.
22:57:53 I have been going by notice of land development of
22:57:56 this special use, that I started going to church on a
22:58:02 random basis, checking out why a social hall was
22:58:07 needed of almost 3 that you square feet, when I had
22:58:14 now learned that the membership is only 112.
22:58:19 Two Sundays ago, I believe it was, I went on the
22:58:23 property, and met with Mr. Jones and with Ed -- I'm
22:58:29 sorry, I don't remember his last name.
22:58:31 He's going to be part of the construction people.
22:58:34 He showed me the plans at that time.
22:58:39 I asked questions as to the fact I was told it was

22:58:43 going to be used for weddings, covered dish on the
22:58:48 ground, but I brought to the effect that there were no
22:58:51 kitchen facilities in this grand hall.
22:58:54 It's basically just a long, open hallway.
22:58:59 To the front, there will be, I believe it was a single
22:59:03 restroom for gentlemen and for women.
22:59:05 My concern to him at that time, also, was that having
22:59:10 viewed this area on six different Sundays, the maximum
22:59:14 number of cars I've seen there have been 34.
22:59:21 One Sunday -- well, 34 let's say.
22:59:24 That's an average.
22:59:25 If they are going to want this addition, as they
22:59:27 stated to me, for weddings and for covered dish
22:59:31 dinners, why are they not including other facilities?
22:59:36 Also, my concern now is that because of this large
22:59:40 addition they are going to be wanting to park on the
22:59:43 front of the property.
22:59:45 And I wish Mrs. Saul-Sena had been around in the days
22:59:52 this church was built because there are no trees
22:59:54 around this.
22:59:55 But Mr. Miranda may remember years ago when we closed
22:59:59 Seneca Avenue, the city and the county owned the

23:00:01 property surrounding this property.
23:00:05 The parsonage is to the left.
23:00:06 So as you saw on the Elmo, this is a very, very large
23:00:10 piece of property.
23:00:11 My concern is with this much property available, why
23:00:14 are they going to be parking on the front, whereby
23:00:20 there are additional areas available along Ola Avenue,
23:00:24 or perhaps additional parking could be done to the
23:00:26 rear of the property?
23:00:30 With this said, I feel, as I said to Mr. Jones, to be
23:00:37 a good neighbor --
23:00:39 (Bell sounds)
23:00:40 I'll close this up.
23:00:41 They did not show due diligence to me on garbage
23:00:45 facilities, taking care of that.
23:00:47 Right now they keep one garbage can to the front of
23:00:49 the building.
23:00:50 Also, they have not shown any interest in the past,
23:00:54 nor have I seen any on the plans, that they are going
23:00:59 to do any landscaping, which is sorely needed to be
23:01:02 part of the neighborhood situation.
23:01:03 Thank you.

23:01:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
23:01:06 Would anyone else like to speak?
23:01:08 Petitioner?
23:01:17 >>> Laura Bellflower again for the record.
23:01:21 There are many trees on the property and there were
23:01:23 not a whole lot around the immediate building.
23:01:28 The plan shows that there are two maple trees where
23:01:30 the fellowship hall is.
23:01:32 Actually there's only one there.
23:01:33 And that would be removed.
23:01:35 As to the parking, currently there is parking that is
23:01:39 being used on the east side in this area that is
23:01:45 parking.
23:01:46 I can understand the concern about accessing across
23:01:49 the front of the church, especially if that needs to
23:01:53 be improved in any type of way, and the church is
23:01:56 willing to look to work with staff as to what our
23:02:00 options are, to accessing out Ola to either put the
23:02:05 parking on the east side, again grass parking, or to
23:02:09 access to have the overflow parking in the back of the
23:02:11 church, the driveway currently is up the side of the
23:02:14 church, would provide access to that back area, and so

23:02:18 we are more than willing to work with staff to provide
23:02:20 the extra overflow parking in that area if the concern
23:02:24 is about having parking in the front.
23:02:26 As to the garbage, the garbage is not in the front,
23:02:30 kept in the front.
23:02:30 It's kept in the back area.
23:02:32 And that's one of the issues we are working with staff
23:02:34 about it a dumpster or cart or what exactly is going
23:02:38 to be required.
23:02:41 I think it is a part of the community. The church is
23:02:44 part of the community. The expansion of the
23:02:45 fellowship hall is for the benefit of the church to
23:02:48 use for their members.
23:02:51 And it is -- the church to grow and have facilities
23:02:58 for their church family.
23:02:59 I'm here with any questions you might have.
23:03:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions from council members?
23:03:05 Close the public hearing?
23:03:06 What are you going to do?
23:03:08 >> I believe we can't close it because they have to
23:03:10 revise their site plan.
23:03:11 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

23:03:13 Yes.
23:03:14 Your vote would have to be to continue this.
23:03:18 Ms. Bellflower suggested may 24th.
23:03:22 But that is for your 15 cases.
23:03:26 You will have to waive the rules.
23:03:28 The next hearing, evening hearing, you have got 14
23:03:33 cases on June 14th so you would have to waive the
23:03:38 rules for June 14th.
23:03:40 The next one that's fully open would be July, unless
23:03:43 you go to a daytime meeting.
23:03:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I ask if May 3rd is not an
23:03:50 option?
23:03:51 Are they not adding options --
23:03:57 >>> There's no night meeting -- it would be May
23:04:00 10th.
23:04:01 But they have chosen --
23:04:03 >>CHAIRMAN: We are going to waive the rules and do it
23:04:05 in a daytime.
23:04:06 What daytime do you have?
23:04:08 >>JULIA COLE: I guess then the question is, the site
23:04:11 plan will have to come in ten days prior to the
23:04:13 hearing.

