Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 28, 2007
5:00 P.M. SESSION

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

>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
05:01:46 In the absence of Mr. John Dingfelder, I'm going to
05:01:49 introduce his guest for the invocation.
05:01:52 He is Thomas Peret, an 18-year-old student at Plant
05:01:55 High School.
05:01:56 He has a grade point average of 5.2.
05:01:58 He is the football punter and place kicker of the
05:02:02 state championship team, Delphi Service Club, two-year
05:02:05 letterman in football.
05:02:06 Four-year letterman in soccer and track.
05:02:09 He attended boy's state learning about local
05:02:14 government and he will be attending North State

05:02:15 University of South Dakota in the fall.
05:02:19 Would you please stand and remain standing for the
05:02:21 Pledge of Allegiance?
05:02:25 >> Let us pray.
05:02:26 From the power of our memory in history, with high
05:02:28 hopes for the days that lie ahead, we gather to craft
05:02:32 the destiny we share with one another.
05:02:34 We gather with faith in the practice of democracy.
05:02:37 We gather with hearts and minds open to the wisdom in
05:02:40 every voice among us.
05:02:42 In our gathering, may we dream and design a bold
05:02:45 future, may we bring our best selves to this service,
05:02:48 and may we dream these dreams and do this work with
05:02:51 love.
05:02:52 Amen.
05:02:52 [Pledge of Allegiance]
05:03:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Peret.
05:03:10 Roll call.
05:03:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
05:03:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
05:03:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
05:03:22 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Here.

05:03:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
05:03:24 We need to open item number one.
05:03:27 We have a motion and second.
05:03:28 All in favor, aye.
05:03:29 [Motion Carried]
05:03:30 >> Michele Ogilvie, Planning Commission staff.
05:03:32 You will hear five amendments that the City Council
05:03:36 needs to make a decision on tonight, whether to
05:03:40 transmit to the Department of Community Affairs or
05:03:43 not.
05:03:43 And then there's a final item that will need a
05:03:46 supermajority to be approved, which is your agenda
05:03:51 item number 6.
05:03:53 Plan amendment 06-31 is a request to amend the future
05:04:04 land use element of the Tampa comprehensive plan to
05:04:09 designate Bayshore Boulevard, a scenic corridor, as
05:04:13 well as a regional attractor with policies in the
05:04:17 comprehensive plan that will address the public realm
05:04:21 as well as proposed language that will consider Land
05:04:26 Development regulation development for the edges of
05:04:30 this roadway.
05:04:33 And these are the parcels that will be affected along

05:04:36 the roadway in this amendment.
05:04:40 Bayshore Boulevard has played an integral part in the
05:04:45 history of Tampa, from its early origins at the
05:04:52 Spanish town creek, which is around the Brorein street
05:04:56 area in which Cuban fishermen came to Tampa to make --
05:05:00 to find prosperity in the 1891, the Chapins arrived in
05:05:06 Tampa and established the consumer light and streetcar
05:05:12 which allowed Ms. Chapin to travel from Gandy into
05:05:15 downtown Tampa and back and other travelers also came
05:05:19 along for the ride.
05:05:20 And that streetcar established was the prerunner to
05:05:26 the Tampa Electric Company.
05:05:29 That streetcar also connected downtown Tampa to Port
05:05:33 Tampa City and many of the immigrants that came to
05:05:37 Tampa at the turn of the 20th century came on that
05:05:41 streetcar into Ybor City.
05:05:43 Of great importance in recognizing this roadway as a
05:05:53 regional attractor as well as a scenic corridor is the
05:05:58 fact that around 1912, when the shoreline was hardened
05:06:04 by A.R. swan and Eugene Holtzinger who were
05:06:10 instrumental in platting what is now called new suburb
05:06:12 beautiful, they left that part of the shoreline open

05:06:16 for us to enjoy.
05:06:18 This amendment now jumps back -- well, it jumps almost
05:06:22 a hundred years forward and is now asking us to
05:06:25 recommend to you a finding of consistency with the
05:06:29 comprehensive plan to designate this roadway a scenic
05:06:33 corridor and a regional attractor.
05:06:35 The Planning Commission on Monday night held its
05:06:38 public hearing, and after public testimony did find
05:06:42 the request to be consistent with the comprehensive
05:06:44 plan and forward that recommendation to the Tampa City
05:06:48 Council.
05:06:56 >> Good evening, Council.
05:06:57 Abbye Feeley, Land Development Coordination.
05:06:59 The proposed plan amendments before you tonight
05:07:02 related to Bayshore are the result of a request made
05:07:05 by City Council and the administration concerning the
05:07:11 future of Bayshore Boulevard.
05:07:12 As Michelle said, and she gave a great history of the
05:07:16 Bayshore, it was before the Planning Commission on
05:07:18 Monday night.
05:07:18 They did vote to approve the policies, and they found
05:07:21 them consistent with the comprehensive plan.

05:07:22 I prepared a short presentation tonight, just a few
05:07:27 slides, to give an overview of what we are proposing.
05:07:30 The purpose of the policies that are being presented
05:07:36 is to formally elevate the status of Bayshore
05:07:40 Boulevard from a minor arterial collector roadway to a
05:07:45 significant community asset.
05:07:47 Also to guide new development and redevelopment in a
05:07:49 manner that will preserve and enhance the aesthetic
05:07:52 appearance of Bayshore Boulevard and the character of
05:07:55 adjacent properties.
05:07:56 Bayshore was actually identified in the original
05:07:59 comprehensive plan back in 1985 as a potential scenic
05:08:03 corridor but was never designated.
05:08:05 The only designated scenic corridor today in the
05:08:08 comprehensive plan is the Courtney Campbell Causeway.
05:08:11 These policies will formally designate the corridor
05:08:17 and change the status of the roadway.
05:08:20 Here's just a historical picture.
05:08:22 This is from late 1950s, early 1960s.
05:08:26 Bayshore has gained recognition.
05:08:35 There have been many studies.
05:08:37 We identified these studies in our research to propose

05:08:39 the policies we're proposing tonight.
05:08:42 We're referring to it as the emerald jewel of the
05:08:45 city.
05:08:46 It was previously studied by the Planning Commission
05:08:47 in 1960, and that is also in the introduction to our
05:08:50 plan amendments at a time when it said that the
05:08:55 function of Bayshore should be treated cautiously in
05:08:58 its urban form.
05:09:00 It was again studied more recently through the Mayor's
05:09:03 Bayshore task force in 2004.
05:09:08 Here's another picture of the balustrade.
05:09:11 This was done, I believe, as part of the
05:09:14 reconstruction, the Freedman administration, the
05:09:20 improvements.
05:09:20 The proposed policies and objectives, one will be to
05:09:25 change the existing regional corridor language that
05:09:28 currently states single ownership to remove that part
05:09:34 of the policy and that part of the definition and to
05:09:37 designate Bayshore Boulevard as a regional attractor.
05:09:40 There are several policies that we're listing under
05:09:45 the regional attractor.
05:09:46 They both affect the private property and the public

05:09:50 realm.
05:09:50 The private property would be the consideration of
05:09:52 potential Land Development regulations which at this
05:09:54 time have not been developed.
05:09:56 It just allows us to study further and consider that
05:09:59 as an option.
05:10:00 The other, as identified, talk about promotion of
05:10:04 pedestrian connectivity, the improvement of pedestrian
05:10:07 safety, increases in public art and the integration of
05:10:11 way finder signage program.
05:10:12 I believe that this morning you heard from Roy
05:10:16 LaMotte in transportation in relation to an RFQ that
05:10:20 is out on the Bayshore right now for improvements and
05:10:23 a master plan out in that area per F.D.O.T. grant.
05:10:27 There are public investments that the city is
05:10:29 currently working on that would couple with this
05:10:32 designation.
05:10:33 The second objective is the scenic corridor
05:10:39 designation.
05:10:39 That, again, as previously discussed will now
05:10:42 designate Bayshore Boulevard as not just a roadway but
05:10:46 as a scenic corridor within our community.

05:10:48 There's a more recent picture of Bayshore.
05:10:54 Lastly, here are some elements of consistency with the
05:10:57 comprehensive plan.
05:10:58 The policies and objectives we're proposing tonight
05:11:03 are planning for and preserving Tampa's urban form,
05:11:06 promoting community appearance, consideration,
05:11:08 preserving public access and open space, protecting
05:11:11 citizens and visitors, providing for improvements of
05:11:14 facilities and programming, and prescribing to the
05:11:18 principles of a livable city, which is what the
05:11:20 Planning Commission has identified through the
05:11:22 comprehensive plan update and the evaluation and
05:11:25 appraisal report as the future for Tampa.
05:11:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public want to
05:11:45 speak on item number 1?
05:12:06 >> Good evening.
05:12:07 My name is Vicky Pollyea.
05:12:09 1311 south Moody Avenue.
05:12:11 I feel like I've been before you all now since 2004
05:12:14 talking about Bayshore.
05:12:16 I'm not going to wax poetic because I've done that
05:12:20 already, and there are other people that can do that

05:12:23 better than I can.
05:12:24 I will give you a copy of the recent guest column that
05:12:26 the city news published that I wrote about Bayshore
05:12:29 and what I think about it.
05:12:30 At the Planning Commission Monday night, one of the
05:12:33 commissioners commented that Bayshore really doesn't
05:12:36 need to be protected from what, was the question to
05:12:40 us.
05:12:40 He waxed poetic about how wonderful it was now, but I
05:12:43 can tell you that as somebody who has attended many
05:12:48 meetings and worked very hard on this roadways, park
05:12:53 corridor, there are a lot of things threatening it.
05:12:55 The balustrades that they spent millions of dollars to
05:13:00 renovate has no money allocated in any budget to
05:13:03 maintain it.
05:13:04 We heard about the bumpy road recently at a meeting
05:13:08 before you all.
05:13:09 That is because it's by the water.
05:13:11 It's cement slabs.
05:13:13 There's undercurrents of water.
05:13:16 Cement slabs get uneven.
05:13:18 It's not a simple road to maintain.

05:13:21 That's why it was built in the 1920s.
05:13:24 That's why we need this special status for it.
05:13:27 Just little things.
05:13:32 Someone mentioned about it being the traffic.
05:13:35 And the traffic is a big issue, and we do need to make
05:13:38 it better for pedestrians.
05:13:39 I went to the Crosstown expressway on my own Monday,
05:13:43 and asked them to change the sign on Gandy Boulevard
05:13:47 to the crosstown.
05:13:48 I can show you what it says right now.
05:13:50 Right now it says to Tampa and Brandon when you're on
05:13:54 Gandy and Dale Mabry, which doesn't make any sense to
05:13:57 me.
05:13:57 Sorry about the quality of that picture.
05:14:00 But what we asked them to do was change it with the
05:14:03 D.O.T. funded Gandy improvements and say direct route
05:14:06 to downtown entertainment district, Ybor City and
05:14:10 Brandon.
05:14:10 Let's get the roads off of Bayshore, get them on the
05:14:14 crosstown.
05:14:14 That section is underutilized.
05:14:17 Make the expressway some money.

05:14:19 Make it safer.
05:14:20 Make it more park-like.
05:14:22 Bayshore does deserve protection.
05:14:24 The other thing I just want to comment on about is the
05:14:27 concept of the overlay.
05:14:29 An overlay is a higher design standard.
05:14:33 And so far, almost every one -- almost everyone that's
05:14:37 built on Bayshore has done it the right way.
05:14:39 That's why the average setback is 65 feet, not 25 feet
05:14:43 the city requirement.
05:14:44 But we're relying on people to do it the right way.
05:14:47 And I've seen that people don't always do it the right
05:14:51 way.
05:14:51 We found out that somebody could put a pole sign on
05:14:54 Bayshore and we couldn't stop that.
05:14:56 Let's take the measures now to protect it.
05:15:00 Things about height and size, that's determined by
05:15:02 zoning, not by land use and design standards.
05:15:05 We're not talking about zoning.
05:15:07 We're talking about the future of Bayshore,
05:15:10 maintaining it, protecting it as a scenic corridor, as
05:15:13 a regional attractor, and looking at the design

05:15:17 standards and possibly in the future making it so that
05:15:20 we can maintain the setbacks and the greenery and the
05:15:23 things that we've all come to appreciate, all the
05:15:25 citizens of Tampa, the people that live on there, and
05:15:29 the people that go there every day for all different
05:15:32 reasons.
05:15:32 I really encourage you to support this, and I thank
05:15:35 you for your time.
05:15:36 I would love not to talk about Bayshore anymore.
05:15:42 Thank you.
05:15:46 >> Good evening.
05:15:46 For the record, my name is Sue Murphy.
05:15:48 P and M consulting, 501 west Euclid Avenue.
05:15:52 I'm here on behalf of the Whiteside family who are the
05:15:55 owners of the colonnade.
05:15:56 We've been attending these meetings, going to
05:15:58 community meetings.
05:16:00 We don't have a problem with making it a regional
05:16:02 attractor.
05:16:03 I would like to put that on the record.
05:16:05 However, I believe, as does my client, that making it
05:16:08 a regional attractor is putting the onus more on the

05:16:12 public sector than the private sector.
05:16:14 If you want to attract more people down to Bayshore, I
05:16:17 firmly believe you need to make it safer for the
05:16:19 pedestrians.
05:16:20 It's very dangerous to get onto Bayshore Boulevard.
05:16:23 You have to cross fast-moving traffic, several lanes.
05:16:26 Very few places to safely cross.
05:16:28 If you want to attract more people, I think the city
05:16:31 has to take that responsibility.
05:16:33 Our issues are going to come up if and when the city
05:16:37 decides to change any of our existing zoning
05:16:39 entitlement rights.
05:16:40 The colonnade is known for the exact same uses as the
05:16:44 regency next door.
05:16:45 And most of the other uses along the high-rise area of
05:16:48 Bayshore.
05:16:48 They are not going to be asking for any special
05:16:50 exceptions or height variances or anything like that,
05:16:53 but they are asking that when this is all said and
05:16:55 done and the Land Development code is revised to
05:16:58 accommodate this, that they are going to be able to
05:17:00 build exactly what they could build today under the

05:17:03 Land Development -- under the zoning district.
05:17:05 And that includes setbacks in the height.
05:17:07 It includes the landscaping requirements, everything
05:17:10 else.
05:17:10 We're not asking for favors.
05:17:12 We're just asking to preserve their property right.
05:17:14 And with that, I will be quiet.
05:17:16 But I would suggest that that was the tone of a lot of
05:17:21 these community meetings.
05:17:22 There were a lot of people in support of the private
05:17:24 property rights.
05:17:25 Ms. Saul-Sena was there.
05:17:26 I don't think I'm speaking out of turn.
05:17:28 There may be a difference when you come to the Land
05:17:29 Development code between the historic district and the
05:17:32 rest of the code and the rest of the Bayshore.
05:17:34 And that may be appropriate because of the higher
05:17:37 standard in the historic district.
05:17:39 And also, I think, you know, there's a point to be
05:17:42 made in the private sector side about signage.
05:17:44 This is primarily residential with the exclusion of
05:17:47 the colonnade.

05:17:47 And if they leave, it will be entirely residential.
05:17:50 And I think lower signage, monument signage probably
05:17:53 is more appropriate for there.
05:17:55 But the rest of it I believe belongs on the public
05:17:57 sector side of the table.
05:18:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:18:09 >> Good evening.
05:18:09 My name is Lori Ann Burton.
05:18:11 I live at 3603 Waverly court.
05:18:16 I've listened to a lot of the workshops as well, and
05:18:19 there does seem to be a lot of question about the
05:18:22 zoning.
05:18:22 I do realize that tonight is not about zoning overlay.
05:18:26 But I do want to show you some pictures of where I
05:18:28 live and make sure that you understand that protecting
05:18:32 Bayshore includes the streets and the immediate
05:18:38 surroundings, because when people start developing or
05:18:42 building on Bayshore, it doesn't just stay on
05:18:44 Bayshore, it comes back into the neighborhood.
05:18:47 This is a picture of the corner of Bayshore and
05:19:00 Waverly court.
05:19:01 It's a very nice single-family home.

05:19:03 And now that we have a new building across the street,
05:19:05 it looks at the edge of that new building.
05:19:09 The house next door, single-family.
05:19:14 It looks at the entrance to the garage.
05:19:18 One more down, another single-family home looks into
05:19:25 the exit of the garage.
05:19:26 So all the headlights coming out come into the front
05:19:29 window.
05:19:31 This is the fourth house down, and they have the
05:19:34 privilege of looking at the dumpster and garage which
05:19:38 looks like a jail.
05:19:39 My only purpose is to remind you as you look at
05:19:44 overlays and future of land use and future zoning,
05:19:48 that it does extend further than just the Bayshore
05:19:50 Boulevard.
05:19:51 And while I understand that those residents do have
05:19:53 certain property rights that they want to maintain,
05:19:56 the neighbors that live within 200 feet of Bayshore
05:19:59 also have property rights to purchase single-family
05:20:03 homes in single-family neighborhoods that they would
05:20:04 like to maintain.
05:20:05 Thank you.

05:20:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So to clarify, do you think that
05:20:09 the overlay is a good thing?
05:20:12 >> Yes.
05:20:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
05:20:18 >> You said item one, my name is Jim Crosby.
05:20:21 And I reside at 2916 west Harborview.
05:20:24 I'm one of the properties that my porte-cochere would
05:20:30 be within the 250 feet designated as adjacent
05:20:37 inclusion.
05:20:38 But I have been before this commission, and I was at
05:20:47 the commission last Tuesday night, and I got a
05:20:51 response from John Dingfelder when I wrote him that
05:20:56 said, it has always been our intent to address only
05:20:59 the homes and properties that actually face Bayshore.
05:21:02 Staff took a wider brush at first, but we told them
05:21:05 that we were not going up into the neighborhoods with
05:21:08 any of this.
05:21:09 We only want to try to protect the unique attributes
05:21:13 of Bayshore itself.
05:21:15 I slept well when I received that, however, I attended
05:21:20 the June 7th meeting here, and John mentioned the
05:21:26 fact that maybe we should do away with the western

05:21:29 boundary all together and plan for future development.
05:21:34 Well, the meeting last Tuesday night assured me once
05:21:37 again that we're not going to -- the intention was not
05:21:40 going to go into adjacent properties.
05:21:46 And that's what worries me, because coming into --
05:21:50 point two, it says, roadways that function as
05:21:53 connectors or linkages to the scenic system --
05:21:56 corridor system are also considered for the
05:22:00 designation even though their present characteristics
05:22:03 would not normally warrant the designation.
05:22:05 This will help to unify and connect different
05:22:09 neighborhoods in the city with attractive boulevards,
05:22:12 improving and enhancing the areas through which they
05:22:15 pass.
05:22:16 And I'll use the hypothetical approach, how would
05:22:21 leaving this clause intact in the comprehensive plan,
05:22:26 which will go on to Tallahassee, how will it not
05:22:29 affect my property at 2916 Harborview if this clause
05:22:34 is allowed to remain in here?
05:22:36 This very specifically indicates that mine is not
05:22:41 within the realm of designation now, but even though
05:22:45 it would be considered.

05:22:46 And I think this is what's going to be put together
05:22:49 for you to make your decision on this evening.
05:22:54 And believe me, I'm a native Floridian.
05:22:58 I've lived here 73 years with the exception of my two
05:23:01 years military service and six years reserve in the
05:23:04 United States army, I'm aware of regulations which
05:23:11 prohibit development, that affect health and welfare
05:23:15 of human beings, not so much where the tail wags the
05:23:21 dog when it comes to aesthetics to take over property
05:23:25 rights to accomplish anesthetic purpose.
05:23:29 Because I've already mentioned there are elderly
05:23:31 people that are included among this cast net of
05:23:35 designation that all of a sudden are placed in a
05:23:38 position where they are in an inordinate burden.
05:23:43 Bert J. Harris act of '95 I think protects us from
05:23:48 that.
05:23:48 Also, I might mention the fact -- I know the whistle.
05:23:51 I know it well.
05:23:52 [ LAUGHTER ]
05:24:01 >> Good evening, Council.
05:24:02 I'm Jim growl.
05:24:03 I reside at 3301 Bayshore.