23:04:14 So it's just very dependent on how long you are going
23:04:18 to take.
23:04:23 That means you have to have --
23:04:26 >>GWEN MILLER: It won two weeks.
23:04:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The only petition that came in is
23:04:36 the president of the association expressed concerns.
23:04:39 And she's well-known that maybe we can -- I hate to do
23:04:44 this to one of my colleagues because he's not here.
23:04:48 But if you snooze you lose.
23:04:50 So I waive the rules to have this a daytime hearing.
23:04:53 >> Second.
23:04:53 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to waive
23:04:55 the rules.
23:04:56 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
23:04:57 Opposed?
23:04:58 (Motion carried).
23:04:59 Don't.
23:05:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Don't get mad at me.
23:05:02 >> May what?
23:05:04 >> 3rd.
23:05:06 >> At 10 a.m.
23:05:08 (Motion carried)

23:05:21 >> Move to open number 16.
23:05:25 >> Second.
23:05:25 (Motion carried).
23:05:26 >>> The next item on the agenda is zoning case
23:05:31 Z-07-09.
23:05:32 District 5.
23:05:33 Channel District.
23:05:34 Council downtown partnership.
23:05:36 Part of the neighborhood area.
23:05:38 Location is 858 Channelside Drive.
23:05:42 Mr. Ken Stoltenberg is petitioner.
23:05:44 This was misnoticed on the February 8th meeting.
23:05:48 And now it has been renoticed for tonight.
23:05:52 The development review committee has reviewed the
23:05:54 petition as of the date of the submission, it has no
23:05:59 objections.
23:06:00 However, two transportation technical standards have
23:06:04 come up which Mr. Brian gentry will explain,
23:06:07 right-of-way, and would not be reviewed tonight.
23:06:10 But I'll let Mr. Gentry discuss that with you.
23:06:13 The request is to change the current zoning to PD-1,
23:06:18 Channel District, to CD-3, Channel District, for

23:06:21 retail, office, multifamily, residential.
23:06:25 Waivers being requested are section 27-248-4, waiver
23:06:29 allowing trucks using off-street loading or areas to
23:06:32 maneuver with within the right-of-way.
23:06:34 Item number 2, 27-247, waiver to reduce the required
23:06:38 loading berth from 2 to zero.
23:06:41 Summary requested petitioner is proposing to rezone
23:06:44 the property located at 858 Channelside Drive from
23:06:48 CD-1 to CD-3 mixed use development.
23:06:51 Proposed uses include 6,131 square feet of office, 993
23:06:56 square feet of retail, 141,360 square feet for 122
23:07:02 bedroom condominium units, and 43,541 square feet of
23:07:07 common areas totaling 198,025 square feet, on a
23:07:14 .63-acre site which is 27,527 square feet of
23:07:19 development.
23:07:21 The base FAR is 3.5, permits 96,050 square feet.
23:07:27 The proposed floor area ratio to the site on 6.8
23:07:33 translates into an additional 95,935 square feet bonus
23:07:37 density for the project.
23:07:39 Bonus features include public open space, public parks
23:07:42 with a 3-story water wall, expanded sidewalk area,
23:07:48 enhanced landscaping, lighting, paving and

23:07:51 furnishings, bicycle accommodations with racks to
23:07:54 encourage pedestrian traffic, sustainable design
23:07:56 elements, by means of a robot being I can parking
23:08:00 system, that may be -- robotic parking system that may
23:08:03 be made available to the public Monday through Friday
23:08:06 subject to availability.
23:08:08 Retail uses and a green roof and the robotic parking
23:08:12 structure. The proposed bonus density calculations
23:08:14 are being reviewed and have been approved by the
23:08:18 zoning administrator Catherine Coyle.
23:08:20 And I have handed those out to you and you have her
23:08:23 memorandum indicating that they do comply with the
23:08:26 city's comprehensive plan.
23:08:28 The building would be a modern design that is accented
23:08:30 with projecting balconies.
23:08:32 The building will have a 6-story, 60-foot robotic
23:08:36 parking garage with green roof amenities, three
23:08:39 stories -- 33 story, 364-foot residential tower
23:08:45 including rooftop he empties for a maximum height of
23:08:49 384 feet.
23:08:51 Elevations are attached to the site plan.
23:08:53 The project requires 249 parking spaces, 240 parking

23:08:58 spaces for residential units, 6 spaces for office, and
23:09:01 3 spaces for retail.
23:09:03 The development is providing 265 parking spaces in a
23:09:07 four-story double robotic parking system and one 88
23:09:13 space for a total of 266 parking spaces.
23:09:19 Elmo, please.
23:09:28 This is Whiting Street.
23:09:29 This is Channelside.
23:09:31 The aerial photo perspective, this is 12th Street,
23:09:35 south 12th Street here.
23:09:37 This is a parking structure for the port authority.
23:09:40 Port authority facility here.
23:09:42 And the subject parcel next to Channelside and
23:09:46 Whiting.
23:09:47 This is a picture of the current south end of the
23:09:53 building.
23:09:54 This is the north end.
23:09:59 This is a view of the site looking north on
23:10:02 Channelside.
23:10:07 This is a view looking west on Whiting.
23:10:10 This is a view looking south on Channelside.
23:10:13 Again the subject property here.

23:10:18 This is looking from the other side of Channelside.
23:10:20 And this is looking directly across the street of
23:10:23 Channelside.
23:10:25 This is across the street from the Place.
23:10:29 A block over from Victory Lofts.
23:10:32 And Seaboard Square along with the Meridian.
23:10:42 Mr. Brian Gentry will discuss the technical standards
23:10:47 objection.
23:10:48 And then we'll hear from Mr. Tony Garcia.
23:10:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Mulhern has a question, then I
23:10:54 have a question.
23:10:54 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't have a question.
23:10:56 I just want to disclose that I heard about this
23:10:58 project prior to being on council.
23:11:01 I attended a Channelside district neighborhood
23:11:05 association meeting, and this happened to be on the
23:11:09 agenda.
23:11:09 So I just wanted to disclose that.
23:11:11 I didn't give any kind of opinion at the meeting and
23:11:15 also wasn't on council at that time.
23:11:17 I did ask a question about the robotic parking, which
23:11:21 I'm sure we'll hear about tonight.

23:11:23 >> And I handed out two packets with robotic
23:11:25 information, ma'am.
23:11:27 >> I appreciate that disclosure.
23:11:29 My question is, refresh our memory. This is the
23:11:33 rezoning from CD 1 to CD-3.
23:11:37 It's been awhile since we dealt with the Channel
23:11:40 District classifications.
23:11:42 I am going to defer to Mr. Wilson Stair, and way think
23:11:46 you are going to ask next, he can give you the details
23:11:49 as far as his design criterion.
23:11:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The continuation of the question is
23:12:00 in a nutshell, a very brief late nature nutshell what
23:12:04 is the difference between CD-1 and CD-3?
23:12:07 >>WILSON STAIR: Urban design division.
23:12:10 I have been sworn.
23:12:11 The difference is, CD 1 has a 60-foot height on it.
23:12:17 And when you go to CD 3, that allows more height.
23:12:22 >>: Pretty much limited height, subject -- that sort
23:12:27 of thing.
23:12:28 Mrs. Saul-Sena?
23:12:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I wanted to say for all council, it
23:12:31 would be so helpful if we had a model, a 3-D model of

23:12:35 the Channel District so we could see this in the
23:12:38 context of what else has been approved around it.
23:12:40 And I hope that some day we get that.
23:12:46 >>> We do have -- at least there is one firm that
23:12:51 Wilson Miller does have a 3 dimensional of the Channel
23:12:54 District.
23:12:55 And the architect should have indications of what's
23:13:01 around it in 3 dimensions.
23:13:03 >> And the difference in F.A.R., or was it just type?
23:13:09 >>> No, we have a total -- at least on the books now,
23:13:14 of three and a half.
23:13:17 >> Across the board?
23:13:19 >> Yes.
23:13:19 >> Thank you.
23:13:20 >>> Council, if I could just kind of refresh my own
23:13:24 recollection, but with regard to the bonus density, I
23:13:28 believe it's council's determination as to whether the
23:13:30 enhancements are sufficient to warrant granting that
23:13:35 density, and I guess when the presentation of the
23:13:38 petitioner is made, they will focus on the basis of
23:13:41 the amenities that form the basis for the increased
23:13:43 F.A.R. above the 3.5, which is the standard.

23:13:50 >> Brian Gentry, transportation, city staff.
23:13:54 I have been sworn.
23:13:58 Unlike the petition, transportation objected to
23:14:00 earlier, there are technical in nature, they do not
23:14:04 meet the technical standards.
23:14:05 However, if you look at the Elmo here.
23:14:08 The developer is also proposing to extend the edge of
23:14:15 the pavement eight feet from what is currently there
23:14:19 now, eight feet into the roadway.
23:14:24 Legal might want to say something about it.
23:14:26 It's my understanding that City Council can approve
23:14:30 within the property lines the right-of-way, the
23:14:34 transportation issue, that actually comes back to us,
23:14:37 the right-of-way permitting process during permitting.
23:14:40 And nothing in the right-of-way can be approved by
23:14:44 council.
23:14:44 The note is on the plan.
23:14:46 It's my understanding that the developer is fine with
23:14:48 that, and it's something that we will take a look at
23:14:52 later.
23:14:59 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
23:15:05 I have been sworn in.