05:24:06 I'm generally for the other resolution.
05:24:11 But there's one aspect of it that concerns me that I
05:24:14 would like to draw to your attention.
05:24:15 As you heard one speaker tonight, there's two pieces.
05:24:19 There's the private property side, the western
05:24:21 boundary and then there's the public side, which is
05:24:23 the roadway itself, the islands the sidewalk.
05:24:29 Councilman Dingfelder we're lucky to have you in
05:24:31 district four.
05:24:32 A year ago he was talking about, maybe there should be
05:24:34 a higher standard when the administration is doing
05:24:37 something on the public side.
05:24:39 It should go all the way to the Mayor before something
05:24:41 can be done to Bayshore.
05:24:43 I know John attended all the public workshops,
05:24:49 expressed that same sentiment.
05:24:51 A lot of citizens like myself express that same
05:24:54 sentiment.
05:24:54 We have to protect both sides of Bayshore, not just
05:24:57 the western boundary.
05:24:58 If the public side isn't going to be protected as
05:25:01 well, then this resolution is really incomplete.

05:25:06 And to be honest, I think part of the opposition that
05:25:08 you're hearing is that people are saying, this is a
05:25:12 case of government saying do as I say, not as I do.
05:25:17 It is the city and the county that really control the
05:25:21 most visible important portion of Bayshore, and that
05:25:24 needs to be protected, and we've been talking about
05:25:28 this for a year and that language is not incorporated
05:25:31 into this resolution.
05:25:32 At the workshop here, June 7th, John offered some
05:25:35 specific language that is not incorporated into the
05:25:41 resolution.
05:25:41 We're not talking about some wild hypotheticals, you
05:25:46 know, could something happen?
05:25:47 We've had two examples in the last year where the city
05:25:50 was not a very good steward of its public property
05:25:54 along Bayshore.
05:25:55 So I would urge the Council to please listen to the
05:25:59 citizens.
05:26:00 Councilman Dingfelder, and make sure that there's
05:26:03 language incorporated in there that emphasizes the
05:26:05 need for the city to make special efforts to improve
05:26:08 the roadway, to monitor municipal construction and

05:26:13 development along the islands and the sidewalks, and
05:26:17 also to pursue the ideas that -- alternative that will
05:26:20 get traffic off of Bayshore.
05:26:22 If this is worth doing, it's worth doing correctly.
05:26:26 Please do the right thing and protect both sides of
05:26:30 Bayshore.
05:26:31 The private side and the public side.
05:26:33 Thank you.
05:26:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:26:40 >> Good evening.
05:26:41 William Robinson, 3014 West Palmeira Avenue, Suite
05:26:46 300.
05:26:47 Regional attractor -- or Bayshore as a regional
05:26:51 attractor may be a good idea.
05:26:53 But we really don't know.
05:26:54 And I've attended all the workshops.
05:26:56 I attended the workshop here at Council and the
05:27:01 neighborhood workshops, and what we have here is we've
05:27:04 been given the adjective.
05:27:06 What kind of street is Bayshore?
05:27:08 It's being designated as a regional attractor, as a
05:27:12 scenic corridor.

05:27:13 But we're not given the adverb.
05:27:16 And that is, how is the designation to be implemented?
05:27:19 If you look at the executive summary, it says the
05:27:24 amendment states that the city's intent is to preserve
05:27:27 and enhance the public realm along Bayshore Boulevard.
05:27:31 If you look at the purpose of the plan amendment
05:27:34 request, it states the same language, that the city's
05:27:39 intent is to preserve and enhance the public realm
05:27:42 along Bayshore Boulevard.
05:27:43 But as soon as you get into the policies, policy
05:27:47 A-2.1A right out of the box, it says consider --
05:27:54 considered but not limited to building setbacks and
05:27:57 height, site landscape, buffers, and streetscape on
05:28:00 the western boundary of the corridor.
05:28:03 The western boundary of the corridor is in private
05:28:06 hands.
05:28:06 So at the outset, we talk about in the public realm,
05:28:12 but the first inkling of any policy implementation is
05:28:17 in the -- is in the private realm.
05:28:21 So I have a little problem.
05:28:23 I don't think at this juncture that the LDC, Land
05:28:28 Development Coordination or the Planning Commission

05:28:31 has been forth right with the public in that they
05:28:35 haven't told us how this designation is going to be
05:28:40 implemented.
05:28:41 What we hear is there's a possibility of an overlay
05:28:44 coming.
05:28:45 This is just step one.
05:28:46 Step two, now that we've got it -- it's a regional
05:28:52 attractor.
05:28:53 It's scenic corridor, now we're going to create an
05:28:56 overlay.
05:28:57 Well, when you start reading overlay language, it's
05:28:59 very onerous on property owners and any conflicts go
05:29:04 to the overlay.
05:29:05 I have one question I would like to get on the record
05:29:10 to Ms. Feeley, please, and that any application to any
05:29:16 city department including but not limited to any site
05:29:19 plan review, any building permit, any certificate of
05:29:23 appropriateness or any rezoning will be reviewed
05:29:26 pursuant to those codes and ordinances and regulations
05:29:30 in effect as of the date of the submission.
05:29:33 Overlays, attractors, notwithstanding.
05:29:36 I would like to get an answer to that so that we have

05:29:42 a surety that there is a vesting of rights as of the
05:29:47 date prior to any enactment of any overlays, of any
05:29:52 scenic corridors or whatever.
05:29:54 Since we don't know how it's going to be implemented,
05:29:57 it makes me, for one, or I for one as a property
05:30:01 owner, very uneasy about what's coming down the road
05:30:04 with regard to my property that I happen to own on
05:30:08 Bayshore, and I also live on Bayshore.
05:30:10 And there are others in this room that have the same
05:30:13 problem.
05:30:13 I would like to get an answer to that on the record at
05:30:17 some point.
05:30:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was going to suggest that the
05:30:22 staff, if they haven't already clarified it, but
05:30:26 thought they did, explain that this step is just --
05:30:29 well, what this step is and what future steps would be
05:30:33 and what the public hearing process would be in the
05:30:35 future.
05:30:40 >> I was saving my points for rebuttal.
05:30:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, fine.
05:30:46 >>GWEN MILLER: You might have more questions to answer
05:30:50 during the rebuttal.

05:30:51 Next speaker.
05:30:54 >> Madam Chairman, members of the City Council, my
05:30:56 name is Ron weaver.
05:30:58 401 east Jackson Street.
05:31:00 And there could be nothing more precious than the
05:31:03 emerald jewel that is the Bayshore.
05:31:06 And we've lived in two different houses in the 3900
05:31:09 block and 4100 block of Bayshore, so we appreciate it
05:31:12 from many perspectives.
05:31:14 Mrs. Chapin and her husband were able to buy the
05:31:17 112 acres and to start that consumer electric trolley
05:31:22 because the city was reasonable with them until I
05:31:24 think in 1946 when they discontinued it and it was
05:31:27 still a nickel because the city was reasonable with
05:31:29 them.
05:31:30 And I'm sure and hopeful that your fine staff will be
05:31:34 reasonable with the property owners on the Bayshore
05:31:36 who want to and need to be a part of the solution to
05:31:40 the maintenance of this pressure emerald jewel that is
05:31:44 the Bayshore.
05:31:45 The reason this, however, needs to avoid inordinately
05:31:51 burden property which by its configuration, its size,

05:31:53 its shape, its vested rights, the amount of money it
05:31:55 may have borrowed and carried and paid taxes on for 20
05:31:59 or 50 years deserve to be treated with some respect
05:32:02 for what they have invested and paid taxes on and
05:32:04 perhaps borrowed in relying upon the ability to
05:32:08 develop a certain amount of property rights that
05:32:10 hopefully you will be attentive to as we protect this
05:32:14 precious emerald jewel.
05:32:15 And as Mrs. Chapin and her husband 110 acres were
05:32:22 developed originally on the Bayshore and
05:32:24 Mr. Holtzinger, and Mr. Swann and all the others who
05:32:27 have invested their savings into Bayshore over the
05:32:30 lifetime that hopefully those folks who have made
05:32:32 those investments in good faith will be able to be
05:32:35 treated fairly with the protection of the Bayshore,
05:32:37 yes, for their mutual benefit, for all of the citizens
05:32:39 and for the benefit of their property, but they won't
05:32:41 have to bear a disproportionate burden of that
05:32:45 protection, vis-a-vis their property rights they've
05:32:48 accumulated over the years.
05:32:49 We're very grateful to your staff for continuing to be
05:32:52 vigilant to the rights, not only the citizens to the

05:32:55 Bayshore, but also those folks that invested their
05:32:57 savings and paid taxes and gotten loans and reliance
05:33:01 on certain abilities to deal with the property on the
05:33:03 Bayshore.
05:33:04 Thank you, Madam Chairman and members of the Council.
05:33:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:33:14 >> I'm Gayle Crosby, 2916 Harborview.
05:33:18 I attended the meeting on the 25th of the Planning
05:33:22 Commission.
05:33:24 At the very end of that meeting -- and there had been
05:33:28 some discussion on the boundaries, Brorein on the
05:33:30 north, Gandy on the south, of course, the bay on the
05:33:33 east, but what about the west?
05:33:36 At the very end of that meeting, Mr. Curry asked three
05:33:40 very specific questions of Ms. Coyle.
05:33:43 The first question was, this particular resolution
05:33:49 does not regulate properties that do not abut
05:33:53 Bayshore.
05:33:54 Her response was, that is correct.
05:33:57 It does not.
05:33:59 He later asked Ms. Feeley if she agreed with the three
05:34:04 answers Ms. Coyle had given, and she said, yes, she

05:34:07 did agree.
05:34:08 Mr. Curry went on to say that if the properties that
05:34:15 did not abut Bayshore were included, he would have to
05:34:19 vote no, but because they weren't, he would vote yes
05:34:22 for it.
05:34:23 I think my question to you is, in your -- in the
05:34:28 proposal that's 30-some-odd pages long, on pages two
05:34:32 and three, toward the bottom of two and the top of
05:34:35 three, it is referencing properties that are west of
05:34:40 Bayshore.
05:34:41 Because the planning commission voted on this with the
05:34:44 idea that nothing off of Bayshore was included, should
05:34:48 that not be removed from the proposal?
05:34:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:34:57 >> Good afternoon, Madam Chair.
05:34:59 Members of the City Council.
05:35:00 My name is John Grandoff.
05:35:02 Address is suite 3700, Bank of America plaza.
05:35:04 I represent several clients that are in opposition to
05:35:07 the designation for several reasons.
05:35:10 I would like for you to know that I represent clients
05:35:12 that span all zoning districts on Bayshore,

05:35:16 single-family, multifamily, educational.
05:35:19 I represent the Academy of the Holy Names.
05:35:22 I represent Governor's Place Homeowners Association,
05:35:25 which is townhomes, Citivest Construction, City
05:35:31 National Bank.
05:35:31 Clark and Glenna Barlow.
05:35:35 Hayward and Jackie Chapman.
05:35:36 Beth and Bert Sigity.
05:35:38 Larry and Liz Smith.
05:35:40 All these owners run the gamut of Bayshore Boulevard.
05:35:43 It's important to know that the previous City Council
05:35:45 last summer asked if they could declare a moratorium
05:35:48 on Bayshore to do something about the high-rise
05:35:53 construction.
05:35:53 That is the genesis of why you are here this evening.
05:35:55 And from the backup that Abbye prepared and Cathy
05:35:59 prepared, some of the quotations from the workshops
05:36:04 were, quote, do something about height.
05:36:07 Do something about the canyon effect of high-rises.
05:36:09 Do something about the increased development.
05:36:11 Abbye and Cathy came back with a zoning map and shows
05:36:16 there are very few high-rise properties available.

05:36:19 Then this movement morphed into a create a scenic
05:36:23 corridor out of Bayshore.
05:36:25 Well, scenic corridor is a good idea, but the plan --
05:36:28 the comprehensive plan says that a scenic corridor
05:36:31 shall relate to the aesthetic appearance of the
05:36:34 roadways.
05:36:35 The public right-of-way.
05:36:37 It does not talk about going on someone's property and
05:36:40 creating something through the back door in the form
05:36:43 of a height restriction.
05:36:44 We're not talking about any restrictions tonight, but
05:36:47 this is the first of a two-step process that I venture
05:36:49 to tell you will ultimately result in some type of
05:36:52 regulation to find a way to regulate height on
05:36:55 Bayshore.
05:36:56 It's fundamental that you must understand the reason
05:37:01 for a rule before you pass the rule.
05:37:02 And if you examine the true reason for this rule, then
05:37:09 you'll find any law that comes out of this will be
05:37:12 flawed if not illegal.
05:37:13 I urge you to cast a very jaundiced eye on the reason
05:37:17 for why the scenic corridor is being made.

05:37:20 No one will dispute the beauty of Bayshore or its
05:37:24 historic significance.
05:37:24 However, if you want to be true to the land use plan,
05:37:27 then you confine the corridor designation to the
05:37:31 right-of-way and you put public funds, I venture to
05:37:34 say an excellent jobs bill, towards improving
05:37:36 Bayshore, the right-of-way.
05:37:38 It needs much improvement.
05:37:39 Especially in this day of budget cuts, you need to
05:37:43 certainly be judicious with your dollars and where
05:37:45 you're spending your dollars.
05:37:48 That may be one good result.
05:37:49 I will also add that -- excuse me for a moment.
05:37:59 You have to also when you're dealing with land use
05:38:02 regulations, identify the public health, safety or
05:38:06 welfare threat that is confronting you before you pass
05:38:09 the regulation.
05:38:10 Now, you're trying to create a scenic corridor this
05:38:13 evening.
05:38:14 But remember that what will follow will be some type
05:38:17 of land use regulation.
05:38:19 Examine for yourself what is the huge threat to

05:38:22 Bayshore right now.
05:38:23 I submit to you there's no imminent threat that
05:38:27 demands a wholesale rewriting of some codes on
05:38:29 property owners.
05:38:30 Now, there's a -- I'll wrap up.
05:38:32 There may be some public health, safety and welfare
05:38:35 concerns as to the actual right-of-way, and the
05:38:38 balustrade and landscaping and bike paths and
05:38:41 pedestrian access and those things where I think the
05:38:45 government should be taking notice and focusing their
05:38:48 energies.
05:38:48 Thank you very much.
05:38:57 >> Hello.
05:38:58 Marilyn weekly.
05:38:59 I reside at 2619 Bayshore Boulevard.
05:39:03 I'd like to say that I wholeheartedly support Bayshore
05:39:08 becoming officially a scenic corridor and an area
05:39:12 attractor.
05:39:13 I think it's high time that we all take notice of a
05:39:16 very important natural asset.
05:39:23 This is a symbol of Tampa.
05:39:25 How many postcards do you see with this.

05:39:27 How many people come to Tampa and the first area they
05:39:30 want to visit is Bayshore Boulevard because they've
05:39:33 heard of it.
05:39:33 And I think it is our duty as a community to maintain
05:39:39 Bayshore in the historic sense that it has always been
05:39:42 in this area.
05:39:44 I own or I should say my land is actually probably two
05:39:49 lots.
05:39:49 And I have no fear whatsoever of any conditions that
05:39:54 are going to be put forth in restrictions of my
05:40:00 property.
05:40:00 No zoning, and I think that's very important that
05:40:02 people understand, the zoning is not going to be
05:40:05 changed.
05:40:05 Anyone who has a home or a lot with an existing
05:40:09 zoning, the zoning will remain intact.
05:40:12 At least that's my understanding of that, so that the
05:40:16 rights one owns right now or the possibility of
05:40:17 building will remain intact.
05:40:19 What may change are things like erecting six-foot
05:40:25 fences with eight-foot bushes around them.
05:40:28 I think that the beauty of Bayshore is being able to

05:40:32 drive down and seeing all the beautiful homes, all the
05:40:35 beautiful landscaping.
05:40:38 It's truly, as I called it the other day at the
05:40:41 commission hearing, it was my Disney World as a child.
05:40:43 And it continues to be a Disney World of sorts to
05:40:47 adults who play there, who visit there and who live
05:40:50 there.
05:40:51 And again, I wish to underscore that as a homeowner, I
05:40:56 applaud what is being done here today, and I will
05:41:01 support the decision of the scenic corridor and the
05:41:05 area attractor.
05:41:06 And as I said, I can't imagine anybody doing anything
05:41:09 but positive things on Bayshore.
05:41:12 Thank you.
05:41:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:41:20 >> Elizabeth Johnson, 1819 Richardson place.
05:41:23 First of all, I would like to commend staff and
05:41:26 particularly Catherine Coyle and Abbye Feeley for
05:41:28 working so hard on this with numerous workshops that I
05:41:33 attended and many of my neighbors.
05:41:35 It's important to remember that what is happening here
05:41:37 is the most minute of baby steps.

05:41:43 It's a mere recognition that Bayshore because of its
05:41:46 historic, scenic, health and welfare, yes, importance
05:41:49 to the City of Tampa because of its jewel status with
05:41:52 the City of Tampa is important, and is a scenic
05:41:57 corridor and a regional attractor.
05:42:00 I think those of you who have been on Council for a
05:42:03 while remember a letter I read from Sam Gibbons a few
05:42:06 years ago explaining how Bayshore was always protected
05:42:10 even from the time when he was in the Florida Senate.
05:42:15 The ideas being put before you today are very
05:42:19 reasonable.
05:42:20 Their time has long passed.
05:42:23 And I think it's disingenuous for some of those who
05:42:26 represent the land use interests not to explain that
05:42:30 no one has a constitutional right to an upzoning.
05:42:33 You don't have a constitutional right to get a planned
05:42:38 unit development that's higher than your zoning or an
05:42:41 RM-75 that's higher than your single-family zoning.
05:42:44 You may have a constitutional right to higher the
05:42:47 finest land use lawyers in Tampa to come argue why
05:42:50 there should be an up zoning, and I don't think
05:42:54 anybody is prohibiting that.

05:42:55 But you don't have a constitutional right to
05:42:56 necessarily get that up zoning.
05:42:59 And what we're hopeful of is that this first baby step
05:43:03 will just create a recognition in the eye of you and
05:43:08 future City Councils who may not be as careful and
05:43:11 passionate about preservation as I know you to be,
05:43:15 that they stop and they look and they say this is not
05:43:18 just any old roadway here, this is Bayshore Boulevard.
05:43:22 And maybe when a land use lawyer manages to get a PD
05:43:26 rezoning request in the dead of summer when citizens
05:43:29 can't go out and object or they make a fine argument,
05:43:33 somebody up there will say, wait a minute, this is a
05:43:35 regional attractor and a scenic corridor and maybe we
05:43:39 should pause.
05:43:40 That's my hope.
05:43:41 That's why I'm here today.
05:43:44 I find it interesting because even with Citivest, the
05:43:51 argument that they made on appeal, there was a second
05:43:54 DCA case that came back that said fine with an overlay
05:43:57 district, you can restrict height.
05:43:59 So this was what came out of a lot of litigation that
05:44:02 was spawned.