23:15:15 In the Channel District, the predominant land use
23:15:18 category currently is regional mixed use.
23:15:21 This property currently has a land use designation, as
23:15:24 you can see, as depicted on this future land use map.
23:15:28 Here's a subject site which is right on the corner of
23:15:33 Channelside Drive.
23:15:35 It gives you a little more context.
23:15:37 As Mr. Schulz said, just prior -- here's Meridian.
23:15:42 This is where the Seaboard square project will be, the
23:15:45 place to the north, subject site in question, the
23:15:48 garage, services, mixed use development, Channelside
23:15:52 to the south, of course if turnabout, port facilities,
23:15:58 and the aquarium directly to the east.
23:16:00 And of course this future model surface parking which
23:16:03 they hope will go away.
23:16:09 Regarding proposed density, proposed bonus density
23:16:13 that the applicant is bringing forward to you this
23:16:14 evening, some very unique proposals within the bonus
23:16:20 density, you have already heard of the robotic garage.
23:16:24 This will be as it moves forward the first robotic
23:16:27 garage actually constructed in the City of Tampa.
23:16:30 You have had one proposed to you up on plant street

23:16:33 that really has not come to pass as far as actually
23:16:37 being constructed.
23:16:41 At the rate that the current applicant has been
23:16:43 building structures over in the Channel District, I
23:16:45 think it's a pretty good bet that you are going to see
23:16:47 this occur fairly soon.
23:16:49 Also, the other unique feature that they are offering
23:16:52 is to T green roof, something we are very pleased to
23:16:55 see, and I'm sure members of council are.
23:16:58 And something that we hope more applicants in this
23:17:03 area and the CBD will venture to offer as part of
23:17:06 their developments in the future.
23:17:08 Planning Commission staff, based on the city
23:17:15 administration's accepting and finding the proposed
23:17:19 bonus density request in accordance with the requested
23:17:25 bonus density of 6.8, finds the proposed request
23:17:29 consistent with the comprehensive plan and does not
23:17:31 object to the request.
23:17:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
23:17:40 >>> Brian Chafe with petitioner and I have been sworn
23:17:46 in.
23:17:47 In the interest of expediency if there's anything I

23:17:50 skip over that you want to hear more about just let us
23:17:53 know and we'll explain everything for you.
23:17:56 Once again, rezoning from CD 1 to CD 3, Channelside
23:18:01 Drive, I wanted to point out a couple of key features.
23:18:05 Obviously there's 993 square feet of retail, 6,000
23:18:12 square feet of office space, offering 265 spaces, in
23:18:15 the unique parking garage, and that exceeds code
23:18:18 requirements.
23:18:20 As previously stated, we are going -- we would like a
23:18:24 F.A.R. 6.8.
23:18:25 Staff has already approved it.
23:18:26 And the design elements which are approved include
23:18:30 street design, expanded sidewalks, public water
23:18:33 feature, bicycle accommodations, design elements
23:18:38 including the parking garage itself, and the green
23:18:40 roof.
23:18:41 I believe the architect is going to explain or provide
23:18:44 additional information regarding these features in the
23:18:46 presentation.
23:18:47 The project meets the requirements of and is
23:18:49 consistent with Tampa city code provisions pertaining
23:18:52 to the Channelside overlay district.

23:18:55 Petitioner presented its project to the Channel
23:18:56 District council, as you heard earlier, and they did
23:19:00 not receive any objections.
23:19:01 Also, petitioner met with the Victory Lofts board and
23:19:05 presented the project.
23:19:06 The Victory Lofts board did not have any objections
23:19:09 either.
23:19:10 As previously stated, there are two waivers that are
23:19:12 being requested.
23:19:13 Those waivers are on the plan.
23:19:16 In the staff report.
23:19:17 The criteria for approving the waivers, and what we
23:19:20 believe are acceptable reasons for putting the waivers
23:19:23 are listed.
23:19:25 And I just wanted to address the two technical
23:19:27 objections to transportation and confirm that these
23:19:29 are issues that will be taken care of during the
23:19:32 permitting process.
23:19:33 At this point I just want to turn the presentation
23:19:35 over to the architect for more information about the
23:19:40 project.
23:19:57 >>> I would like to say I have been sworn in, but I

23:19:59 haven't been.
23:19:59 [ Laughter ]
23:20:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is there anybody else?
23:20:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody to be sworn in at this time
23:20:03 would you please stand and raise your right hand.
23:20:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you intend to testify tonight.
23:20:08 (Oath administered by Clerk).
23:20:12 >>> My name is Richard Zangali and I have just been
23:20:18 sworn in.
23:20:19 I think everyone has a good idea of where the project
23:20:22 is located.
23:20:24 It's on the corner of Whiting and Channelside Drive.
23:20:30 So I will move on to explain the fundamental aspects
23:20:33 of the building.
23:20:34 Here you have an overall perspective of the building.
23:20:39 It can be broken down simply into three components.
23:20:42 The robotic parking garage, as you have come to
23:20:45 understand.
23:20:48 We have more information on that that will occur later
23:20:50 in the presentation.
23:20:51 And a residential tower of 33 stories, in our office
23:20:55 and retail component in the lower portion of the

23:20:58 residential tower.
23:20:59 There is an amenity deck located on the third floor of
23:21:01 the bidding.
23:21:02 That actually connects the two and provides the
23:21:05 covering for the motor court that happens in between.
23:21:08 I would like to go ahead and place it in the skyline
23:21:12 of Channelside.
23:21:13 And this is a cross section of Channelside beginning
23:21:17 with The Towers of Channelside to the south, Seaboard
23:21:21 square occurring next, the project that occurs next
23:21:29 going north.
23:21:29 We have got the Nuvare project.
23:21:34 We have the two phases of city place.
23:21:35 And we have got the residences of Kennedy, Grand
23:21:38 Central, the Martin building, and then synergy which
23:21:42 is currently putting in their foundations for their
23:21:44 rental properties.
23:21:45 Here are some perspectives looking at Channelside with
23:21:50 the Double R to the west.
23:21:53 Here we are looking back down Channelside with the
23:21:57 double R again on the west side of the street.
23:21:59 Here we have an elevation of the structure on the

23:22:03 ground floor, which helps to begin to break it down
23:22:06 yet again, with the robotic parking garage, the
23:22:09 connecting amenity deck and then the base of the point
23:22:13 tower which has the offices and retail space.
23:22:16 We have a physical -- don't have a physical model but
23:22:20 we can play the video of the district at the three
23:22:24 dimensional and places the building in and among all
23:22:27 the other structures so let's go ahead and start the
23:22:29 video now.
23:22:45 As we move closer to the project you can see how it
23:22:47 plays in the skyline of Channelside with various -- I
23:22:49 guess I would call it point towers at this point.
23:22:52 Being distributed.
23:22:57 South on various podiums at different heights.
23:22:59 Moving along the backside now around the Novare
23:23:04 building and now seeing the west elevation and here it
23:23:06 becomes pretty apparent which is the robotic parking
23:23:09 component, the amenity deck which provides the amenity
23:23:12 for the motor court and then the point tower.
23:23:14 The administration -- it was placed, the main a
23:23:19 certification was to place on the north and south
23:23:21 faces to help reduce the heat gain on the east faces

23:23:25 which has primarily opening.
23:23:30 We are going to move in closer to the office component
23:23:32 now.
23:23:33 Which is to your -- which is to the right of the
23:23:37 image, where they have the retail space that moves
23:23:39 closer to the motor court, which is in between the
23:23:43 robotic garage.
23:23:44 There's the three-story water feature.
23:23:46 There's been -- spend a little time talking about the
23:23:49 public open space there.
23:23:51 That's the robotic parking garage, to provide major
23:23:54 visual access and engage the public in the technology
23:23:58 behind those windows.
23:23:59 We are going to move up on top now.
23:24:01 Here's the green roof.
23:24:02 We have some data and details on that.
23:24:04 And we are going to fly up around the top.
23:24:09 The building, and the delicate roof feature which is a
23:24:14 gentle curved grill that engages the cooling tower
23:24:18 which will have a screen around it.
23:24:22 And we'll move quickly then back to the east
23:24:29 elevation.

23:24:31 And you will see again in the context of the
23:24:33 Channelside skyline.
23:24:35 And then in the distance.
23:24:38 And that pretty much is the conception.
23:24:45 We will move -- let's move right into the ground plain
23:24:50 and talk a little about components.
23:24:52 Locate you here in the site plan which is an
23:24:55 illustrative site plan, Channelside, Whiting, the
23:24:57 robotic parking garage, and the point tower coming
23:25:01 down onto both enclosed space and columns.
23:25:08 So you can see there's a lot of solid and a lot of
23:25:10 void in these components.
23:25:12 The amenity deck provides a canopy that connects the
23:25:15 two.
23:25:17 Actually, I am going to have Lee Decosta from Wilson
23:25:23 Miller talk about the ground plain amenities.
23:25:26 >>> Leah Decosta, Wilson Miller, and I have been
23:25:30 sworn.
23:25:33 As he just said, start to walk you through some of the
23:25:37 amenities that are around the base of the building.
23:25:41 We have Whiting Street to the north, and Channelside
23:25:43 Drive to the east.

23:25:46 Along Channelside Drive, you will see the strategic
23:25:50 action plan recommendations for the streetscape.
23:25:53 It is enhanced streetscape along the edge of the road,
23:25:59 and then you have pedestrian circulation area that the
23:26:03 minimum width is 10 feet, and certain areas, even
23:26:08 widens out to as much as 25 feet.
23:26:09 So there's ample room for pedestrian circulation along
23:26:11 the side.
23:26:14 Also along Whiting street you can see that the Channel
23:26:16 District plan has been implemented with cobbles along
23:26:22 if edge, at the state -- the concave shape to the
23:26:28 building.
23:26:30 Going to Channelside Drive you can see that there's
23:26:33 quite a few trees along the roadway. This provides
23:26:36 separation between the pedestrian traffic and
23:26:39 vehicular traffic.
23:26:40 But also provides a lot of shade along that edge,
23:26:43 because you will have morning sun and this will
23:26:48 provide canopy for circulation from north to south.
23:26:51 Midway at this point you will notice there's a lot
23:26:55 going on near the center of the building. This is our
23:26:58 pedestrian open space.