05:44:03 We're not there yet.
05:44:05 Abbye Feeley and Cathy Coyle will tell you this is,
05:44:08 again, the most incremental of baby steps.
05:44:10 But the time has come because previous Councils before
05:44:15 you have not held the line when requests for rezonings
05:44:19 have come up.
05:44:20 And what has happened is those families that have had
05:44:23 single-family properties there and they say I want my
05:44:25 single-family zoning and I plan to give my
05:44:27 single-family zoning to my offspring and my heirs,
05:44:33 well, somehow it's happened differently.
05:44:36 And if you believe in the single-family zoning for
05:44:38 Bayshore, if you're passionate about it, great, you
05:44:43 know, great.
05:44:44 But if you want RM-75 in a PD and don't be
05:44:49 disingenuous and say you're not in favor of the
05:44:52 beauty -- well, anyway.
05:44:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:44:54 Anyone else like to speak?
05:44:56 If you're going to speak, would you please come up and
05:45:02 speak.
05:45:03 >> Rosemary Henderson.

05:45:05 I live at 2001 Bayshore Boulevard in a home that was
05:45:10 built in 1916, and I've lived there since 1971.
05:45:15 And I'm very much in favor of the proposal tonight.
05:45:19 I just think it would be a wonderful thing for our
05:45:22 entire city.
05:45:24 I also wanted to commend the staff and I also attended
05:45:27 I believe all of the workshops that were held.
05:45:31 And just really feel that Bayshore needs some special
05:45:37 attention, special handling of whatever so that things
05:45:39 do not fall through the cracks in the future.
05:45:42 This is a little bit of a repeat but to me an example,
05:45:49 as wonderful as the staff is, can be, astute
05:45:53 commissioners, it is still easy for things to fall
05:45:56 through the crack.
05:45:57 And my example is, a couple of years ago, and I know
05:46:01 several of you were on the commission then, but
05:46:03 several of you were not, the city was doing the
05:46:05 citywide corner lot setbacks, changing the setbacks to
05:46:11 seven feet, which was probably a very good thing.
05:46:13 But it was not a good thing for Bayshore Boulevard.
05:46:17 It had already passed first reading to change the
05:46:20 setbacks.

05:46:21 And then some astute citizens somewhere picked up on
05:46:25 the fact -- picked up on what this would do to
05:46:28 Bayshore.
05:46:29 Then a large number of people came to that second
05:46:31 reading, and presented our reasons as to why we
05:46:34 thought Bayshore should be exempted from that.
05:46:37 And -- can I put something on the --
05:46:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Just lay it on there.
05:46:42 >> Still call it an overhead.
05:46:45 Give you an idea of what a seven-foot setback would
05:46:54 look like, the Bayshore corner lot.
05:46:56 That's my home and I measured it seven feet back and
05:46:59 put that orange mesh up.
05:47:01 To show a house could be built right out to that
05:47:05 footage.
05:47:06 And I didn't feel like that quite showed the
05:47:09 perspective, so I've kind of foolishly sat in a chair
05:47:18 and had my picture taken to just emphasize, you know,
05:47:23 this is not what we want on a corner lot on Bayshore.
05:47:27 I think it would be ridiculous for a house to be built
05:47:29 at that point.
05:47:30 And it absolutely could have been, and some of the

05:47:34 staff members asked, could this happen and said, yes,
05:47:38 it could.
05:47:39 Very gratefully, you exempted Bayshore from this.
05:47:43 But to me, this is just an example of how things can
05:47:46 happen sometime in the future.
05:47:50 I just can't emphasize enough that I think this is
05:47:53 best for the whole City of Tampa.
05:47:56 I think we really need it, and would appreciate your
05:47:59 considering it.
05:48:00 Thank you.
05:48:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:48:14 >> Good evening, City Council members.
05:48:16 For the record, my name is Janet Kovac.
05:48:18 I reside at 8214 Rebels Road in Riverview, Florida.
05:48:22 I've attended the last three meetings.
05:48:24 The last meeting in front of you, I came and I was
05:48:27 listening to citizens in the audience.
05:48:30 And at that point, everyone there were people that
05:48:32 lived along Bayshore.
05:48:34 I counted them.
05:48:35 There were 13 residents that felt that they had not
05:48:37 had proper notification.

05:48:39 I think opponents and proponents all agree that they
05:48:43 love Bayshore, and it's beautiful.
05:48:45 And they want to keep the aesthetic beauty.
05:48:48 I think it's interesting that everyone tonight has
05:48:51 talked about how beautiful it is today.
05:48:53 It's been kept that way with the current regulations
05:48:56 that are in place and has been upheld by the private
05:48:58 property owners that currently live there.
05:49:00 Notification issue, there are 174 entities on Bayshore
05:49:05 Boulevard.
05:49:06 I know, councilman Dingfelder, you talked about the
05:49:10 problems with large condo associations.
05:49:12 I just wanted to say that I think what could happen is
05:49:16 that you could give it to the condo association, they
05:49:19 could disseminate the information.
05:49:20 But there were many, many individuals not notified.
05:49:23 Commissioner Scott is not here, but I talked about
05:49:25 community-based planning.
05:49:27 I still believe in that.
05:49:28 Yes, there have been public hearings, but I think the
05:49:30 best decision making occurs for a neighborhood when
05:49:34 opponents and proponents come together and they draft

05:49:38 the language.
05:49:39 And that language is brought forward for the community
05:49:41 to adopt.
05:49:42 All the people that are there, that live there that
05:49:45 are affected.
05:49:46 And that's something that I did not hear from the last
05:49:49 meeting in front of you that was occurring.
05:49:51 Finally, councilwoman Mulhern is not here as well, and
05:49:56 she brought up the traffic issue.
05:49:57 And I really hope you guys as City Council will take a
05:50:00 hard look at investing some dollars in solving that
05:50:03 issue.
05:50:03 Again, I do think there are a lot of issues with this,
05:50:07 and I think that the best thing to do would be to
05:50:10 bring everyone together to draft the language that
05:50:12 would impact their neighbor.
05:50:15 Thank you.
05:50:21 >> My name is Sue Lyon.
05:50:23 I've served on the Bayshore task force.
05:50:26 One of the biggest things we were concerned about was
05:50:29 traffic and safety.
05:50:32 We believe that if it's designated as scenic corridor,

05:50:37 that perhaps we'll be able to get some money to put in
05:50:39 the things that we wanted in order to make it a safer
05:50:43 place to be.
05:50:44 The Bayshore task force did not involve ourselves in
05:50:49 the property rights or anything off the actual
05:50:53 roadway.
05:50:54 We were concerned with safety.
05:50:55 We came into being after a woman was killed on the
05:50:59 Bayshore with somebody doing 80 miles an hour on the
05:51:02 Bayshore.
05:51:03 If you notice the traffic, it's not as fast as it used
05:51:07 to be, because we gave 1500 tickets in three months.
05:51:11 The police department was very active and very busy on
05:51:14 doing that.
05:51:14 We've slowed it down, but we haven't eliminated the
05:51:19 amount of traffic that's on the Bayshore.
05:51:22 It's an easy way for people to get through, and they
05:51:24 are going to keep using it, unless we figure out a way
05:51:27 to get them to use the Crosstown.
05:51:30 And while we were working trying to get them to lower
05:51:32 the rates, they raised the rates.
05:51:34 So it's one of those things that it's something that I

05:51:41 believe the powers that be, county and city and
05:51:46 administration, and Council, all need to work together
05:51:51 to see if we can do something with the traffic.
05:51:53 But we need to get some money, which is hard to do.
05:51:57 But I think a scenic corridor would let the powers to
05:52:03 be know that it's something special that we need to
05:52:05 spend money on.
05:52:07 And the task force was not involved in any of the
05:52:10 properties, and that's not something we were involved
05:52:12 in.
05:52:12 But we need to work on the roads to make it safer.
05:52:16 And we need some money to do it.
05:52:19 Thank you.
05:52:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
05:52:20 If you have a cell phone, would you please turn them
05:52:22 off.
05:52:23 Would anyone else like to speak?
05:52:27 Ms. Feeley?
05:52:44 >> Got a lot of items to cover.
05:52:49 Let me be as succinct as possible.
05:52:52 Council, what is before you tonight is the designation
05:52:54 of Bayshore Boulevard as a scenic corridor and as a

05:52:57 regional attractor.
05:52:58 The policies that are related to the consideration of
05:53:04 Land Development regulations are related to the
05:53:06 regional attractor designation.
05:53:08 They are not related to the scenic corridor
05:53:10 designation.
05:53:12 It is not unlikely that other regional -- it's not
05:53:15 unlikely that regional attractors throughout the city
05:53:18 have their own separate Land Development regulations
05:53:21 such as the airport.
05:53:23 Such as Ybor City.
05:53:24 Those are regional attractors as identified in the
05:53:27 comprehensive plan, and they do have separate Land
05:53:30 Development regulations.
05:53:31 That is why that policy that is associated with the
05:53:34 regional attractor states that we will consider the
05:53:37 future development of those items.
05:53:38 Again, what is before you tonight is designating
05:53:42 Bayshore and recognizing it as it is today.
05:53:44 It's not designating it as a regional attracter to
05:53:47 attract more people.
05:53:48 It's designating it as a regional attractor in order

05:53:51 to call it and show what it is today.
05:53:53 It already is functioning that way, however, the
05:53:56 comprehensive plan does not currently identified it
05:53:59 that way.
05:53:59 It currently functions as a scenic corridor.
05:54:03 Everyone who talks about it, talks about the views and
05:54:05 vistas, the public realm, how it all interacts and it
05:54:08 is functioning as a scenic corridor, it's just not
05:54:11 specifically designated that in the comprehensive
05:54:13 plan, and that is what is before you tonight.
05:54:15 Should the next step, when we work on the next step of
05:54:19 the possible development of Land Development
05:54:21 regulations just as in any other Land Development
05:54:24 regulation development, there would be community
05:54:26 workshops, community input and community and public
05:54:29 workshops before you.
05:54:30 So those items would be forth coming.
05:54:32 The corridor as identified in the proposed policies
05:54:39 includes the area both public and private on both
05:54:42 sides of Bayshore Boulevard adjacent to it from
05:54:46 Brorein south to Gandy Boulevard as shown on the map
05:54:49 before you.

05:54:49 What we are designating today, there was concern about
05:54:56 retroactivity, it affecting somebody's property the
05:55:01 way it is today.
05:55:02 Us going back and potentially regulating something in
05:55:04 existence.
05:55:05 That would not happen as it doesn't happen with any of
05:55:07 the overlays that have passed since people have owned
05:55:10 property in those areas.
05:55:11 If there were regulation, that regulation would take
05:55:14 place from the time of adoption forward.
05:55:17 It would not be retroactive on people's properties.
05:55:21 I just wanted to clarify that.
05:55:23 I'm trying to see if there's anything else.
05:55:33 Designation.
05:55:34 Compliance, what would happen after adoption.
05:55:38 The way Bayshore Boulevard is currently recognized in
05:55:40 the comprehensive plan today is as a roadway.
05:55:42 Any other roadway just like Dale Mabry, Kennedy
05:55:44 Boulevard, what we brought before you tonight is your
05:55:49 ability to now designate this roadway as a scenic
05:55:53 corridor and regional attractor before any harm
05:55:58 happens to it.

05:56:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You guys are professionals, and
05:56:08 you're the ones who put all the work into it.
05:56:11 I have some questions for you.
05:56:12 We had conversations -- a lot of people expressed that
05:56:19 the Bayshore is at risk in certain ways.
05:56:22 Is that a concern of staff?
05:56:26 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I think that what City Council has
05:56:27 seen and why this was brought to City Council's
05:56:29 attention by the public are changes that are occurring
05:56:33 and pressures that are occurring out there.
05:56:35 What we're saying is that a first step to protecting
05:56:37 what is out there today and preserving the character
05:56:40 of that out there today is go ahead and designate this
05:56:43 roadway as something more than a roadway in the
05:56:45 comprehensive plan to show that it is the city's
05:56:47 intent to preserve this in the future.
05:56:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And Mr. Crosby I know has expressed
05:56:54 repeated concerns.
05:56:55 I thought I alleviated the concerns.
05:56:57 But let's clarify them again.
05:56:59 The map you had on the overlay, we're just talking
05:57:02 about the properties that butt up against the Bayshore

05:57:06 and the road itself.
05:57:07 We're not extending beyond the front layer of
05:57:10 properties.
05:57:14 >> It is the adjacent.
05:57:16 The adjacent properties to the Bayshore.
05:57:18 They have frontage on.
05:57:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That front on the Bayshore.
05:57:21 Nothing further.
05:57:23 So if there's confusion about the western boundary.
05:57:26 Sometimes it's hard to say what is west and south on
05:57:29 the Bayshore because of the way it twists and turns.
05:57:32 It's just the properties that front up against
05:57:35 Bayshore and the road itself.
05:57:37 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.
05:57:37 What is proposed tonight would designate those
05:57:39 properties as part of the scenic corridor.
05:57:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
05:57:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions from Council
05:57:44 members?
05:57:45 We need to close the public hearing.
05:57:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would just like to make a
05:57:51 comment.

05:57:56 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
05:57:58 All in favor, aye.
05:57:59 [Motion Carried]
05:58:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You're right, everything is there.
05:58:01 It's beautiful, it's 4.4 miles long.
05:58:05 It's one of the top three scenic areas in the country,
05:58:09 maybe one in California, one in Palm Beach and two out
05:58:14 of the three I've been on.
05:58:15 I haven't been on the one as far as California.
05:58:18 It used to have a hospital there, beautiful hospital.
05:58:21 When I was a little boy, we used to go out there and
05:58:23 look at the fish in the big fountain.
05:58:25 That's gone.
05:58:26 They used to have the streetcars, that's gone.
05:58:30 So things do change little by little.
05:58:32 I don't see too much difference between the proponents
05:58:37 and those opponents, if there's any regarding the
05:58:41 beauty of it, the aesthetics of it, the need to
05:58:44 maintain it.
05:58:45 That's all there.
05:58:46 We talk about traffic in six or seven different
05:58:51 conversations brought up.

05:58:52 Where is that traffic coming from and where is it
05:58:54 generated from?
05:58:55 I think it has a multi-answer, and I'm not a traffic
05:59:02 engineer, but if you look at the south corridor from
05:59:06 Gandy south, it's had an enormous impact in
05:59:10 development.
05:59:10 It's really taken off the last ten years.
05:59:12 If you look at Gandy boulevard itself from east to
05:59:17 west and all the way into St. Pete, that is developed
05:59:22 in a big, big way.
05:59:24 So the first lady that spoke on the first sign had a
05:59:29 very good idea.
05:59:29 That first little sign that says Brandon, Ybor, and
05:59:33 downtown and takes you right through, what it is, it's
05:59:35 a thoroughfare, because people are used to it.
05:59:38 We're creatures of habit.
05:59:40 Once we start doing something, most of us go to work
05:59:42 the same way and come home the same way.
05:59:45 And traffic is a great concern on the Bayshore.
05:59:49 I'm not qualified to fix a traffic problem, because
05:59:54 it's there and it's from different areas.
05:59:56 High-rise buildings.

05:59:58 There are some there.
06:00:01 I don't know how much traffic they create, but I don't
06:00:05 have an answer to that.
06:00:06 Do they create more than a residential area?
06:00:11 I would assume so.
06:00:12 How many times, who lives there, what age are they,
06:00:15 how many kids they have?
06:00:16 I don't know.
06:00:17 And maybe I don't want to know.
06:00:19 But when you see things that are built on the Bayshore
06:00:23 and the address like the lady who spoke on Waverly
06:00:26 court, the address of that building is not on
06:00:30 Bayshore.
06:00:30 It's on Waverly.
06:00:32 3507, because I saw it myself.
06:00:34 So these are the things that we're looking at on this
06:00:37 Council.
06:00:38 I want to make sure that what we're doing here, it's
06:00:42 not restraining anyone that has a Land Development
06:00:47 that fits into the comprehensive plan and has a proper
06:00:51 zoning.
06:00:51 I don't know how many properties fall into that

06:00:53 category.
06:00:54 Can I get an answer?
06:00:56 Does anybody know?
06:00:57 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to open the public hearing
06:00:58 again.
06:00:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm going to ask a question.
06:01:00 I'm not asking the public.
06:01:01 I'm just asking the professional.
06:01:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to reopen.
06:01:06 >>GWEN MILLER: It's been moved and seconded to --
06:01:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion and second to
06:01:10 reopen.
06:01:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You mean to tell me if we want to ask
06:01:17 a question of staff --
06:01:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's all I'm doing.
06:01:22 >>JULIA COLE: Technically, if you're having a public
06:01:25 hearing, you have to have that as part of the record,
06:01:27 as part of the public hearing.
06:01:29 When you close the public hearing making sure that all
06:01:31 questions have been answered.
06:01:33 But if there are additional questions then, yes, you
06:01:35 would have to reopen the public hearing, even if it is

06:01:38 staff because they are providing testimony.
06:01:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's additional information for the
06:01:42 record.
06:01:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That I understand.
06:01:43 I don't like it, but I understand it.
06:01:44 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to reopen
06:01:47 the public hearing.
06:01:47 All in favor, aye.
06:01:48 [Motion Carried]
06:01:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Staff, do you know, and I don't
06:01:53 know, and I apologize for asking a question you may
06:01:56 not be prepared to answer.
06:01:58 How many properties fit into that parameter of where
06:02:01 they may be developed that have the proper land
06:02:03 designation to the comprehensive plan?
06:02:06 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Are you asking, sir, how many are
06:02:08 currently vacant that could be developed multifamily?
06:02:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
06:02:12 Whether they are vacant or not.
06:02:14 I don't know if there's a building there.
06:02:15 I don't know if there's a restaurant there.
06:02:16 I don't know anything.

06:02:17 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Based on our inventory that the urban
06:02:19 design staff actually walked and inventoried the
06:02:22 Bayshore, there are currently 49 multifamily residences
06:02:27 or parcels out of the 172 which is 29%.
06:02:32 And there are 94 single-family.
06:02:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: But I think maybe I posed the
06:02:38 question the wrong way.
06:02:39 How many of them can be high-rises?
06:02:42 I'll go right to the chase.
06:02:43 >>ABBYE FEELEY: How many have multifamily zoning that
06:02:45 could potentially be developed under that?
06:02:47 I don't have that figure with me tonight.
06:02:49 There are eight vacant parcels that are out there
06:02:52 today.
06:02:52 I'm sorry.
06:03:03 It's just a question of where I put it.
06:03:05 >> What Abbye would be giving you if she finds it is
06:03:07 the number of parcels with RM-35 or higher.
06:03:10 RM-35, 120-foot height classified as a high-rise under
06:03:15 the comp plan.
06:03:26 >>ABBYE FEELEY: It's going to take me a minute to
06:03:28 count.

06:03:29 >>GWEN MILLER: She's counting.
06:03:30 She can't answer any questions.
06:03:44 >>ABBYE FEELEY: There are 37 that have a single-family
06:03:49 zoning of RM-35 or higher.
06:03:51 11 of those are currently zoned PD.
06:03:57 So if you subtracted those out, it would be 26 that
06:04:03 are not currently site plan controlled that could be
06:04:05 developed that way.
06:04:11 >>MARY MULHERN: I had a quick question.
06:04:12 Abbye, I don't know if you can answer this or you and
06:04:15 Vicky, but as Charlie brought up the idea of diverting
06:04:20 traffic off of Bayshore and putting it on the
06:04:22 Crosstown, where are we with that?
06:04:25 Is there something that we can do, that city staff can
06:04:28 do to get some signage there?
06:04:31 >> I've been in several meetings of discussions of
06:04:37 projects going on.
06:04:38 It was my understanding that the transportation
06:04:40 division was handling that, working or cooperating per
06:04:45 the recommendations of the Bayshore task force.
06:04:48 Unfortunately, at the present time, I don't have any
06:04:49 additional status other than that.

06:04:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
06:04:53 Well maybe you could look into that.
06:04:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm ready to close the public
06:05:03 hearing.
06:05:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question.
06:05:10 I think there's confusion on what we are or are not
06:05:12 doing.
06:05:13 Charlie, we are all concerned about property rights
06:05:15 and we never want to take any away.
06:05:18 I don't know if this question is directed to legal or
06:05:20 to staff.
06:05:20 But as I read this basically one page of plan
06:05:25 amendments, I mean, it's a little more than a page,
06:05:29 the objectives and the policies that we're talking
06:05:31 about are focused on this one page, objective A2A and
06:05:37 policies A2A-1A through A2 whatever.
06:05:40 Anyway this page, as I read it, and I've read it
06:05:44 probably 15 times now, to the best -- from what I can
06:05:49 see, from my legal perspective from sitting up here
06:05:51 for four years, this does not do anything to anybody's
06:05:54 property rights.
06:05:56 And Abbye or legal, if somebody wants to confirm that,

06:05:59 you know, it's got a lot of sort of very broad
06:06:03 language in there.
06:06:04 It's nice and flowery language about being a scenic
06:06:07 corridor and regional attractor and sidewalks and
06:06:09 pedestrian connections and public art and that sort of
06:06:12 thing, and it gives us the future ability to
06:06:16 consider -- and I'm going to read it -- to consider
06:06:18 the development and implementation of Land Development
06:06:21 regulations, et cetera, et cetera.
06:06:25 It gives us the ability to consider that in the
06:06:27 future, but this plan amendment does not change
06:06:30 anything today.
06:06:32 >> Mr. Dingfelder, that is correct.
06:06:34 It does not change the existing zoning on any property
06:06:37 today.
06:06:37 It does not regulate anything additional on any
06:06:40 property today.
06:06:40 That is correct.
06:06:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Are there any other questions from
06:06:44 Council members?
06:06:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So then I guess the question comes, we
06:06:53 have property rights and we don't want that changed,

06:06:56 according to staff it does not change.
06:07:00 >> That is correct, sir.
06:07:01 It does not change.
06:07:03 I think what people are reacting to are the potential
06:07:06 of fourth coming overlay in which there could be
06:07:09 potential landscape signage, other design regulations
06:07:13 that would then affect the property.
06:07:15 What is before you today is not that overlay.
06:07:17 What is before you today is a designation for the
06:07:21 roadway, Bayshore Boulevard, the corridor as a scenic
06:07:25 corridor and regional attractor.
06:07:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me follow on what Councilman
06:07:29 Miranda raised a question.
06:07:32 There are 26 properties that could be developed as
06:07:35 high-rises.
06:07:36 I think that's what his question was and your response
06:07:41 was 26.
06:07:42 >> Based on the information pulled from our system,
06:07:44 there are 26 properties currently zoned at RM-35 or
06:07:48 greater, which is residential multifamily, 35 units to
06:07:51 the acre or greater.
06:07:52 Once you apply the setbacks and current regulations of

06:07:56 those zoning districts today, those properties would
06:07:58 then be developed as they could be.
06:08:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Just for the record, Mrs. Novak, we
06:08:06 heard all the testimony when people were up, we were
06:08:08 right here in the rear.
06:08:10 So just in case we were not here, we heard all the
06:08:13 testimony and saw everything.
06:08:14 Ms. Mulhern and I were in the back.
06:08:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions, Council members?
06:08:20 We have a motion and second.
06:08:22 [Motion Carried]
06:08:23 Ms. Saul-Sena.
06:08:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
06:08:24 This is a very lively discussion.
06:08:28 It's the second discussion we've had on this here.
06:08:31 We've had many other discussions in other forums.
06:08:33 We all concur that Bayshore is special.
06:08:37 The proposal before us is really modest, innocuous
06:08:42 proposal, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
06:08:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that a motion?
06:08:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
06:08:48 >> Second.

06:08:49 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a question on the motion.
06:08:50 Mr. Dingfelder.
06:08:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just want to say one more thing.
06:08:53 The last time we were here and I'll direct this to
06:08:56 Mr. Growl, wherever he is and anybody else who was
06:08:59 interested in this issue about the public sector.
06:09:01 We all agree that we've got to make improvement to the
06:09:04 public sector.
06:09:04 That is very much a city responsibility and perhaps a
06:09:08 county responsibility, but -- and I came up with some
06:09:12 language to include in this for the public sector
06:09:15 side.
06:09:15 The problem is, when I threw that language to
06:09:18 legal.and to staff, legal came back and said it was
06:09:22 really a little too late in the game and it would
06:09:25 delay the entire process if I did that.
06:09:27 So I agreed to pull back on that until we do the plan
06:09:30 update, which is what we're going to be doing over the
06:09:33 next year.
06:09:34 I will be putting that language or something similar
06:09:37 to that language that addresses the public sector side
06:09:39 of it.

06:09:40 Hopefully it will be even better than what I came up
06:09:42 with to start with, because I'll have more time to
06:09:44 work on it.
06:09:45 And I need your input on that as well.
06:09:47 So we haven't discarded that language.
06:09:49 That will be coming forth the next time we revisit the
06:09:53 comp plan in this issue.
06:09:55 But I just wanted to assure you of that.
06:09:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to add to that that we
06:10:00 heard today, and Linda had discovered last week that
06:10:03 there's an RFP out for improvements to the roadway,
06:10:07 and we were assured that from city staff that there
06:10:11 would be a lot of public input on that.
06:10:14 So the city is working toward working on the roadway.
06:10:20 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
06:10:21 floor.
06:10:22 All in favor of the motion, aye.
06:10:23 Opposed, nay.
06:10:24 [Motion Carried]
06:10:25 We need to open item number 2.
06:10:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair, before you do, Mr.
06:10:29 Stefan asked me to read this and say something related

06:10:34 to the budget issue.
06:10:35 If everybody could exit quietly, we would appreciate
06:10:38 it.
06:10:38 Thank you.
06:10:38 Mr. Stefan has suggested two budget dates for our
06:10:47 final budget hearings in September.
06:10:51 And, of course, when we do this, we have to look at
06:10:53 the School Board gets first choice and then the county
06:10:56 commission gets the next choice, et cetera, et cetera.
06:10:58 The dates that are left for City Council that he's
06:11:01 suggesting for two public hearings include Tuesday,
06:11:04 September 4th at 5:01 p.m., and Wednesday
06:11:08 September 19th at 5:01 p.m.
06:11:12 And if that meets Council's approval, I'll go ahead
06:11:17 and make that as a motion and just read this formally
06:11:20 into the record.
06:11:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
06:11:23 All in favor of the motion, aye.
06:11:24 [Motion Carried]
06:11:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And if I could, under the
06:11:26 provisions of Florida statute 200.065(2)C and D,
06:11:32 taxing authorities are required to hold two public

06:11:34 hearings on their tentative budgets and proposed
06:11:37 millage rates.
06:11:38 The City of Tampa has in coordination with other
06:11:40 taxing authorities in Hillsborough County set the
06:11:41 following dates and times for our required public
06:11:43 meetings, Tuesday, September 4th, 2007, at
06:11:46 5:01 p.m., city charter mandated and state required
06:11:51 Council public budget hearing and first reading of
06:11:54 ordinance.
06:11:55 Wednesday, September 19th, 2007 at 5:01 p.m., state
06:12:00 required second public hearing, second reading of
06:12:03 ordinance.
06:12:03 This schedule meets all city and state timing
06:12:07 requirements for public hearings, and we will reserve
06:12:09 these dates and times on our calendar and direct the
06:12:12 clerk according to the motion.
06:12:14 And any appropriate notices that have to go out,
06:12:18 Mr. Clerk, you guys will take care of it.
06:12:20 Thank you.
06:12:24 >> I also had an item that I had been ask to take care
06:12:32 of for Ms. Cindy Miller.
06:12:34 She was supposed to appear before you on July 19th

06:12:37 concerning the city's affordable housing program.
06:12:39 And she is unable to make that July 19th date.
06:12:43 She would like to ask for a continuance to July 26th
06:12:47 seeing that you don't have a hearing next week.
06:12:48 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and favor.
06:12:50 All in favor, aye.
06:12:51 >> It was on your a.m. agenda.
06:12:53 >>GWEN MILLER: 10 a.m.
06:12:54 >> Thank you very much.
06:12:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
06:13:00 >> Rose Petrucha, Planning Commission staff.
06:13:03 Your next three agenda items are related, and they are
06:13:06 by the same applicant.
06:13:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's open two, three, and four.
06:13:12 We have a motion and second.
06:13:13 All in favor, aye.
06:13:14 [Motion Carried]
06:13:15 >> Thank you.
06:13:16 Plan amendment 06-25 is a request to amend the central
06:13:24 business district periphery boundary area, and in
06:13:29 particular in the vicinity of Ybor channel.
06:13:32 Back in 1988 at the request of the City of Tampa, the

06:13:40 Planning Commission had studied areas surrounding the
06:13:44 CDB for potential redevelopment.
06:13:46 The objective was to identify areas and mechanism to
06:13:50 influence the private sector to increase the housing
06:13:53 supply and provide opportunities for people to live
06:13:57 and work in proximity to the downtown.
06:13:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Rose, hold on one second.
06:14:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is 1988?
06:14:05 >> 1988 is when the city had asked the study for
06:14:08 the -- for increased opportunities for housing.
06:14:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Was this in response to the max
06:14:14 factor property on the west side of the river right
06:14:16 across from the Performing Arts center?
06:14:18 >> The max factor property is included as part of the
06:14:21 CBD periphery area.
06:14:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Having been around since then, I
06:14:26 remember specifically, this is where Tampa prep is
06:14:28 now.
06:14:28 But that was the whole impetus of this thing was to
06:14:32 accommodate a particular individual in 1988.
06:14:34 So my question is, have we rethought this?
06:14:37 >> It was broader than that.

06:14:39 It really was looking at the ability to get housing in
06:14:43 location to the central business district.
06:14:45 And in the areas, it included an area to the north --
06:14:49 let me look at the ELMO.
06:14:51 It included an area on the north side, the west side
06:14:56 as well as Harbour Island was included as well as the
06:14:59 east side in and around the CBD area.
06:15:01 Again, the primary purpose was looking for
06:15:04 opportunities for housing to try and just stamp and
06:15:07 encourage redevelopment in the CBD area, try to make a
06:15:13 live/work area.
06:15:14 As a result of that study, ultimately the concept was
06:15:19 included in the comprehensive plan and was included on
06:15:22 part of the future land use plan map.
06:15:25 Subsequently to that concept being adopted, the
06:15:30 Channel District community redevelopment area plan, a
06:15:34 strategic area plan was developed and adopted.
06:15:38 And at the time, it had been assumed that all the
06:15:40 parcels within the Channel District CRA were within
06:15:43 the CDB -- were within the CBD periphery area.
06:15:47 However, there are inconsistencies between the two, so
06:15:50 the applicant has requested that the boundaries be

06:15:53 aligned.
06:15:54 Let me show you those particular areas.
06:15:56 On this graphic, you can see the -- this is the
06:16:05 Channel District CRA.
06:16:06 And the line pretty much goes up the middle of Ybor
06:16:11 channel, but it also includes an eastern portion on
06:16:15 the northeast portion of the CRA.
06:16:18 The CBD periphery just went up straight up the Ybor
06:16:26 channel.
06:16:26 So the request is to pull this particular area that's
06:16:30 included in the CRA into the CBD periphery boundary.
06:16:33 So that's that particular request.
06:16:35 Let me go to the next plan amendment.
06:16:47 Plan amendment 06-25, so the main purpose of that is
06:16:50 to realign the boundaries.
06:16:51 Plan amendment 06-25 is located on the eastern side of
06:17:03 the Ybor channel area in the vicinity of 17th and
06:17:15 19th street.
06:17:16 Plan amendment 06 -- I'm sorry, 06-26.
06:17:20 This particular site is approximately 13 acres in
06:17:24 size.
06:17:26 It is currently used for international ship repair

06:17:30 company.
06:17:31 But the petitioner is requesting an amendment in this
06:17:33 area from heavy industrial to urban mixed use 60 to
06:17:37 allow for future consideration of mixed use project
06:17:40 for residential professional office and commercial
06:17:42 development.
06:17:43 And then plan amendment 06-27 is on the western side
06:17:58 of Ybor channel.
06:17:59 And that particular area is -- again, it's occupied
06:18:05 with international ship repair company, but much of
06:18:08 this particular land area lies vacant.
06:18:10 The petitioner is requesting an amendment on this area
06:18:13 from heavy commercial -- excuse me, heavy industrial
06:18:16 to regional mixed use 100, again to allow for
06:18:20 consideration of a mixed use development.
06:18:22 The petitioner had provided a background analysis for
06:18:25 all of these amendments, including the conditions of
06:18:29 the area, land analysis and trends and effects on
06:18:32 industrial land supply.
06:18:34 The relationship of these amendments to the
06:18:36 comprehensive plan as well as the master plan of the
06:18:38 port of Tampa.

06:18:40 And we had met with the Port Authority back in 2006
06:18:44 when these amendments were first requested, and the
06:18:48 Port Authority did not have any objections to these
06:18:51 amendments.
06:18:52 This particular -- these particular amendment areas
06:18:56 are located within the Ybor channel regional activity
06:18:59 center.
06:18:59 They lie in proximity to several regional attractors
06:19:02 including the port of Tampa, Ybor City, the St. Pete
06:19:05 Times Forum and the high intensity activity center, of
06:19:08 course, is the Tampa central business district.
06:19:11 The request is an opportunity to continue the
06:19:15 revitalization efforts of the downtown core to provide
06:19:17 for 24-hour city, live/work environment.
06:19:22 The Planning Commission heard these amendments on
06:19:24 April the 9th and found them consistent with the
06:19:26 long-range comprehensive plan.
06:19:27 That concludes my presentation.
06:19:36 >> Petitioner?
06:19:39 >> Good evening, Council members.
06:19:40 David Mechanik, 305 south boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
06:19:44 I'm here on behalf of Gibraltar development.

06:19:48 I would like to introduce our project team.
06:19:51 We have Alex Creager, who is a professor of urban
06:19:55 design at Harvard University.
06:19:57 He's also a principle with Chan Creager and Sonovich.
06:20:02 And I also have Mr. David gamble from the Chan Creager
06:20:06 firm.
06:20:07 I have mike English and Evan Johnson who are planners
06:20:09 with Wilson Miller.
06:20:12 Absent this evening but on the project team is Albert
06:20:14 Alfonso of Alfonso architects.
06:20:18 We have three petitions I'm going to address them all
06:20:22 simultaneously.
06:20:23 That will save a little bit of time.
06:20:25 Rose did a good job on the report.
06:20:27 I would just like to reinforce a couple of points.
06:20:31 We have asked for the regional mixed use for the
06:20:33 property that's located within the Channel District
06:20:36 and within the community redevelopment area of the
06:20:40 Channel District.
06:20:42 The regional mixed use is the prevailing land use
06:20:45 classification recommended in the plan for the Channel
06:20:49 District.

06:20:49 We have asked for the urban mixed use category on the
06:20:54 eastern side of the property, which is consistent with
06:20:56 the regional activity center designation for that
06:21:01 property as well as the Adamo redevelopment corridor
06:21:04 classification, and to Ms. Linda Saul-Sena's question,
06:21:09 we are only asking for the extension of the CBD
06:21:13 periphery to address really an anomaly of the
06:21:17 inconsistency between that periphery line and the
06:21:20 community redevelopment area line, so we're just
06:21:23 trying to match those up.
06:21:24 We're not affecting the periphery in connection with
06:21:27 Tampa Heights or the west side of the river, which we
06:21:30 understand was a concern of yours.
06:21:32 It's really just to correct a little procedural glitch
06:21:35 in the comprehensive plan.
06:21:36 At this time, I would like to introduce for the
06:21:39 record, our planning report, which we prepared, dated
06:21:44 March 7th -- March 2007, which Ms. Petrucha referred
06:21:50 to as part of her presentation.
06:21:55 And at this time, I would like to ask Alex Creager to
06:21:59 come up and give a brief presentation.
06:22:02 He has a Powerpoint.

06:22:04 Again, we are combining all three of the petitions.
06:22:07 We'll be brief knowing that you are -- have other
06:22:11 items on your agenda.
06:22:12 Mr. Creager has done a number of urban waterfront
06:22:16 redevelopment projects around the country and the
06:22:20 world, and he wanted to show you some examples of what
06:22:23 can be done with property like this, this particular
06:22:29 real estate on Ybor Channel.
06:22:31 With that, I'll introduce Mr. Creager.
06:22:33 Thank you.
06:22:37 >> My name is Alex Creager.
06:22:40 I'm from Boston, Massachusetts.
06:22:42 On behalf of the petitioners, I've been asked to
06:22:45 develop conceptual plans for this area.
06:22:48 If I may get the Powerpoint started.
06:22:50 You can see the area in question really, the Ybor
06:22:56 Channel.
06:22:57 My firm has had the advantage or the benefit -- the
06:23:01 benefit of working on a number of waterfront
06:23:03 revitalization efforts several dozen in this country
06:23:07 and some internationally as well.
06:23:08 And I just wanted to share a couple of examples, and I

06:23:11 hope the buzzer doesn't go off in two minutes, of
06:23:15 other situations somewhat similar and perhaps possibly
06:23:19 similar to the future that the Ybor Channel might have
06:23:22 in Tampa.
06:23:22 For instance, my hometown being Boston also, of
06:23:27 course, was a very vital port.
06:23:29 You can see in the upper right-hand image, mostly
06:23:32 vacated by the 1950, some of our industries came down
06:23:36 to you here, by the middle of the 20th century, most
06:23:39 of its port areas were vacant parking lots, abandoned
06:23:42 buildings and so forth.
06:23:44 So the city at the time underwent a major sort of
06:23:47 comprehensive reevaluation of the future of these
06:23:49 areas and began to revitalize them for a different set
06:23:53 of uses.
06:23:54 You can see in the transition between the upper
06:23:56 right-hand image and lower image, the transformation
06:24:01 took place.
06:24:02 The formula was somewhat like this, that is, housing
06:24:05 was introduced as a major use, open space, continuous
06:24:10 public access, cultural facilities, perpendicular
06:24:16 streets that had been cut off by the various

06:24:18 industries, make them come closer to the water.
06:24:21 And indeed, a number of cities, not to say Boston was
06:24:24 the first, but a number of cities have undergone
06:24:26 similar transformation whereas historical, of course,
06:24:30 cities depended on the riverfronts and water fronts
06:24:33 and ports for commerce, transportation in the 21st
06:24:36 century, they'll depend upon those water fronts for
06:24:39 simply quality-of-life issues.
06:24:41 In addition, of course, the commerce as well.
06:24:43 There are thousands of cities around the world,
06:24:46 literally thousands of cities around the world that
06:24:48 are trying to find -- they are trying to return their
06:24:51 front face back to their waterfront as opposed to
06:24:54 their kind of backyards, which was the case throughout
06:24:58 most of the 18th, 19th and early 20th century.
06:25:04 You can also see around the world, cities bringing
06:25:07 their most interesting amenities towards the water
06:25:11 fronts, whether alignment of commerce as Singapore or
06:25:15 world famous opera house in Sydney or area in Rio De
06:25:20 Janeiro into again a mixed use neighborhood.
06:25:24 Another example from north of here in Montreal, you
06:25:26 can see its old port in the lower image looking a