23:27:02 Basically, the three components.
23:27:06 You have pedestrian circulation out front with the
23:27:07 wider sidewalks.
23:27:08 And then you have the retail space.
23:27:13 Adjacent to that you have -- this is where the
23:27:19 three-story or 46-foot tall wall is located.
23:27:24 It columns from the amenity deck and cascades down
23:27:27 into a pal at the bottom.
23:27:29 Also notice that there is -- these are the stone
23:27:36 elements, that would be functional and they would
23:27:41 serve as seating areas for the plaza.
23:27:44 Some of them penetrating into the waters.
23:27:46 We think it's quite a dynamic space.
23:27:49 From a vehicular circulation point of view, all the
23:27:51 circulation into the sidewalk or Whiting Street, cars
23:27:56 would enter, come forward and find an empty bay, in
23:27:59 order to be queued into the parking facility.
23:28:02 And as they are leaving, the cars are vacated, placed
23:28:06 back out and exit the facility.
23:28:08 There's also ample room for a car to turn around in
23:28:10 here, drop people off and leave.
23:28:14 There's loading dock spaces located here, has a

23:28:17 separate entrance into the site.
23:28:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The retail feature -- in terms of
23:28:34 the ground level, it's only about maybe a fourth of
23:28:39 the entire periphery.
23:28:42 And the rest of it as I walk around the building, I
23:28:45 know it's going to be beautiful.
23:28:47 A lot of the amenities on the streetscape et cetera.
23:28:50 But other than that, it's not the retail, the open,
23:28:55 active stuff that we have been talking about,
23:28:57 downtown.
23:28:58 And I assume Channelside.
23:29:02 I'm looking at transformers, electrical --
23:29:06 >> But those are all on the alley side of the
23:29:08 building.
23:29:10 On that side of the building there's an alley and this
23:29:12 is really not intended to be a pedestrian access, but
23:29:15 vehicular.
23:29:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But it's not just the alley.
23:29:19 It's Whiting Street, it's half of the Channelside
23:29:22 Drive side.
23:29:26 >> Well, the garage --
23:29:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not talking about the garage.

23:29:30 >>> There's the plaza to this point here which is
23:29:34 retail -- this corn.
23:29:36 Given the configuration of the tower and the function
23:29:38 that is we have in the tower, those mechanical
23:29:41 services need to be placed somewhere.
23:29:44 I mean, you know, we can look at it, we can actually
23:29:48 walk around that building and understand how many
23:29:52 grills and gates and things are needed just for those
23:29:55 kinds of mechanical issues.
23:29:57 So placing the primary interface, the public has with
23:30:01 the structure, and this location given that
23:30:02 Channelside is probably primary versus -- and there's
23:30:07 an interest in charging Channelside and engaging the
23:30:11 public on Channelside with the intent of locating the
23:30:17 primary face.
23:30:20 >> Maybe we are missing each other.
23:30:22 I am not being critical of where you put the retail.
23:30:24 I think it's fine, it's great.
23:30:27 >>> Oh, you are suggesting another way.
23:30:30 >> And I'm not saying you have to don't have to put
23:30:33 pump rooms and transformers somewhere.
23:30:36 I'm just not sure the street level -- that's

23:30:38 traditionally what downtown did.
23:30:40 And they put it at the street level and you walk by it
23:30:43 and saw grills and things like that.
23:30:46 I thought we were trying to get a little further than
23:30:48 that.
23:30:48 I'm not saying you have to do the whole ground floor.
23:30:51 It just seems a little bit more.
23:30:52 We had this discussion about two months ago on a
23:30:57 building on the north end of downtown.
23:30:59 And part of the reason they said was, well, at this
23:31:02 point in time retail is not very viable, you know,
23:31:06 yada yada yada.
23:31:07 So we said we contained of made it like an optional
23:31:10 space.
23:31:11 The transformer is a little harder to be optional.
23:31:14 It's not like you are going to move them later.
23:31:22 >> To just elaborate.
23:31:23 It doesn't have to be just retail.
23:31:25 It has to have something interesting so when you walk
23:31:28 by you don't think, you know, it's dead.
23:31:32 And maybe there's some exterior treatment that's not
23:31:35 obvious looking at the plan.

23:31:39 >>> Maybe we can relook at that, the he will vases and
23:31:42 maybe open that topic up again.
23:31:43 >> Like on the Whiting side.
23:31:45 But the Channelside side looks really great.
23:31:49 >>> That's a pretty narrow street portion of the
23:31:51 building, though, on Channelside -- I mean on Whiting.
23:31:54 I mean, we have got a pretty tight elevation.
23:31:59 We could move those elevations but that's kind of at
23:32:03 the end.
23:32:04 Do you want me to pull that out of order?
23:32:07 >> No, just point it out when we get there.
23:32:09 >> Quickly moving through the balance of the -- the
23:32:15 second floor is entirely office.
23:32:16 It's a tall space.
23:32:18 And then the third floor is the deck we talked about
23:32:22 with the pool.
23:32:23 And fitness, club room, and then recreation area to
23:32:29 the north.
23:32:29 And then the point tower is essentially a 6,000 square
23:32:33 foot piece.
23:32:36 There are four units per floor.
23:32:38 Again with a major on the north and south sides and

23:32:44 here you can see the extent. Gren roof being much
23:32:47 larger than the footprint of the point tower.
23:32:49 If we move on to the robotic parking garage, we would
23:32:55 like to first show the parking garage to understand
23:33:01 more about the technology of the parking garage.
23:33:02 If we could roll that now.
23:33:05 >> In this day and age how about a robotic parking
23:33:10 garage?
23:33:10 >> There are those in Europe that does reports on what
23:33:13 might be a first of its kind right here in the U.S.
23:33:16 >> It puts a whole new spin on parking.
23:33:19 It could put the wrap on car owners worst parking
23:33:24 nature mayor.
23:33:27 >> Scratched.
23:33:30 Breathed on wrong.
23:33:31 At this garage there's no one in the driver's seat.
23:33:34 >> Absolutely robotic.
23:33:36 >> President of robotic parking, the company's first
23:33:39 fully automated garage is now open in HOBOKEN, New
23:33:45 Jersey.
23:33:45 If you drive off your car is read and a Dar opened,
23:33:49 pull onto a platform, the driver exits, and this the