06:25:29 little bit like Ybor Channel does today.
06:25:32 Some activity remaining but mostly underutilized.
06:25:36 And then in the upper view, you can see the
06:25:38 transformation, again taking some of the space,
06:25:40 converting it to open space, making it publicly
06:25:43 accessible, bringing roads closer to that edge and
06:25:46 aligning the back of it with primarily housing and
06:25:49 mixed use environments.
06:25:51 One more example, Pittsburgh, of course, wants the
06:25:55 mighty industrial metropolis, certainly of the
06:26:00 northeast.
06:26:03 Pittsburgh along its three river corridors and former
06:26:08 port facilities or at least industrial facilities have
06:26:10 now turned to a similar array of uses.
06:26:12 They repositioned them to accommodate, well, housing
06:26:17 primarily.
06:26:17 Some important cultural facilities, convention center,
06:26:20 couple of ball parks, couple of museums and corporate
06:26:23 headquarters.
06:26:24 And realizing 21st century, bodies of water that
06:26:28 Pittsburgh faced through their industrial might will
06:26:32 be faced by those things that make the 21st city

06:26:35 habitable, enjoyable, desirable, competitive in the
06:26:40 20th century.
06:26:41 You can see some of the things underway, including
06:26:44 perhaps in your future as well, the conversion of
06:26:47 formerly purely industrial water fronts to now
06:26:50 mobility.
06:26:51 Those ball parks built recently, you can see they open
06:26:54 up to the waterfront.
06:26:55 They don't close themselves off.
06:26:57 Would look like river gambling boats.
06:26:59 What they do, they deliver people to those ball parks
06:27:02 as a way to be able to enjoy the quality of the
06:27:05 waterfront environment.
06:27:06 Just two more examples.
06:27:11 Cincinnati along the Ohio, you can see a great stretch
06:27:14 of an environment not only in the process of
06:27:18 transforming the highway but including a fairly large
06:27:21 open space similar to the kind of riverfront promenade
06:27:25 you are producing along with being edged by a variety
06:27:28 of housing and mixed use facilities.
06:27:30 And some cities you can see again, around the world,
06:27:34 fully embarked upon the transformation, this sort of

06:27:38 millennial transformation that suggests that if rivers
06:27:41 and water fronts and ports were essential for the
06:27:43 19th century city quality of life amenities are
06:27:46 important to the 21st century cities and, therefore,
06:27:50 adjustments to both zoning and uses along those bodies
06:27:53 of water begin to take place.
06:27:56 Just two more images, if I may.
06:27:58 You can see one major transformation is housing.
06:28:03 Boston, Vancouver, whose slogan is living first, by
06:28:10 the way, not commerce first, living first, built tens
06:28:13 of thousands of housing units along its bodies of
06:28:16 water.
06:28:17 Below, Miami, of course, it's important to understand
06:28:20 that the future of our cities in the 21st century
06:28:24 will be taking areas such as Ybor Channel, making
06:28:28 better connections to other neighborhoods including
06:28:30 Ybor village and then making them more publicly
06:28:33 accessible, beautiful, desirable, enjoyable.
06:28:37 Last image from a small city, the capital of
06:28:40 Providence -- or the capital of Rhode Island, our
06:28:42 small state.
06:28:43 You can see historically, the capital being placed

06:28:45 very far away in the upper left image.
06:28:48 Separated by the downtown by a variety of industrial
06:28:53 uses.
06:28:54 They began to be abandoned and now a program over the
06:28:56 course of 20 years or so to bring the downtown closer
06:29:00 to the capital, bring the capital closer to
06:29:02 downtown -- uncovering what was a river that was
06:29:07 covered because of its prior lack of a need at least
06:29:11 for railroad terminals and so forth.
06:29:14 In summary, the channel area is a remarkable
06:29:17 opportunity to take what is essential to the history
06:29:20 of the city, its relationship to the body of water and
06:29:24 provide for its future the most appropriate set of
06:29:27 uses which probably is a combination of open space,
06:29:30 public amenities, neighborhood services, housing,
06:29:33 commerce, and perhaps an occasional wonderful citywide
06:29:37 amenity as well.
06:29:38 Thank you.
06:29:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sir, that was a beautiful
06:29:43 presentation.
06:29:43 I think in concept, we all would agree.
06:29:46 Go into the detail of this project, if you could go

06:29:49 back to the first slide, it showed -- right.
06:29:59 We had a similar issue out on rattlesnake point which
06:30:06 you might not be familiar with, but David, I can
06:30:11 direct it to either one of you.
06:30:12 I'm a little concerned about the adjacent tanks.
06:30:16 I don't know what the tanks are.
06:30:17 Maybe we shouldn't even say on the air.
06:30:20 But whatever they are, they are probably not real good
06:30:22 in terms of compatibility with residential.
06:30:24 And I'm wondering, I know on rattlesnake we had some
06:30:29 language to address this.
06:30:34 I'm sure your client is aware of the tanks and how you
06:30:38 are dealing --
06:30:41 >> David Mechanik again, for the record.
06:30:43 First of all, it's a petroleum product which is not
06:30:47 hazardous in the sense of the chlorine facility that
06:30:50 was existing on rattlesnake point.
06:30:53 We also researched the regulations concerning those
06:30:56 facilities, and that's in the report that we passed
06:30:59 out.
06:31:00 There are substantial setback requirements for those
06:31:04 facilities.

06:31:05 And in addition to that, there's a road as well as
06:31:10 setbacks that we would -- that we would impose as part
06:31:13 of our site plan rezoning, which, of course, we're not
06:31:16 here on this evening.
06:31:17 But we intend to fully buffer that particular edge of
06:31:21 the property.
06:31:22 As I indicated, there is already a substantial setback
06:31:25 that's already established there.
06:31:26 And these are not hazardous materials.
06:31:29 So we feel as if -- yeah, it's a petroleum product of
06:31:34 some sort, yes, sir.
06:31:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because we are putting some
06:31:39 significant density there.
06:31:40 I apologize for not raising the question earlier, but
06:31:44 I was sort of looking at it myopically just in terms
06:31:48 of the site itself.
06:31:49 I didn't realize those tanks were there.
06:31:51 >> We did address that extensively in our report,
06:31:54 Mr. Dingfelder.
06:31:56 >> Many of these other industrial cities, there are
06:32:00 such seeming in-- in fact, one of the great charms
06:32:04 about cities especially in 21st centuries in living

06:32:07 in proximity to things quite different.
06:32:09 You have to mitigate, control and be careful, but
06:32:13 there are lots of people who would still want to live
06:32:16 against a waterfront that seems to have a thriving
06:32:19 necessity about it, which would be the case here as
06:32:21 well.
06:32:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Any other questions?
06:32:28 >> We are finished.
06:32:30 I would like to just hand out a paper that Mr. Creager
06:32:34 wrote.
06:32:34 It was actually a chapter in a book published by the
06:32:38 Urban Land Institute called "remaking the urban
06:32:41 waterfront."
06:32:41 We're just passing out a copy of this article for your
06:32:46 reading pleasure in the future.
06:32:49 We appreciate your favorable consideration of these
06:32:52 three amendments this evening.
06:32:54 Tonight, if you all approve this it will be the first
06:32:57 step in a multistep process that we will go through in
06:33:01 terms of a zoning and DRI approval.
06:33:05 We appreciate your favorable consideration to allow
06:33:08 for the transformation of this urban water front into

06:33:13 something like some of the examples you saw here this
06:33:16 evening.
06:33:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a number of questions, as
06:33:23 usual.
06:33:24 My first question arose from -- and if you can give
06:33:33 this to me in a nutshell and this is something I'm
06:33:36 wondering, we are asked for these land use changes and
06:33:39 zoning changes in the Channelside and Ybor, if you can
06:33:45 give me in a few sentences, what is the master plan
06:33:48 for the port of Tampa? We're looking at this area
06:33:53 that was port.
06:33:53 When you talk about redeveloping the character of this
06:33:57 area, it was a port.
06:33:58 I still enjoy driving by there with my son and seeing
06:34:05 the ship building going on.
06:34:08 I feel like I'm in the dark where the port is going to
06:34:11 go.
06:34:11 >> There's a port master plan that's in the process of
06:34:13 being updated, so we don't have the benefit of the new
06:34:16 adopted plan.
06:34:17 But the plan that was adopted in 2000, specifically
06:34:21 recognized the new land use pattern to some extent

06:34:26 established by the port and by the City of Tampa in
06:34:29 terms of establishing the aquarium and then the port
06:34:32 with its office building.
06:34:34 You have the Channelside shops.
06:34:37 All of that started to establish the trend toward a
06:34:40 mixed use type development.
06:34:42 Even the arena was really probably the first catalyst
06:34:46 toward the redevelopment, even though it's not in the
06:34:49 Channel District, it opened up the area and allowed
06:34:54 people to recognize the development opportunities in
06:34:55 that area, but specific to your question, the port
06:34:58 master plan specifically recognizes the entire western
06:35:05 edge of Ybor Channel up through the northern part as
06:35:07 redeveloping in a mixed use.
06:35:09 The port has also recognized that they need to
06:35:16 establish -- they are not reducing or diminishing the
06:35:19 maritime industry which it serves and those uses are
06:35:22 going to be accommodated or addressed in the plan
06:35:27 further to the south on port property.
06:35:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Sounds to me like their plan is moving
06:35:31 all of that kind of industry away from there.
06:35:34 >> Well, at least on the west side of the channel.

06:35:37 I mean, I'm not going to represent that it's all going
06:35:41 away.
06:35:41 That's not what the plan says.
06:35:43 Certainly the property that we are seeking the plan
06:35:47 amendment for this evening.
06:35:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I enjoy seeing all those waterfront
06:35:51 cities and what's going on, but I think there is kind
06:35:54 of a big difference between that little channel that
06:35:56 we're looking at and some of the Charles river and the
06:36:00 big port cities.
06:36:03 So my concern and it's somewhat reassuring to see
06:36:06 those pictures of other city water fronts and how they
06:36:09 are redeveloping, but what I feel that we need to see,
06:36:13 and I don't know if this is part of the -- you know,
06:36:17 the vision for channelside in Ybor is, there were a
06:36:21 lot of open spaces.
06:36:22 And that water was opened up to the public.
06:36:25 And there was a lot of green, and in general, other
06:36:29 than maybe one of the photographs we just saw, they
06:36:32 were kind of mid-rise, low-rise.
06:36:36 There was a compatibility with what was around them.
06:36:40 And my big concern is, if we're going to open this up

06:36:45 to the kind of densities and the kind of height that
06:36:49 isn't really compatible with -- and really isn't going
06:36:53 to create that kind of character where people are
06:36:56 going to want to live and in an urban setting because
06:37:00 you need those things.
06:37:01 So that's what I'm going to need to see to feel like
06:37:04 this is, you know, an appropriate way to go.
06:37:11 >> We probably didn't explain this, the site is
06:37:14 currently zoned industrial.
06:37:15 So we could not build any residential uses on this
06:37:18 site without a rezoning coming back to City Council.
06:37:22 The procedure, of course, at this stage we don't have
06:37:25 a site plan to present to you.
06:37:27 We do have a vision which will include a substantial
06:37:31 amount of open space on this property, but it's not
06:37:33 technically tied to this plan amendment, but
06:37:36 nothing -- no residential uses could be built on the
06:37:40 site without first coming in for a rezoning!
06:37:44 And we're working on a zoning plan as we speak, which
06:37:47 will be presented or filed with the city sometime in
06:37:50 August to coincide with what hopefully will be the
06:37:54 final approval of this plan amendment.

06:37:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me say one more thing, because I
06:38:00 think maybe Linda and Charlie and John were here in
06:38:04 1988 -- but the thing that I think we're going to need
06:38:11 to see, when you do get to the rezoning and the site
06:38:14 plans, we've got to see some park and some green.
06:38:18 And I'm concerned that this is -- I'd like to see the
06:38:22 city and our Parks Department have some kind of --
06:38:26 where is that presence when we're doing this?
06:38:28 I know you're a developer and you want to build.
06:38:34 But I feel like this is never going to be an
06:38:36 attractive place unless we make it feel like a
06:38:43 parkland.
06:38:44 >> We understand that.
06:38:44 And we have incorporated a number of both urban-type
06:38:49 parks as well as green parks on the site plan, and
06:38:52 look forward to presenting that to Council.
06:38:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: First of all, I want to welcome
06:39:00 Mr. Creager to Tampa.
06:39:01 This is a really big deal.
06:39:02 This is like a world-class guy who is coming here to
06:39:05 help us think through our waterfront.
06:39:07 It's exciting.

06:39:08 Welcome.
06:39:08 The densities that are -- the request before us, which
06:39:15 is to change this from an industrial to a mixed use
06:39:18 potentially very dense, is a very dramatic change.
06:39:21 And 20 years ago when I was first elected to Council,
06:39:25 this area was a rusty old industrial area that nobody
06:39:28 would have considered doing this to.
06:39:30 But a lot of people working together with vision have
06:39:33 transformed the Channel District into a very desirable
06:39:36 area, and it's made the derelict phosphate plant look
06:39:43 like a great place to do some very glamorous, high-end
06:39:47 residential, which just proves with enough imagination
06:39:50 and money, you really can transform an urban setting,
06:39:53 and it's very exciting.
06:39:54 And I think that's what is before us, if you look at
06:39:57 it, to the north of it is the Crosstown expressway,
06:40:00 and I think that anything these people would do would
06:40:02 be oriented toward the water views, and the port is
06:40:09 rethinking in its master plan the relocation of all
06:40:12 the serious industrial uses to its substantial acreage
06:40:16 to the south, and I think this is very exciting.
06:40:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First, I would like Ms. Petrucha to

06:40:27 speak to the tanks.
06:40:28 And Rose, while you're coming up, Ms. Mulhern, I think
06:40:32 you're right on in terms of expressing a concern about
06:40:36 open space and public access in these waterfront
06:40:41 areas.
06:40:42 Mr. Creager is shaking his head so I feel much better
06:40:50 about it since he's written the book.
06:40:52 I think the way we do that is now at this point, I
06:40:56 think the entire channel wrapped around there now has
06:41:01 appropriate comp plan amendments for urban mixed use
06:41:04 and those high density urban mixed use.
06:41:07 So the comp plan part of it is sort of over, and now I
06:41:10 believe over the next couple of years, we will start
06:41:14 to be seeing the rezonings come in.
06:41:18 And that's going to be extremely important, because
06:41:20 when the rezonings come in, I think it will be
06:41:23 inherent on us as well as the development community
06:41:26 who comes to us to make sure we really stress a
06:41:30 consistent approach to ensuring the open space and the
06:41:35 public access and the other appropriate amenities on
06:41:38 this extremely important area.
06:41:40 This is sort of finishing up Channelside.

06:41:43 We started it on the landward side and now we're
06:41:47 finishing on the water side which I think in some ways
06:41:49 is backwards.
06:41:50 That's okay.
06:41:50 Anyway, Rose, how about the tanks?
06:41:53 You guys looked at the tanks next door, and you're
06:41:57 comfortable with the density adjacent to --
06:42:00 >> Again, if this amendment is transmitted and it
06:42:03 comes back and you adopt it, I believe it will be at
06:42:07 the time of the rezoning request that you'll be
06:42:10 looking at the specifics as to how this project
06:42:13 transitions over to that particular area.
06:42:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But at this point, the Planning
06:42:16 Commission is comfortable with it because you sent it
06:42:19 to us with your blessing.
06:42:20 >> Yeah, we are and like I said, we spoke to the Port
06:42:22 Authority as quickly as possible when these requests
06:42:26 came in to get their inputs on these amendments and
06:42:29 they had no problems with these particular amendments.
06:42:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
06:42:35 Like Ms. Saul-Sena so adequately spoke, if we had
06:42:42 realized -- if we had a chance to look back at a

06:42:45 picture in time, back in the '40s and '50s, you
06:42:48 wouldn't believe the change that's on Channelside now.
06:42:52 It's just dramatic in nature.
06:42:54 It certainly has improved not a hundred folds, a
06:42:59 thousand folds.
06:43:00 I remember the banana dock, I remember the Coca-Cola
06:43:04 bottling company.
06:43:05 I remember all along the edge and where the aquarium
06:43:09 now sits and other properties that were not attractive
06:43:12 at all.
06:43:13 I mean, no one wanted to live in that area.
06:43:15 If you gave them a house, they moved the house.
06:43:18 It was that bad.
06:43:20 What we're having here is something like Ms. Mulhern
06:43:24 adequately also put about a river.
06:43:27 We don't have that traffic flow like the Ohio river
06:43:30 where there are barges two and three times the length
06:43:32 of football fields with a big tug pushing them along
06:43:36 all the way to Pittsburgh, taking gasoline, oil and
06:43:39 all different kinds of contaminants.
06:43:41 That's not here.
06:43:42 We have cleaned up through our abilities, not only in

06:43:46 the government, but in the private sector and through
06:43:49 the port.
06:43:51 They've done an excellent job of relocating those that
06:43:54 were there to somewhere else.
06:43:56 It's time that we start looking urban.
06:44:00 It's time that we're looking at density, because
06:44:02 without density, you're never going to get what we've
06:44:05 all been talking about, and that's rail.
06:44:07 It's not going to happen unless we have people living
06:44:09 here.
06:44:10 And I think this is a step forward in the right
06:44:12 direction to make this thing happen.
06:44:15 This is not a zoning.
06:44:17 This is a planned comp change to allow us and whoever
06:44:19 the petitioner may be here coming forward to make a
06:44:23 decision whether we want to do this or not at a later
06:44:26 date.
06:44:26 And I'm for this being done.
06:44:30 Thank you.
06:44:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who wants
06:44:32 to speak on item two, three or four.
06:44:34 We have a motion and second to close.

06:44:37 All in favor, aye.
06:44:38 What's the pleasure of Council?
06:44:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to transmit two, three and
06:44:42 four.
06:44:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
06:44:44 All in favor of the motion, aye.
06:44:45 Opposed, nay.
06:44:46 [Motion Carried]
06:44:46 Item number 5, we need to open.
06:44:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
06:44:49 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and a second.
06:44:52 All in favor of the motion, aye.
06:44:53 [Motion Carried]
06:44:58 >> Rose Petrucha, Planning Commission staff.
06:45:00 This next agenda item relates to the Virginia Park
06:45:08 neighborhood area.
06:45:10 This is an amendment that the Tampa City Council
06:45:14 initiated over a year ago in response to a request of
06:45:19 the Neighborhood Association.
06:45:22 And the request was to examine the area of Virginia
06:45:24 Park for possible planned amendment from residential
06:45:28 10, which is 10 dwelling unit to the acre category, to

06:45:32 a residential 6 land use plan classification, six
06:45:37 dwelling units to the acre.
06:45:38 This particular amendment affects approximately
06:45:41 150 acres in the vicinity of San Luis, which is on the
06:45:46 northern boundary.
06:45:46 Manhattan Avenue, which is the western boundary.
06:45:49 Euclid Avenue, the southern boundary and South Dale
06:45:52 Mabry, the eastern boundary.
06:45:53 We had briefed the City Council, I think it was
06:46:09 approximately about two months ago, so I'm not going
06:46:11 to go into a whole lot of detail on it so we can get
06:46:14 to the public hearing part of it.
06:46:16 Virginia Park when it was platted back in the '20s
06:46:25 and much of the land area -- or not much of the land
06:46:27 area, but many homes were developed on 50-acre --
06:46:31 50-foot frontage, 5,000-square-foot lots.
06:46:34 As a result of World War II, many of the areas did not
06:46:42 develop, but after the war, this area was ripe for
06:46:45 development again and it kind of developed with this
06:46:48 urban pattern in some areas.
06:46:50 The homes were built usually with a few bedrooms,
06:46:58 usually one story.

06:47:00 And some property owners bought approximately a lot
06:47:05 and a half for approximately a 7500-square-foot lot
06:47:10 configuration with a ranch style suburban house.
06:47:15 Today, in the particular area, the community has been
06:47:22 feeling a lot of development pressures in this area as
06:47:29 many of the houses have been torn down and new housing
06:47:31 has been going in.
06:47:34 Much built in importance with the Land Development
06:47:36 regulations, with usually a larger lot footprint on
06:47:43 the lot.
06:47:44 And the neighborhood was looking at the aspect that
06:47:47 much of the greenspace in the front of the houses are
06:47:49 being replaced with large driveways.
06:47:51 The Neighborhood Association prepared the background
06:47:57 report on this particular amendment, and when we
06:48:00 received the report, we realized that much of the
06:48:04 concerns of the neighborhood really relate to design
06:48:07 and urban form factors, much more so than density.
06:48:11 In the further analysis of this amendment -- and
06:48:23 looking at the potential aspect of amending this area
06:48:27 from a residential -- from a residential 10 to
06:48:30 residential 6, the impact on many of these properties

06:48:35 would be to make some nonconforming in terms of the
06:48:40 density.
06:48:40 We held a neighborhood meeting for the community to
06:48:49 learn the affected property owners' feelings on this
06:48:53 particular amendment.
06:48:54 Many of the property owners that came and spoke to us
06:48:57 were not in favor of this particular amendment.
06:49:00 Based on the statements that were made, based on the
06:49:08 conditions of the area, based on the goals, objectives
06:49:11 and policies of the comprehensive plan, the staff and
06:49:16 the Planning Commission found this particular
06:49:20 amendment inconsistent with the goals, objectives and
06:49:22 policies of the plan.
06:49:23 However, many of the issues that this neighborhood
06:49:26 raised are issues that we have been hearing through
06:49:28 many other neighborhoods in the City of Tampa.
06:49:31 So the recommendation is not to amend the long-range
06:49:34 comprehensive plan of the future land use map, but to
06:49:37 continue this amendment into the plan update so that
06:49:40 we can address more comprehensively the issues of this
06:49:46 particular neighborhood.
06:49:46 The Planning Commission on April 9th found this

06:49:50 amendment inconsistent as currently proposed and did
06:49:53 concur to request to you to continue this amendment
06:49:57 into the Tampa comprehensive plan update.
06:50:02 That concludes my presentation.
06:50:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Does anybody else have any
06:50:07 comments?
06:50:08 I didn't want to jump in.
06:50:09 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
06:50:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
06:50:10 I've been working on this with the neighborhood and
06:50:13 with the Planning Commission staff and our staff for
06:50:18 quite a while.
06:50:19 I'm frankly, a little disappointed that this is where
06:50:23 we are.
06:50:23 The Planning Commission and Planning Commission staff
06:50:27 was recommending that we continue it and roll it into
06:50:30 the plan update, which, you know, at today's day, I'm
06:50:39 sort of resigned to accept that recommendation.
06:50:41 However, what I'm real curious about, and I haven't
06:50:45 heard anything from anybody is, what are you going to
06:50:49 do with it?
06:50:50 What are you going to do with it then when it gets to

06:50:54 the plan update?
06:50:55 Then what?
06:50:56 >> The intent is to look at the issues that the
06:50:58 neighborhood brought up in a more comprehensive
06:51:00 fashion, because it is affecting other neighborhoods
06:51:03 as well.
06:51:03 If you're looking for a specific answer, I cannot give
06:51:08 that to you today, because we're still exploring that.
06:51:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't want it to just get pushed
06:51:16 aside.
06:51:17 I agree with you, this is not an issue that's unique
06:51:19 to this neighborhood.
06:51:20 These are neighborhoods that are -- have been under a
06:51:22 lot of pressure over the years, and that pressure
06:51:27 comes -- you know, ends up here.
06:51:29 It ends up here in front of us with very contentious
06:51:35 rezonings that have to do with converting a parcel and
06:51:39 splitting a single parcel.
06:51:41 I mean, that's what it ends up doing.
06:51:43 You do enough of those and pretty soon you have a
06:51:46 major impact on a neighborhood.
06:51:47 And that's what happened in Palma Ceia.

06:51:49 We responded to it in a appropriate manner, and I
06:51:52 think that was good.
06:51:53 It's happened in Virginia Park and there seems to be
06:51:56 more resistance to the responding to it.
06:51:58 I don't know, are there folks from the community that
06:52:07 are going to speak to it?
06:52:08 >> I believe so.
06:52:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to provide a little
06:52:10 historical background that in the year before I was
06:52:15 elected which was 1986, there wasn't much going on in
06:52:18 the city.
06:52:18 And to spur redevelopment under Tom Vann being
06:52:22 Chairman, vast amounts of South Tampa were rezoned to
06:52:25 multifamily in an effort to encourage redevelopment.
06:52:28 It turned out that basically the neighborhood stayed
06:52:36 the same.
06:52:36 They stayed single family.
06:52:37 But the zoning changed that encouraged higher
06:52:39 densities in the existing development pattern.
06:52:41 What we are seeing now many years later is the
06:52:43 conflict between these 1986 decisions.
06:52:46 The city re-did its entire zoning code in 1986.

06:52:50 They rented -- it was at Curtis Hixon.
06:52:54 It was huge quantities of rezonings in the night like
06:52:57 five hours for five months.
06:52:59 It was crazy.
06:53:00 Every single parcel in the city of rezoned.
06:53:02 This is a result of that.
06:53:09 I felt it was important for you all to know how it got
06:53:12 here.
06:53:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Petrucha, I had a question and
06:53:20 maybe this will help us understand why you don't want
06:53:22 to do this now, but it looks like there are a lot of
06:53:24 nonconforming -- I don't know if you can tell me in
06:53:32 general, but what kind of buildings are these?
06:53:39 >> You're talking about the --
06:53:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Those are all single-family.
06:53:42 >> These are all single-family.
06:53:43 The aspect of changing the long-range comprehensive
06:53:46 plan would force the city to have to do an area
06:53:51 rezoning.
06:53:52 It's all zoned single-family.
06:53:54 The zoning in this area is RS-60 requiring
06:53:57 6,000-square-foot lot.

06:53:58 It's all single-family.
06:54:03 By changing the plan to 60 units to the acre, the
06:54:06 smallest lot requirement is 7500-square-foot lot.
06:54:13 Many of these parcels were developed at less than that
06:54:15 in compliance with the comprehensive plan, in
06:54:18 compliance with zoning.
06:54:19 The Neighborhood Association when they provided us
06:54:26 their background report, it appears the emphasis of
06:54:28 that background report was to prevent anyone from
06:54:30 coming in to request the small lot, the
06:54:32 5,000-square-foot lot.
06:54:33 That can't go today, because that would require
06:54:37 rezoning.
06:54:37 That would have to come before you.
06:54:39 It's not a threat.
06:54:41 I think -- anyone asking for the request for rezoning.
06:54:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's exactly the threat that
06:54:51 brought us to this point today, because we kept having
06:54:54 them.
06:54:54 We kept having them time and time again.
06:55:00 All they had to do was come in for the rezoning either
06:55:03 with the PD or before that with the 90% rule.

06:55:05 It wasn't very hard for them to get it.
06:55:11 They were tired of coming in here night after night,
06:55:13 month after month to do it.
06:55:15 You're right.
06:55:15 It did require a rezoning.
06:55:15 I wasn't like they could build on the small lot without
06:55:15 the rezoning.
06:55:15 We're all in agreement on that.
06:55:22 What they were trying to avoid was to say, we don't
06:55:25 want that anymore, we don't want those small lots.
06:55:28 This is a larger lot neighborhood, and we want to keep
06:55:30 it that way.
06:55:32 And, you know, that's where we are today, we haven't
06:55:35 moved from that.
06:55:36 But, you know, I don't want you to misstate that.
06:55:39 >> No.
06:55:40 And with all due respect, when you look at the goals,
06:55:42 objectives and policies, you look at the location of
06:55:44 this area in relation to the bigger picture, this is
06:55:48 adjacent to the Britton plaza, which is a community
06:55:52 activity center of the comprehensive plan, this is a
06:55:54 major transit center.

06:55:55 This is within walking distance of this particular
06:55:59 area.
06:55:59 You look at all the factors.
06:56:02 This is not exclusively a large-lot area.
06:56:06 There are many smaller lots in this particular area.
06:56:10 When I say "smaller," they are consistent with the
06:56:13 existing plan and the existing zoning.
06:56:23 >> When you look at this, so many of the houses are
06:56:26 not consistent.
06:56:26 >> Well, they are consistent currently.
06:56:28 You would impact these by changing the comprehensive
06:56:34 plan.
06:56:35 That's the impact.
06:56:45 >> If we make this change, they are still able to stay
06:56:48 there, able to build, grandfathered in.
06:56:50 They are not threatened.
06:56:51 This doesn't speak to the current situation.
06:56:55 It speaks to the future.
06:56:56 Is that not correct?
06:56:59 >> Well, that is correct.
06:57:00 But some of the other -- the analysis showed that
06:57:04 under the existing conditions today that based on the

06:57:08 existing zoning, there would only be about nine houses
06:57:11 that could be built.
06:57:12 Based on the configuration.
06:57:16 >> But the ones there are fine and people could
06:57:17 rebuild.
06:57:18 And the whole policy decision which is
06:57:20 appropriately -- is how much density do we want here?
06:57:25 We talked about adjacent to downtown is appropriate
06:57:27 for great densities to support transit.
06:57:30 This is the middle of flat Interbay, is this really a
06:57:33 place where we want to see greater density?
06:57:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public who wants
06:57:41 to speak to item number 5?
06:57:43 >> Good evening Council members.
06:57:44 My name is Isaac.
06:57:46 I own property at 3807 Euclid Avenue.
06:57:50 I was unable to attend the neighborhood meetings
06:57:53 because they were scheduled at times I was out of
06:57:57 town.
06:57:57 So I wanted to take this opportunity and come and
06:58:00 voice my objection to this proposed change because I
06:58:07 have owned the property for a long period of time and

06:58:10 like previous speakers have said on other issues --
06:58:19 not paying the rent on time or demolishing or
06:58:22 destroying buildings and so forth.
06:58:24 My property is right off of Dale Mabry and across the
06:58:28 street, there is a convenience store and huge
06:58:33 apartment building.
06:58:33 Catty-corner is Britton plaza.
06:58:36 So it will affect me financially very seriously.
06:58:39 Downzoning, and I would ask you don't approve the
06:58:46 plan.
06:58:47 If you do, that you accept my property which may be a
06:58:50 little different.
06:58:51 It's not desirable for residential, but it could be
06:58:56 maybe office or small condo or maybe a nice store or
06:59:01 something.
06:59:02 So I would request that you consider excluding 3807
06:59:06 Euclid Avenue from rezoning if you do it, or hopefully
06:59:12 as I said earlier, maybe there's a chance that you
06:59:16 will continue it and reject it tonight and we see the
06:59:20 next time what happens.
06:59:21 Thank you very much.
06:59:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

06:59:22 Anyone else like to speak?
06:59:30 >> Good evening, City Council.
06:59:31 My name is Paul black.
06:59:32 I live at 3904 Leona street.
06:59:36 I'm in favor of this request to lower the density from
06:59:41 10 to 6.
06:59:42 I feel that the infrastructure is at risk.
06:59:47 Traffic is getting heavier, and I've lived in this
06:59:51 neighborhood about 44 years, so I've seen the builders
06:59:56 come in, take advantage of this situation and leaves
07:00:07 folks that have been there longer kind of in the
07:00:10 shadow of these large two-story homes.
07:00:13 I'm not against two-story homes necessarily, they just
07:00:16 don't fit into this neighborhood in the way that I
07:00:18 think it should be.
07:00:19 I would request that you support this amendment and
07:00:26 lower the density.
07:00:26 Thank you very much.
07:00:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
07:00:28 Anyone else like to speak?
07:00:39 >> Thank you.
07:00:39 I've been a homeowner in this area for 20 years now.

07:00:43 Warren ball.
07:00:43 I've been a homeowner in this area for 20 years.
07:00:47 And my confusion on the amendment is the
07:00:51 grandfathering.
07:00:51 I like it the way it is.
07:00:53 I understand a lot of people don't like the lots being
07:00:55 split and extra house going up.
07:00:57 I disagree.
07:00:59 But if this is passed over the objections of some
07:01:02 residents like myself, how do we go about making sure
07:01:06 we're grandfathered in for our property -- so our
07:01:09 property does not go down because we got rezoned
07:01:11 against our will?
07:01:11 Can anyone answer the question?
07:01:14 >>GWEN MILLER: The Planning Commission will as soon as
07:01:17 everybody is finished speaking.
07:01:18 Next speaker.
07:01:26 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
07:01:27 My name is Chen.
07:01:29 I live at 3917 Kensington Avenue.
07:01:32 The reason why I'm here tonight, because my family
07:01:34 have two vacant RS-60 lots in Virginia Park at this

07:01:37 time.
07:01:38 Both lot sites are under 7,400 square feet.
07:01:42 I just wonder what happens to our vacant lot if
07:01:45 amendment 06-32 is approved tonight.
07:01:52 Can we do anything on top of the property in the
07:01:54 future?
07:01:54 Thank you.
07:01:54 >> Thank you. Next speaker.
07:01:55 >> Good evening, Madam Chair, members of Council, my
07:01:57 name is John Grandoff, Suite 3700, Bank of America
07:02:01 Plaza.
07:02:01 I represent Sandra Busart who owns her home at 3816
07:02:05 West Sevilla.
07:02:06 And she urges you to follow the Planning Commission's
07:02:10 finding of inconsistency.
07:02:17 I think it's important to realize that this Virginia
07:02:19 Park plat is basically a 50-foot plat.
07:02:22 And Ms. Mulhern, you raise an excellent question, what
07:02:25 occurs if we change it to an R-6?
07:02:28 Well, you take the square footage of an acre, 43,560
07:02:34 square feet and divide it by six, and your resulting
07:02:37 number is about 7200 square feet.

07:02:38 So now you have to have a minimum of 7200 square feet
07:02:41 under the comp plan to develop.
07:02:44 You will then have to do an areawide rezoning to
07:02:47 RS-75.
07:02:48 That's where you're going to create a lot of
07:02:50 nonconforming lots.
07:02:51 Because remember, the plat is down at about 55 feet
07:02:55 wide.
07:02:55 The issue is, the development result.
07:03:01 And I've walked this neighborhood, I've run this
07:03:03 neighborhood.
07:03:03 People are concerned about and angry about are large
07:03:07 garages, very small setbacks of seven feet and the
07:03:10 towering of these homes over smaller homes that were
07:03:13 built right after World War II.
07:03:15 If you go into the Planning Commission's findings, the
07:03:18 solution is to change table 4.2, which creates your
07:03:21 setbacks under the zoning code.
07:03:24 It's a problem with aesthetics, because if you do go
07:03:26 to RS 6 and you come up now with the necessary square
07:03:34 footage, you're still going to have a home with a
07:03:36 seven foot setback on both sides with a gigantic

07:03:39 garage and it will be 35 feet high.
07:03:41 You're not going to attack the aesthetic problem.
07:03:44 I wanted to caution you all, and I think the Planning
07:03:47 Commission is correct, increasing or changing the
07:03:49 density is not the solution.
07:03:52 It's a performance standards.
07:03:54 It's how are the regulations drafted which is the
07:03:56 solution.
07:03:57 I think you have to roll up your arms and look at
07:03:59 that -- roll up your sleeves and let's work on better
07:04:03 setbacks and better performance standards in the code.
07:04:07 And I think you would have a better result.
07:04:09 Thank you very much.
07:04:17 >> Good evening.
07:04:17 My name is David Sommers.
07:04:19 3612 west Clark circle.
07:04:22 I have a lot that's 118 by six.
07:04:25 It's actually 13,064 square feet which I've been told
07:04:30 I can build two houses on this lot, because each lot
07:04:33 is 6500 square feet, if I'm correct.
07:04:35 If you guys pass this amendment, then I will lose
07:04:40 money in the long run.

07:04:41 I bought this 15 years ago because I saw them building
07:04:47 down south Tampa.
07:04:48 Also, if you stop the building, you won't be
07:04:50 collecting all these taxes that you guys are going to
07:04:52 need with all these budget cuts.
07:04:54 I won't say I paid very little, because that would
07:04:59 probably be the wrong term to use, but I pay low taxes
07:05:03 because I've been there a long time.
07:05:05 If you took my lot and sold it and broke it in half,
07:05:07 you would collect $20,000 for both houses. I only pay
07:05:14 1500.
07:05:15 So you would lose a lot of money in that if you did
07:05:17 that.
07:05:37 >> Good evening.
07:05:38 I have before the Council, little green, not the green
07:05:41 in wallets, but the green that was here before any of
07:05:44 us were born.
07:05:45 Our zoning may help to relieve some of the
07:05:48 overcrowding in our neighborhood there be preserving a
07:05:51 fraction of greenspace.
07:05:52 Too much heavy construction and extreme density
07:05:56 affects the quality of life in any situation in and

07:06:00 our little neighborhood is no exception to that rule.
07:06:04 Floridians like George Perkins Marsh, Harriet Beacher
07:06:09 Stow, Marjorie Stone McDouglas, Arthur Marshall, all
07:06:16 tried to warn us about the vanishing greenspace.
07:06:20 In our century, John Weiss is trying to protect our
07:06:24 neighborhood from excessive overcrowding when he
07:06:26 proposed the R-6 zoning.
07:06:28 R-6 zoning will relieve us from some of the
07:06:30 overcrowding, and I'm all for it.
07:06:33 I have a letter here from Tampa City Councilman John
07:06:37 Dingfelder pledging to save greenspace in Tampa.
07:06:45 In a letter from Mayor Pam Iorio, recognizing the
07:06:49 importance of preserving our environment, R-6 zoning
07:06:55 can diminish construction and preserve greenspace.
07:06:57 So I ask you to support this decision.
07:06:59 Thank you for your time.
07:07:00 It has been an honor to speak before you on this
07:07:00 important matter.
07:07:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
07:07:12 Ms. Petrucha, would you come back and answer the
07:07:12 gentleman's question about the grandfather.
07:07:12 >> I believe the gentleman had stated whether or not

07:07:15 if the amendment went through, how would he be
07:07:17 protected or something to that effect.
07:07:19 The aspect of, if this amendment were to go forward,
07:07:24 be transmitted, come back and you adopted it, it would
07:07:28 require the city to go through an area rezoning.
07:07:31 That area rezoning then would make a number of these
07:07:34 properties nonconforming.
07:07:36 Ms. Saul-Sena stated --
07:07:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a point of order.
07:07:40 Two things.
07:07:43 One, you and I and Terry, who is sitting quietly in
07:07:46 the back, okay, talked many, many times about just
07:07:49 like we did in Palma Ceia, that if it's a
07:07:53 nonconforming property, if we create a nonconforming
07:07:56 use, okay, then we would carve it out.
07:07:59 Which is what we did in Palma Ceia, which is what you
07:08:02 did in Palma Ceia.
07:08:03 We talked about that numerous times, when we talked
07:08:06 about Virginia Park with John Weiss, we talked about
07:08:09 the same program.
07:08:10 That's what I talked about.
07:08:11 Maybe I've been in different meetings.