23:33:56 car is pulled, and maneuvered into a space.
23:33:59 There are seven levels.
23:34:07 >> Pick up your car, punch in your pin in, a minute or
23:34:11 two you are told in what bay it will appear.
23:34:13 Many cars fit into the same amount of space because
23:34:15 there's no read for ramps offer space to open doors
23:34:18 between cars.
23:34:20 A single operator can handle the 312 car lot, as
23:34:24 vehicles move, they are tracked on a computer like a
23:34:27 video game.
23:34:28 Since no one goes inside you don't have to worry about
23:34:30 the typical kind of case where you are walking around
23:34:32 alone in a dark garage.
23:34:34 >> Leave the doors unlocked, I don't worry about it.
23:34:40 >> A blue sedan waltzing to the Blue Danube.
23:34:48 CNN.
23:34:52 >>> So some quick facts about the parking garage.
23:34:55 I am going to go through this really quickly.
23:34:56 This is an illustration to help you understand that
23:34:59 the parking garage we are proposing is 100 feet by 100
23:35:02 feet.
23:35:03 To park the same amount of cars, 265 cars, and this

23:35:09 parking structure is 52 feet to its roof.
23:35:13 To park the same amount of cars in a traditional
23:35:17 poured-in-place structure would be 100, approximately
23:35:21 250 feet and 7 stories tall, or 77 feet in height.
23:35:25 Here is a graphic that is a dimensional graphic
23:35:29 showing you the difference between those two
23:35:31 proportions.
23:35:34 I'm actually going to let Rhea talk about the green
23:35:38 roof component on top of the robotic.
23:35:42 Here's some other shots of that.
23:35:44 Yes, we can talk about actually the elevation on
23:35:46 Channelside as we get to the corner of Whiting.
23:35:49 And there's some images that I think will help with
23:35:51 that a little more.
23:35:52 But why don't you talk about that?
23:35:59 >>> We have the green roof located on top of the
23:36:01 parking garage.
23:36:02 What we trade to do is configure an interest in not
23:36:06 only in having green space but also looking at what we
23:36:08 could do with the form to make it more interesting.
23:36:11 You can see from the graphic, you can start to see
23:36:13 some undulations occurring.

23:36:16 How this would be accomplished would be through the
23:36:18 green roof layering system where you would have
23:36:20 waterproofing that would come down, first onto the
23:36:24 roof, and then build up the structure in some
23:36:25 undulating form and also would hide some of the
23:36:31 mechanical equipment would you normally see on top of
23:36:33 the structure.
23:36:33 That can be hidden in the undulations performed.
23:36:38 On top of this would be soil, and six to eight inches
23:36:41 of soil and different native plantings would occur on
23:36:44 top of that.
23:36:45 You can see from this top view, this would be what you
23:36:49 would see if you are looking for the higher levels on
23:36:52 Victory Lofts so it's a lot more pleasant than looking
23:36:55 at the top of a regular parking garage structure.
23:36:57 So it's much more pleasing view.
23:36:59 And this is looking from a helicopter, I guess,,
23:37:06 parking is located here.
23:37:07 You can see again, it's very pleasing type of --
23:37:15 pleasing to the eye.
23:37:16 Sorry.
23:37:16 Some of the benefits of this is, it's reducing the

23:37:22 urban effect you get in the neighborhood where you
23:37:24 have a lot of hard spaces gaining heat.
23:37:29 It reduces that.
23:37:30 It also helps with the air quality in the
23:37:32 neighborhood.
23:37:33 Actually, you could give enough oxygen to about 600
23:37:39 people for a year just by planting this on the roof so
23:37:45 it's significant.
23:37:46 Stormwater quality, in the summer, it actually retains
23:37:49 70 to 90% of the stormwater that falls on it.
23:37:53 Any excess water would then be filtered prior to
23:37:56 entering into the stormwater system.
23:37:58 So you are having better water quality that's coming
23:38:00 out of this.
23:38:02 And the last thing, one of the things that I thought
23:38:04 was kind of interesting but I hadn't thought about was
23:38:07 it actually provides areas for birds to nest and it
23:38:14 provides that separate level of interaction with the
23:38:17 environment.
23:38:23 >> Mr. Stoltenberg?
23:38:25 >>> Ken Stoltenberg, 1,000 channel said drive.
23:38:28 I believe my associates have done a very capable job

23:38:31 of explaining the project and what we are doing. This
23:38:33 is our third collaboration, with Wilson Miller.
23:38:37 We have been down here in the Channel District for
23:38:39 quite some time.
23:38:40 I know it's late.
23:38:41 If you have any questions, I'm here to answer them.
23:38:44 This is a neat building.
23:38:46 There's a lot of neat stuff.
23:38:48 I will address, Mr. Dingfelder, your question on the
23:38:51 retail.
23:38:52 We originally did have a space right on the corner
23:38:54 where you suggest that we have one.
23:38:56 The reason we don't right now is because we made
23:39:00 compromises with the folks from solid waste, the area
23:39:04 where we had the dumpster expanded greatly.
23:39:06 So that was out of deference to staff.
23:39:09 So I believe in retail.
23:39:15 So I would like to readdress that because I don't
23:39:17 think we should have a blind corner there either.
23:39:19 We did that not to have an objection from staff.
23:39:22 That was the only reason.
23:39:23 >> But just for a moment, this is that corner.