07:08:13 So I'm just saying we recognize that there might be
07:08:16 some nonconforming uses.
07:08:18 You've shown us the map that says if we went forward
07:08:21 today, we would create some nonconforming uses.
07:08:24 If we did that, I know it's my intent that we would
07:08:27 carve those out so we wouldn't have nonconforming
07:08:31 uses.
07:08:32 We would leave those folks alone, number one.
07:08:34 Number two, just like we did in Palma Ceia, we would
07:08:38 allow people to opt out.
07:08:40 I said that from the very get-go three years ago, that
07:08:44 we don't want to mess with people's property rights if
07:08:47 they don't want us to -- you know, if they don't want
07:08:50 to go along with the program when we do the notice
07:08:52 letters, specifically addressing your parcel is going
07:08:55 to be changed in a comp plan amendment that sort of
07:08:57 thing, that we either allow people to opt out both at
07:09:01 the plan stage and at the rezoning stage.
07:09:04 We did that in Palma Ceia.
07:09:05 We could do that now.
07:09:07 And I think that, you know, I think that it's wrong to
07:09:09 create alarm that those options aren't available to

07:09:13 this Council.
07:09:13 Those options are available to this Council just like
07:09:16 they were in Palma Ceia.
07:09:18 >> There's a difference between the Palma Ceia
07:09:20 amendment and this particular amendment.
07:09:22 The Palma Ceia amendment, the zoning in that
07:09:24 particular area already allowed.
07:09:26 And the question was town house development.
07:09:29 In the Palma Ceia amendment, town houses could be
07:09:32 built by right if they had enough of the land area.
07:09:35 In this particular area, this area is all
07:09:37 single-family development.
07:09:39 It's different than the Palma Ceia.
07:09:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm talking about procedure.
07:09:43 Procedure, we could implement both of those
07:09:46 procedures.
07:09:46 Let me finish.
07:09:49 The procedure is what I'm focusing on.
07:09:52 I'm not saying Palma Ceia is the same as Virginia
07:09:55 Park.
07:09:55 It's not.
07:09:56 I agree with you a hundred percent.

07:09:58 We have a different set of circumstance in Palma Ceia
07:10:01 than we do in Virginia Park.
07:10:02 But procedurally, we could do the same two things we
07:10:06 did in Palma Ceia that we could do in Virginia Park,
07:10:09 which I just stated a minute ago.
07:10:12 We could identify the potentially nonconforming uses
07:10:16 and we could carve them out.
07:10:17 We could allow people to opt out so it would become a
07:10:21 voluntary program.
07:10:22 And we could do that.
07:10:23 You know what, 20 minutes ago, I said I'm okay with
07:10:27 allowing this to get rolled into the plan update.
07:10:30 I'm not thrilled with it, but I'll live with it.
07:10:33 And I don't think the neighborhood is thrilled with
07:10:36 it, but let's deal with it in the plan update.
07:10:43 >>JULIA COLE: I just wanted to pose a question.
07:10:46 I don't know if it's the Planning Commission or who it
07:10:48 is.
07:10:49 I haven't been real involved in this process up till
07:10:51 now.
07:10:52 What I'm wondering is if we've identified on a
07:10:54 parcel-by-parcel basis which parcels would, as

07:10:58 developed today, become a nonconforming lot?
07:11:02 It may be better to go ahead and do it as part of the
07:11:08 plan update to allow the opportunity to get those
07:11:11 specific folio numbers, pull them out of this so that
07:11:15 we aren't creating these nonconforming lots.
07:11:18 Because once we put this comprehensive plan
07:11:21 designation on it, we would be obligated then at the
07:11:25 zoning level to deal with it, which we would then not
07:11:28 be able to pull out.
07:11:29 So I just ask that question.
07:11:30 I don't know if it would be better to do it as part of
07:11:34 the plan update so we can pull out the folios and
07:11:37 relook at those from that perspective.
07:11:41 >> We have not looked at it on a folio,
07:11:43 parcel-by-parcel basis.
07:11:45 A full analysis would be done by the Civic Association
07:11:48 as part of the study.
07:11:50 That aspect has not been done.
07:11:52 The issues regarding -- the issues that have been
07:11:56 identified by the neighborhood, it was felt that
07:11:58 because they are issues that we're hearing in other
07:12:01 neighborhoods that it's best to address those issues,

07:12:05 of course, as the plan update.
07:12:14 >>GWEN MILLER: What is the pleasure of Council?
07:12:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Are we going to continue taking
07:12:18 testimony or close the hearing?
07:12:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Does Council have any more questions?
07:12:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't have any more questions.
07:12:26 >>GWEN MILLER: We can close the public hearing then.
07:12:27 [Motion Carried]
07:12:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: After listening to all the
07:12:32 testimony, you have some for and some against like
07:12:36 most things in life.
07:12:37 I agree actually with both sides.
07:12:39 The problem is, we have to make a decision one way or
07:12:41 the other.
07:12:42 Mr. Dingfelder said earlier that he felt very
07:12:47 strongly, but he also felt that we could send this
07:12:50 back to the Planning Commission to be continued to the
07:12:54 next plan update.
07:12:55 So my motion is to resend to the Planning Commission
07:12:57 for their next plan update to clarify all these
07:13:00 things, to pull out the folio numbers that are
07:13:02 necessary so that both sides can win.

07:13:05 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:13:06 All in favor of the motion, aye.
07:13:08 [Motion Carried]
07:13:08 Item number 6 is a continued public hearing.
07:13:21 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Michele Ogilvie, Planning
07:13:24 Commission staff.
07:13:24 This plan amendment was heard in November of 2006.
07:13:27 We now have a new Council, so I would just give an
07:13:31 opportunity to describe the request.
07:13:33 It's located at -- I'm sorry.
07:13:36 Dr. Martin Luther King and 34th street.
07:13:39 The request is to change land use from heavy
07:13:42 commercial 24 to -- and residential 10 to community
07:13:47 mixed use-35.
07:13:49 On the overhead, you can see there's a quarter acre of
07:13:52 land that's heavy commercial 24 and one acre
07:13:56 residential 10.
07:13:57 In the November public hearing and it was continued
07:13:59 into January of this year, there was concern expressed
07:14:03 by the petitioners -- I'm sorry, not the petitioners,
07:14:07 but the surrounding property owners as to the impact
07:14:11 of this request and the City Council did continue it

07:14:15 for the opportunity of the petitioner to have further
07:14:18 discussion with the surrounding neighborhood.
07:14:20 The Planning Commission did review this back in
07:14:26 October of last year, and our recommendation was a
07:14:29 finding of consistency with the comprehensive plan.
07:14:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:14:34 Seeing that the petitioner is not here, what's the
07:14:45 pleasure of Council?
07:14:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, I can't fill in for them.
07:14:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we hold it a minute.
07:14:54 Maybe they are out in the hall and don't know we're
07:14:56 discussing it?
07:14:59 >> It's a public hearing.
07:15:00 They really should be in here.
07:15:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you know whether the petitioner was
07:15:06 in here earlier?
07:15:07 >> No, he wasn't.
07:15:08 He did call -- we did remind them that they had a
07:15:12 public hearing, two weeks ago we called and reminded
07:15:15 them.
07:15:15 >>GWEN MILLER: What is the pleasure of Council?
07:15:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to have a legal

07:15:19 opinion what to do.
07:15:22 >> There is no reason you couldn't take action.
07:15:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Council's discretion.
07:15:27 Anyone came to speak on item number 6?
07:15:33 Anyone in the public came to speak on item number 6?
07:15:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We don't have anything.
07:15:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What does the staff recommend?
07:15:43 Let's start with that.
07:15:44 >> This is a legislative action.
07:15:45 So -- substantial, competent evidence is not the basis
07:15:51 for this decision.
07:15:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What does the staff recommend?
07:15:54 >> They recommend approval.
07:15:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, then I say go with staff
07:15:57 recommendation.
07:15:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
07:15:58 It's the first one I've ever done this way.
07:16:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close the public hearing.
07:16:02 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
07:16:03 All in favor, aye.
07:16:04 [Motion Carried]
07:16:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to support the staff

07:16:10 recommendation of approval.
07:16:11 It speeds things up.
07:16:13 >>GWEN MILLER: I voted nay.
07:16:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We moved to close.
07:16:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, there are about five motions
07:16:24 going on at one time.
07:16:26 I had moved for approval, but you got there before I
07:16:30 did, so I'll let Ms. Saul-Sena make the motion.
07:16:33 I'll second it.
07:16:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The motion is for approval as per
07:16:37 the staff recommendation.
07:16:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
07:16:38 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
07:16:40 Opposed, nay.
07:16:42 Nay.
07:16:42 Don't you have to have a unanimous vote for this,
07:16:51 Ms. Ogilvie?
07:16:53 >>JULIA COLE: This is first adoption public hearing so
07:16:55 we need to read the ordinance.
07:16:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: --
07:17:02 >> You need five votes to approve this.
07:17:03 I'm not sure how many we have.

07:17:09 >> Supermajority, yes, we do.
07:17:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move an
07:17:13 ordinance --
07:17:17 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to say, when the
07:17:20 petitioner came here before us in November, he was
07:17:22 supposed to buy property to open a road because
07:17:25 there's only one way in there and one way out, and the
07:17:27 community was not satisfied with people driving in and
07:17:30 out by their house.
07:17:34 And they were not pleased to have it there.
07:17:39 >>JULIA COLE: You had one public hearing on this, and
07:17:42 I understand that not everybody here has the benefit
07:17:45 of that actually is concerning me a little bit.
07:17:49 My recommendation is -- John, is this part of the
07:17:52 transmittal package or can we go ahead --
07:17:56 >> No, this is a small scale.
07:17:58 This is first reading of the ordinance and a
07:17:59 legislative matter.
07:18:00 So there's no need for any of the Council members to
07:18:02 go back and read the transcript for the previous
07:18:05 hearing.
07:18:06 You can make your decision on the record or any other

07:18:09 considerations that you know about the neighborhood,
07:18:14 the comprehensive plan, staff recommendation, you
07:18:17 know -- this is not a zoning.
07:18:19 This is not a quasi-judicial matter.
07:18:21 This is a legislative matter.
07:18:23 And Council is correct.
07:18:26 If you do decide to approve it for first reading the
07:18:32 proper thing would be to read the ordinance.
07:18:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move an ordinance
07:18:37 amending the Tampa comprehensive plan future land use
07:18:39 element, future land use map for the property located
07:18:41 in the general vicinity of East Martin Luther King Jr.
07:18:43 Boulevard and 34th street from residential 10 and
07:18:47 heavy commercial 24 to community mixed use-35,
07:18:51 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
07:18:54 providing for severability, providing an effective
07:18:55 date.
07:18:57 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
07:18:58 All in favor of the motion, aye.
07:19:00 Opposed, nay.
07:19:01 [Motion Carried]
07:19:01 We are on item number 7.

07:19:07 Anyone in the public going to speak --
07:19:11 >> Motion carried unanimously.
07:19:13 >> No, six to one.
07:19:16 >>THE CLERK: You did say nay on the second vote?
07:19:19 Motion carried with Miller voting no.
07:19:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone if the public going to speak
07:19:28 on items 7 and 8, you need to stand and raise your
07:19:32 right hand.
07:19:37 (Oath administered by clerk)
07:19:43 >>JULIA COLE: Prior to moving forward, I just want to
07:19:46 remind everybody that any documents have -- that have
07:19:51 been submitted to any of the Council members for any
07:19:53 of these hearings have been placed in the public
07:19:55 record and have been submitted to the clerk and also
07:19:59 if you've had any conversations with any of the
07:20:01 parties on any of these rezoning, that you should go
07:20:05 ahead and state the nature of those conversations and
07:20:09 make that part of the record prior to taking action on
07:20:12 this matter.
07:20:13 I would also like to remind everybody to indicate, say
07:20:15 their name on the record when they come up to speak
07:20:18 and to also indicate that they have been sworn.

07:20:21 >> Jill Finney, Land Development Coordination.
07:20:24 I have been sworn.
07:20:25 Here on petition Z07-25, located at 1903, 1905 and
07:20:30 1513 north Lois Avenue going from planned development
07:20:34 to PD planned development as a mixed use residential
07:20:39 multifamily and retail uses.
07:20:41 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property to
07:20:46 allow for a total of 510 residential units, 350 of
07:20:51 which are apartments located at the north and central
07:20:54 portion of the site and 160 units which are allocated
07:20:57 to affordable senior housing located at the
07:21:00 southernmost portion of the site with 12,700 square
07:21:03 feet of retail space located at the northernmost
07:21:07 portion of this site on the ground floor of the
07:21:11 apartment building abutting Spruce Street.
07:21:14 The 6.85-acre site is located in a PD zoning district
07:21:18 and is surrounded by a mix of commercial residential
07:21:22 and professional office uses.
07:21:24 The site is currently vacant, and the requested PD
07:21:27 setbacks are as follows:
07:21:28 From the north is 65 feet.
07:21:30 From the west is 15 feet.

07:21:32 To the south is 10 feet.
07:21:33 And to the east is 25 feet.
07:21:35 A total of 944 parking spaces are required, and 731
07:21:40 spaces are provided.
07:21:41 Therefore, a waiver for the 213 deficit parking spaces
07:21:46 has been requested.
07:21:47 The two proposed buildings will not exceed 75 feet in
07:21:50 height.
07:21:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just as a point of order, for the
07:22:00 record, I did have a brief conversation with the
07:22:03 petitioner representative this week.
07:22:05 It wasn't substantive in nature.
07:22:07 It just dealt with procedural aspects in regard to
07:22:11 whether or not there was going to be a continuance and
07:22:14 that sort of thing.
07:22:15 So I felt comfortable with it because it wasn't
07:22:18 substantive in nature.
07:22:18 I just wanted to disclose that for the record.
07:22:25 >> Here is a zoning map of the local area.
07:22:28 You'll notice that there are several PDs all along
07:22:32 Spruce Street.
07:22:33 Here is an aerial of the property.

07:22:41 With Lois street to the west and spruce to the north.
07:22:45 Here is a picture of the site.
07:22:55 Here is the site looking north onto Spruce Street.
07:22:59 And this is looking down Lois.
07:23:02 The petition request has 11 requested waivers
07:23:14 pertaining to traffic and tree and landscaping issues.
07:23:17 Of those, staff has two objections.
07:23:20 One coming from transportation.
07:23:22 They feel that the requested waiver for parking is 23%
07:23:27 of the required parking, and they feel it is in
07:23:29 excess.
07:23:30 And the tree and landscaping is objecting based on the
07:23:35 request to reduce the greenspace -- I'm sorry, the
07:23:40 required tree plantings, one per 1500.
07:23:44 They want to reduce that to one to 3,000 for the
07:23:48 vehicle use area and the required multifamily space.
07:23:51 So that would essentially -- this project from 1930 to
07:23:57 1950 was previously a landfill used by the City of
07:24:01 Tampa and the EPC is requiring that they remove all
07:24:06 trees so that would be 100% of the tree removal.
07:24:09 And, in fact, what their request would do would enable
07:24:12 them to replace only 50% of the trees required.

07:24:19 So it could potentially be a very barren site.
07:24:23 That's all staff has.
07:24:24 Thank you.
07:24:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission?
07:24:37 >> Good evening.
07:24:38 Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
07:24:39 Here is a map of the general area.
07:24:48 And what I would like to show you is basically the
07:24:51 predominant land use categories for this area.
07:24:53 Your pink color over here is regional mixed use 100,
07:24:57 which is your highest mixed use category under the
07:25:00 comprehensive plan.
07:25:01 The other land use category you have over here is
07:25:04 residential 10.
07:25:05 So we have quite a drop-off of intensity and density
07:25:08 from residential ten up to regional mixed use 100.
07:25:12 We must remember that this lies within the Westshore
07:25:18 mixed use regional activity center areas.
07:25:23 Boyscout Boulevard is located directly to the north
07:25:27 which intersects with Lois Avenue which is located
07:25:32 directly to the west of the site in question, Spruce
07:25:34 Street to the north, and, of course, you have

07:25:37 commercial hotel here and office buildings, also
07:25:40 townhome development and another office building over
07:25:42 here.
07:25:43 Mr. Dingfelder has Lee Roy Selmon's here.
07:25:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All too expensive for us.
07:25:57 >> Just an FYI.
07:25:59 Of course, what you have, you have the neighborhood --
07:26:01 it's bounded by the neighborhoods of Carver City and
07:26:04 Lincoln -- residential neighborhoods long established
07:26:07 in this area for quite a few years.
07:26:09 Also a few municipal services located in proximity to
07:26:11 the site here.
07:26:12 Of course, you have a Postal Service location over
07:26:14 here.
07:26:15 Home Depot, which is located in a shopping center
07:26:18 directly to the east.
07:26:19 Of course, we have the major arterial of Dale Mabry
07:26:21 located farther to the east.
07:26:23 To the south, about a half a mile to the south, you
07:26:26 have do -- you do have the interstate and Cypress,
07:26:29 which is an east-west collector, again about half a
07:26:36 mile to the south of the site.

07:26:37 As Ms. Finney stated, the request, this has had
07:26:40 several resurrections this initially came in 1987 to
07:26:44 this Council and zoned for development for an office
07:26:47 development.
07:26:47 Then it came to this Council again in 2005 and was
07:26:50 approved for the development of a mixed use project
07:26:52 which at that time consisted of 109 attached
07:26:56 residential units and 68,000 square feet of commercial
07:26:58 uses.
07:26:59 This was in 2005.
07:27:00 The current request is another modification that would
07:27:04 allow 510 residential dwelling units, 160 of those
07:27:08 which would be affordable housing for the elderly and,
07:27:10 of course, 350 rental units.
07:27:12 The rental situation in the city, of course, has had a
07:27:16 little bit of a drop-off with many of the existing
07:27:19 apartment complexes going to condos.
07:27:21 So this would fill a nice niche as far as a rental
07:27:23 aspect is concerned in a clustered area such as this.
07:27:28 The proposed site, as I have stated, lies in close
07:27:31 proximity or is within the Westshore mixed use
07:27:34 regional activity center and should provide a nice mix

07:27:37 of uses, residential housing for a high employment
07:27:40 center, which Westshore is known to be.
07:27:42 The Planning Commission staff had no objections to the
07:27:44 proposed request.
07:27:45 Thank you.
07:27:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena.
07:27:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
07:27:48 Could we receive pictures of the four elevations?
07:27:52 I've just been looking through my plans several times
07:27:55 and I can only find one view.
07:27:56 Maybe the petitioner will present it as part of their
07:28:02 presentation.
07:28:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
07:28:07 >> Good evening, Council, for the record, Michael
07:28:09 brooks, 500 East Kennedy Boulevard, suite 200, Tampa,
07:28:12 33602.
07:28:13 I have been sworn.
07:28:15 Ms. Saul-Sena, we had submitted four site elevations
07:28:22 of this project.
07:28:22 I'm not sure why they did not make your package.
07:28:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have another copy I could
07:28:27 take a look at?

07:28:33 >> We do have the Lois Avenue elevation.
07:28:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's what I've seen.
07:28:37 I want to see what the other three sides look like.
07:28:39 They are all really different.
07:28:40 You have shown us the one with the deepest setbacks
07:28:43 and the trees.
07:28:44 I want who the whole thing is.
07:28:48 -- I want what the whole thing is.
07:28:51 The rules changed about maybe six months ago, and we
07:28:58 have to see all four sides.
07:29:00 >> I understand that, Ms. Saul-Sena.
07:29:01 We did submit those.
07:29:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, did you bring a copy with
07:29:04 you?
07:29:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If you submitted them, they are in
07:29:12 somebody's file, either the clerk's file or staff's
07:29:16 file.
07:29:16 >> We have with it the Spruce Street elevation, the
07:29:20 side elevation from the south and we are looking for
07:29:24 the eastern elevation.
07:29:25 It was not a board we prepared for this evening's
07:29:31 presentation.