23:39:28 The thought is that even though we are working with
23:39:34 mechanical services, the big articulation and color
23:39:38 patterns certainly wouldn't be interrupted by that.
23:39:40 So I was just looking for this graphic.
23:39:43 I found it.
23:39:48 >> Any other questions I would be happy to answer.
23:39:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm just wondering -- I know that
23:39:54 it says the transformers, et cetera, the drawings have
23:39:58 that contained of detail.
23:39:59 Does it give you the option to keep working on that?
23:40:02 I don't know.
23:40:04 >>> I will pledge to keep working on that, sir.
23:40:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And then the other question I have,
23:40:09 if I could, Phil, one or the other -- and thank you,
23:40:18 Ken.
23:40:19 On the bonus calculations, giving a pretty hefty bonus
23:40:29 for the robotic garage to the tune of I don't know
23:40:34 exactly calculation, $500,000, 25% of the bonus
23:40:39 calculation.
23:40:40 And I'm -- I don't think we ever talked about robotic
23:40:45 garages when we talked about the different types of
23:40:47 things.

23:40:47 But we want to be flexible.
23:40:49 But why do we feel a robotic garage is something that
23:40:54 serves F.A.R. bonus?
23:40:57 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I'm the CRA manager for the Channel
23:41:00 District.
23:41:01 I did review the bonus density values associated with
23:41:04 this.
23:41:06 In regards to the robotic garage, I actually did pose
23:41:12 that question back to zoning, because just as you
23:41:16 said, it had not been discussed.
23:41:18 There's no specific reference or anything to it in
23:41:21 terms of the Channel District plan.
23:41:24 And I did raise the question that as they consider it,
23:41:28 as they look at it to allow it to contribute value for
23:41:31 the bonus density, there needs to be a justification
23:41:37 in their minds as to why a robotic system would
23:41:39 support that.
23:41:40 So I have to kind ever beg off that because I didn't
23:41:43 feel I understood what robotics, a robotic garage,
23:41:48 would contribute to the environment of the Channel
23:41:50 District to determine value.
23:41:54 So I can't answer that peace of it.

23:41:56 That was one I did refer back to the zoning people.
23:42:00 >> The representative of zoning, do you want to pinch
23:42:04 hit?
23:42:05 >>> Yes, sir.
23:42:06 That's actually part of their lead certification
23:42:08 process.
23:42:08 And it comes under the 140,000 that Mr. Stoltenberg
23:42:15 can address the proposal that he provided to us and
23:42:18 the calculations.
23:42:19 He's not using all of the value that he's presented to
23:42:23 us.
23:42:24 And I think Mr. Stoltenberg can address that.
23:42:29 >>> I think the values and calculations have been
23:42:31 provided for you are an attempt to show you a way of
23:42:36 calculating it but as you know we haven't adopted the
23:42:38 calculations part of the code, or just pending.
23:42:43 So I understand that when Cathy was looking at these
23:42:46 issues that is one of the things that she looked at.
23:42:59 >> I would say that the robotic parking garage is one
23:43:02 of the most significant features about the building.
23:43:05 And the reason that we decided to go with it was in
23:43:08 deference to the neighbors.

23:43:09 It was the only way we could keep the vast majority of
23:43:12 the structure over 80% of it under 50 feet.
23:43:16 When we met with people from the Victory Lofts and
23:43:18 surrounding owners, that they wanted to still see the
23:43:24 cruise ships.
23:43:25 I looked at a credit with Kathy of about $1800 per
23:43:28 space.
23:43:29 That's about 6.8% of the actual cost to build the
23:43:33 structure.
23:43:34 I think it's important that someone does this because
23:43:36 if we are trying to do, for example, a mass transit
23:43:39 system you are not going to be able to put a
23:43:40 conventional garage in Soho or Palma Ceia or a lot of
23:43:44 other areas and you could put something like this
23:43:45 there that I think would work.
23:43:47 The other thing that this garage will do, and I
23:43:50 originally tried, Mr. Schulz alluded to it, was to
23:43:53 have a portion of the parking during the day be
23:43:59 allowed for daily fee usage.
23:44:01 Parking -- and I met with all the business owners down
23:44:04 there. I lived there.
23:44:05 Parking during the day is a huge issue down there for

23:44:07 the business owners.
23:44:09 A lot of other uses in, say, 1000 Channelside,
23:44:15 Meridian and Victory Loft were based on one space per
23:44:18 thousand.
23:44:19 That's nowhere near enough parking and I have been
23:44:21 doing retail for over 20 years.
23:44:23 What this will do very effectively, it will allow the
23:44:27 condominium association, when they take over, to enter
23:44:31 into arrangements with specific shop owners, if they
23:44:35 choose to, to use that parking on a daily fee basis.
23:44:38 I'm not forcing the