07:29:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't need a board, just a
07:29:34 picture.
07:29:35 >> Let me hand out what I do have which may be helpful
07:29:39 and then we can circulate the other elevations that we
07:29:41 have.
07:29:42 As staff has -- as staff has pointed out, actually, I
07:30:00 wanted to introduce the folks, cocounsel, Steve
07:30:03 Anderson, my client, the developer for Cross and
07:30:06 Phillip Smith.
07:30:07 The project engineers are Helen and Associates and
07:30:10 Brian Corraly is here with me.
07:30:12 Traffic engineer is Randy Cohen on this project and
07:30:15 also have the contract purchaser for the affordable
07:30:18 senior portion of this project which is the Richmond
07:30:20 Group.
07:30:24 As staff pointed out, everybody probably knows this
07:30:26 property.
07:30:26 Seven-acre tract located at the corner of Spruce and
07:30:29 Lois.
07:30:29 It is within the DRI.
07:30:31 It is currently vacant.
07:30:32 It has been vacant for many years, except for several

07:30:36 billboards that are on the property.
07:30:39 It was historically part of City of Tampa landfill and
07:30:44 will require significant excavation as many of the
07:30:46 other development projects that you've seen in recent
07:30:49 years have required.
07:30:50 The project is a mixed use project.
07:30:54 It is comprised of a market rental apartment component
07:30:59 with 350 units.
07:31:02 Affordable senior housing portion, which is up to 106
07:31:06 units as well as 12,000 square feet of ground floor
07:31:10 retail that will front on Spruce Street.
07:31:13 The redevelopment, we believe, continues a trend of
07:31:19 increasing housing opportunities in the DRI,
07:31:22 particularly in this area.
07:31:23 In this case, providing both an affordable senior
07:31:26 product and market rate housing to replace and -- a
07:31:32 portion that has converted to condominiums.
07:31:34 The commercial portion will provide
07:31:36 neighborhood-serving retail opportunities versus many
07:31:39 of the regional opportunities that are in the area.
07:31:42 And we think that overall, this would be a benefit to
07:31:46 the city and redevelopment of underutilized land

07:31:49 within the urban core, creation of a quality infill
07:31:52 project that serves the vision of the DRI as well as
07:31:57 adding and contributing to the tax base of the city.
07:32:00 You have in your packet, although we now know you
07:32:02 don't have all the elevations, a two-page site plan
07:32:05 and color renderings now in front of you.
07:32:08 The second page of the site plan contains all of the
07:32:11 conditions, waivers, obligations and developer
07:32:13 commitments associated with this project.
07:32:15 My client has spent the better part of 10 months
07:32:20 meeting with the neighborhood regarding this project
07:32:22 and its design.
07:32:23 That is part of their company philosophy.
07:32:25 He has met with the Carver City board formally,
07:32:30 roughly half a dozen times.
07:32:32 He's had countless informal discussions.
07:32:35 And the site plan that you have before you is a
07:32:38 product of the agreements that at least have been
07:32:42 reached in regard to the changes that have been made
07:32:44 over time.
07:32:46 Mr. Garcia pointed out that there are major employment
07:32:55 centers to the north, south, west.

07:32:56 International Mall, shopping along Dale Mabry as well
07:32:59 as many dining opportunities.
07:33:02 Lee Roy Selmon's being one of them.
07:33:04 There are a number of institutional services, schools,
07:33:07 parks, community centers as well as the Westshore
07:33:10 senior center, which was a consideration in locating
07:33:13 the affordable senior housing portion of this project.
07:33:18 There's an emerging concentration of supporting
07:33:21 multifamily development in this area.
07:33:24 The villa Sonoma project which was recently converted
07:33:28 to condominiums.
07:33:32 Other apartments that are under construction or at
07:33:33 least begun excavation as well as another project that
07:33:37 you understand has not come before you yet, but will
07:33:40 add several hundred more units.
07:33:43 The property immediately adjacent to ours is the City
07:33:49 of Tampa fleet maintenance building.
07:33:51 There's also a Post Office across the street.
07:33:56 I've handed you the site plans in the exhibits, and I
07:34:00 want to go through the design aspects in particular
07:34:03 changes that have been made to the project as we've
07:34:06 gone through discussions with the neighborhood.

07:34:08 First and foremost, the affordable senior housing
07:34:11 portion.
07:34:11 It is a six-story structure.
07:34:14 It is going to be consistent in height with the rest
07:34:16 of the project, approximately 75 feet.
07:34:20 It was a need that was identified by the Carver City
07:34:24 neighborhood.
07:34:25 In the initial discussions, affordable housing for the
07:34:27 seniors, those who are aging, looking to move out of
07:34:31 the obligations of their homeownership but wanted to
07:34:36 stay in the neighborhood and that was a change in a
07:34:38 commitment that the developer agreed to make.
07:34:42 Initially, there was an offer to blend these units
07:34:47 within the project itself.
07:34:48 The neighborhood indicated to us they preferred to
07:34:50 have their own free-standing building, so we obliged
07:34:53 with that, and that is why you see two separate
07:34:57 structures as part of the project.
07:35:00 And that's located on the south side of the project.
07:35:03 It is a tax credit senior housing facility that is
07:35:07 under state application, process of state application
07:35:11 currently.

07:35:12 The market rate apartments are typical multifamily
07:35:18 apartment rentals.
07:35:20 We believe they are going to maintain a supply of
07:35:23 housing stock within the activity center, which will
07:35:27 reduce vehicular trips, provide livable communities
07:35:31 consistent with the Westshore pedestrian system plan
07:35:34 that this Council adopted roughly two years ago.
07:35:37 And generally encourage pedestrian mobility.
07:35:40 Lois Avenue is identified in that systems plan as a
07:35:45 priority pedestrian corridor.
07:35:46 It is one of only two that go to our south in the
07:35:48 Westshore DRI, the other being Westshore.
07:35:51 And we were sensitive to in our design, providing a
07:35:55 product that integrated and was consistent and
07:35:58 compatible with that plan.
07:36:01 The third component of the project is an integrated
07:36:04 retail component which is on the first floor -- this
07:36:08 is a good opportunity for me to utilize an exhibit if
07:36:12 I can get one of my colleagues to assist.
07:36:18 There's an easel right over there, Brian.
07:36:22 On the portion of the project that faces Spruce
07:36:27 Street, there will be ground floor retail.

07:36:29 Again, 12,000 square feet, roughly.
07:36:32 That retail portion -- the retail portion is located
07:36:46 on the bottom floor of this building.
07:36:48 It is apartment, multifamily over top of the retail,
07:36:52 so it's four stories of housing.
07:36:55 There is a sky bridge that covers this motor court, of
07:36:59 which there are apartments over top of the motor court
07:37:02 where the northernmost access on Lois coming into the
07:37:07 project.
07:37:07 This motor court will serve as really the entryway
07:37:12 feature to the apartment -- market rate apartment
07:37:14 portion of the project, leasing offices, all the
07:37:18 things that you would expect there, pretty fountains,
07:37:21 landscaping, et cetera.
07:37:25 The rear of the commercial uses will be shielded back
07:37:29 there.
07:37:30 They will use dumpsters and loading facilities that
07:37:32 are shared back behind the building, so it would be --
07:37:36 you won't be able to see those from the public
07:37:39 right-of-way.
07:37:40 Design architecture.
07:37:47 One of the many concerns we had heard from the

07:37:49 neighborhood was the scale of the 300 unit market rate
07:37:54 housing project.
07:37:56 And the attempt was to modify it from a traditional
07:38:00 intense urban design, which would traditionally have
07:38:05 apartment units all the way or housing all the way out
07:38:08 to the street edge and courtyards internal, to take
07:38:12 the courtyards and bring them out to the street.
07:38:15 Give a little bit of a setback.
07:38:17 That was an accommodation that was made.
07:38:19 I think it was a good design change at the request of
07:38:21 the neighborhood.
07:38:22 It breaks up the building mass and creates meaningful
07:38:26 open space both for the public and for the project.
07:38:31 The distance from the roadway to the back part of the
07:38:36 courtyards is roughly 85 feet, just to give you a
07:38:38 scale of how far that is.
07:38:41 They are roughly 70 feet wide so there is significant
07:38:44 breakup of the scale along Lois.
07:38:48 You can see from the architectural elevations that
07:38:51 there was much detail given to alternating elements of
07:38:54 materials and textures to give it an identity for the
07:38:58 project and to minimize the impact of the structures

07:39:01 looking monolithic.
07:39:02 The retail is going to be designed to maximize the
07:39:06 visual opacity both from spruce and from Lois and to
07:39:10 draw the streetscape inward toward the project on both
07:39:14 of those streetscapes.
07:39:15 Access and parking, parking will be located in the
07:39:21 garage.
07:39:22 It's in the rear of the building.
07:39:26 Minimized the ability to see that from the public
07:39:29 right-of-way.
07:39:29 This is the parking garage for the market rate
07:39:33 apartment portion of the project.
07:39:34 The loading areas are shared loading areas for the
07:39:37 mixed use project.
07:39:38 They are located along this rear as well as the
07:39:41 dumpsters.
07:39:42 There are two access points on Lois.
07:39:44 One towards -- closer to the intersection, which is
07:39:47 lined up with the motor court.
07:39:49 Also an access point to the south that will be a
07:39:53 shared driveway, essentially with the affordable
07:39:56 senior housing portion of the project.

07:39:58 There is also -- I have to mention, if any of you have
07:40:01 noticed it, there is a condition that allows for a
07:40:05 shared driveway off of Spruce Street to be shared with
07:40:08 the property that is understandably coming in front of
07:40:12 you shortly.
07:40:13 Proposed residential project by the Westshore
07:40:15 community development corporation.
07:40:17 That condition, if this comes to fruition, will give
07:40:21 staff the ability to reconfigure this area so as to
07:40:24 bring in a single access point off of spruce to serve
07:40:28 both of those projects.
07:40:30 Obviously the driveway markings across each of the
07:40:36 curb cuts will be paveed to clearly identify the
07:40:39 pedestrian crossings.
07:40:40 All that will be consistent with the pedestrian system
07:40:43 plan for the DRI.
07:40:46 Just a few points on the pedestrian connectivity.
07:40:52 As I mentioned, Lois street is designated as a
07:40:55 pedestrian priority corridor.
07:40:57 It is a conduit to key destinations.
07:40:59 It is also at the intersection of spruce and Lois.
07:41:02 The terminus of what is designated as a high demand

07:41:06 pedestrian area.
07:41:07 It also in that plan specifically identifies the
07:41:09 subject property as being part of an emerging
07:41:14 concentration of multifamily development that will
07:41:16 facilitate pedestrian demand.
07:41:18 The residential -- moving back and forth -- the
07:41:24 residential portion will have ground floor entryways
07:41:27 that come in from the Lois Avenue sidewalks, so there
07:41:32 would be -- they would interface with the public
07:41:35 right-of-way.
07:41:36 The short setbacks also created the opportunity for
07:41:46 the developer to plant streetscaped trees that will be
07:41:51 slightly out of the right-of-way but will provide
07:41:53 shading and encourage a friendly pedestrian atmosphere
07:41:57 along Lois consistent with the system plan.
07:42:02 Courtyards will create a visual enhancement as well as
07:42:07 breaking up the mass of the building.
07:42:09 The intents in the Westshore pedestrian plan was to
07:42:17 have commercial components of the project that created
07:42:19 distinctive personality they call it that identified,
07:42:22 in this case, the intersection of Spruce and Lois and
07:42:27 again to quote the plan, where the action is.

07:42:29 We have done this by creating an enlarged greenspace
07:42:34 at the corner of the intersection.
07:42:36 You can see from the elevations that there are
07:42:42 distinctive architectural overhangs.
07:42:45 Seating areas along the retail portion of the
07:42:47 building.
07:42:47 There will be, of course, visual opacity consistent
07:42:51 with all of the Land Development code requirements.
07:42:54 There will be distinctive markings that invite -- they
07:43:00 will invite pedestrians to come into the commercial
07:43:03 portion of the project from the street right-of-ways.
07:43:05 And provision for bicycle parking is also a condition
07:43:10 of this project.
07:43:12 And we believe the design features will allow the
07:43:15 commercial to integrate into the streetscape and
07:43:18 contribute to a friendly atmosphere for the
07:43:21 pedestrian.
07:43:22 Public transportation, another important component of
07:43:25 that pedestrian plan.
07:43:27 There are two enhanced transit stops that will be
07:43:30 constructed in connection with this project.
07:43:32 The first will be a relocation of a -- of an existing

07:43:36 transit stop that is located just to the south, and it
07:43:40 will be relocated here, improved, enhanced consistent
07:43:44 with the new design that we see from Hartline,
07:43:48 adjacent to the affordable senior portion of the
07:43:51 project.
07:43:51 The second will be a relocation of an existing transit
07:43:55 stop that sits right at the intersection on Lois.
07:44:00 We will bring it around and put it into the greenspace
07:44:03 on spruce.
07:44:05 There's more of a loading area there.
07:44:07 And actually is an enhanced transit stop that is
07:44:10 specifically identified as being a need item on the
07:44:14 pedestrian street plan I need to address two waivers
07:44:23 that were technically objected to in the staff report.
07:44:28 The first is based on parking.
07:44:30 And I want to clarify that objection.
07:44:34 Staff has required that we provide our parking numbers
07:44:39 based on a project-wide basis, and we have done that
07:44:42 at their request.
07:44:44 In doing that, it has resulted in an overall parking,
07:44:48 I don't want to say deficit, but a reduction in the
07:44:50 required parking by 23%.

07:44:53 That would include both required parking and guest
07:44:55 parking for the multifamily portion.
07:44:58 But it's important to distinguish here and we need to
07:45:02 elaborate that it is skewed by the affordable senior
07:45:06 housing portion of this project.
07:45:07 What I mean by that is that the market rental in the
07:45:12 retail portion of the project are consistent with the
07:45:16 intent of the Land Development code.
07:45:18 We are asking for just on that portion, a 4% waiver
07:45:24 that is related to guest parking only.
07:45:26 We still have 73 guest parking spaces, even with that
07:45:30 4% waiver.
07:45:31 The predominance of this waiver request is related to
07:45:36 the other portion of the project, which is the senior
07:45:40 affordable.
07:45:41 I have with me tonight Damon Cole of the Richmond
07:45:42 Group, and I'm going to ask him to come up to provide
07:45:49 an explanation as to why the waiver relative to the
07:45:51 affordable senior housing is reasonable in their
07:45:53 experience.
07:45:54 Damon Cole with the Richmond group.
07:46:04 >> Damon Cole with the Richmond group.

07:46:06 I have been sworn in.
07:46:07 First of all, I want to briefly -- for those of you
07:46:11 who may not be familiar with the name, the Richmond
07:46:14 group.
07:46:14 We are an active developer in the Tampa market,
07:46:16 including two projects that have been developed in the
07:46:18 City of Tampa.
07:46:19 That would be grand oaks apartments and the Meridian
07:46:22 point apartment, both in district five.
07:46:24 And we typically look for sites that may have been
07:46:28 passed over previously by other developers.
07:46:31 We are really excited to be a part of this project,
07:46:34 when Crossland contacted us regarding the affordable
07:46:37 housing component, it's really a unique opportunity to
07:46:41 bring a different type of development to this area.
07:46:45 We are in addition to being the developer, we also own
07:46:50 and manage the apartment rentals for the life of the
07:46:54 project.
07:46:54 And this is a state requirement, the projects are tax
07:47:00 exempt bond financing as well as a sale loan from the
07:47:03 state.
07:47:03 Originally, the parking was -- how do I want to phrase

07:47:14 this?
07:47:15 We were always aware that there was going to have to
07:47:17 be a parking waiver for this development.
07:47:19 Because of the site constraints of being located on
07:47:22 one acre, but when we really started to review, we
07:47:25 have another affordable, elderly project in a
07:47:30 different region of the state, but it's a suburban
07:47:32 location, and when we evaluated what we did at that
07:47:36 site and that site is parked at .85 spaces per unit.
07:47:39 And that's an overall, that includes both the guest
07:47:42 spaces as well as the residents' spaces including the
07:47:46 employee parking.
07:47:46 Well, we went to that property manager, and we did sort
07:47:46 of our own informal study.
07:47:46 When we took a look at what the actual usage was,
07:47:58 we're really about .45 spaces overall.
07:48:00 That includes both our residents, our guests, and
07:48:03 employee parking.
07:48:04 What we're proposing on this site is .61 spaces per
07:48:09 unit.
07:48:10 That's split between the .5 and then the .11 that the
07:48:16 overall development has to meet that will also meet on

07:48:18 our one-acre site.
07:48:19 We're really comfortable with this number based on the
07:48:23 income and age restrictions specific to this portion
07:48:26 of the development.
07:48:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What age are you looking at?
07:48:28 >> That's where I'm headed.
07:48:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Senior, elderly --
07:48:35 >> Overall, the requirement is actually 55 and over.
07:48:39 So I don't want to offend anyone with that age
07:48:43 demographic, but typically, the trend on our site is
07:48:47 more 75% of the units typically are 62 and up.
07:48:51 And really, the trend is even in the 70s or the
07:48:55 80s.
07:48:55 It is an independent living facility, however, it's a
07:49:00 new development.
07:49:00 It's a no maintenance environment for the residents,
07:49:03 so we really trend towards an older demographic.
07:49:07 In addition, out of the units that we plan on doing,
07:49:10 10% of those will -- all the units will be affordable,
07:49:13 but 10% of them will meet for the extremely low
07:49:16 income, which is a 33% or less of the area median
07:49:19 income.

07:49:20 So when you -- if there are questions related to the
07:49:24 specifics.
07:49:29 >> I just want to know -- is this whole thing senior
07:49:32 housing or above 55?
07:49:33 >> No, no.
07:49:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Which piece?
07:49:35 >> That would be the one-acre south portion.
07:49:38 Someone can point that out.
07:49:39 Up to a maximum of 160 units would be set aside as the
07:49:48 senior component.
07:49:48 Typically, when we get into the median incomes that
07:49:52 we're working with multiple and even single vehicle
07:49:57 ownership is really a challenge for the residents.
07:49:59 And in many cases, it's a choice that they prefer not
07:50:04 to have a vehicle.
07:50:06 And one of the reasons we're really excited about this
07:50:09 site is because we have direct access, as Mr. Brooks
07:50:12 just pointed out, to what will be a transit stop.
07:50:15 In addition, you have the Westshore senior center that
07:50:17 is literally around the corner.
07:50:19 We can't ask for sort of a better location for our
07:50:21 type of development.

07:50:22 Just a little bit more, and we have on-site laundry
07:50:28 facilities, resident activity room, computer lab, all
07:50:31 these things will help reduce external trips that
07:50:34 future residents would have to make.
07:50:36 So based on our experience developing affordable
07:50:39 housing, we respectfully request this waiver to .5
07:50:43 spaces per unit and then the .11 to guest spaces.
07:50:49 And request your support for the overall project as
07:50:51 well.
07:50:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena.
07:50:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
07:50:55 I've looked at the plan -- [microphone not on] I have
07:51:00 a lot of experience reading plans.
07:51:02 I can't figure out where the picture is of what the
07:51:05 senior housing will look like.
07:51:06 >> That's because the senior housing will look
07:51:08 identical to the balance of the development.
07:51:10 I think we have an overview -- I mean, the building
07:51:12 will be consistent in character and architectural
07:51:15 treatment as the balance of the development.
07:51:17 It's not intended to stand out and look any different.
07:51:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, my question and maybe I'm not

07:51:23 clear on this, if I'm looking --
07:51:27 >> Michael is going to try to help you here.
07:51:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It looks like there's a bunch of
07:51:34 parking.
07:51:34 It says, "ramp up," which to me indicates parking.
07:51:37 >> That's actually north of that.
07:51:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Show me the picture of what that's
07:51:41 going to look like.
07:51:42 >> I believe what you're referring to is this area.
07:51:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If I may.
07:51:56 >> That is a site plan that's outdated.
07:51:59 This is the current site plan.
07:52:01 That ramp up was when -- it looks like that building.
07:52:08 The lowest street elevation is probably the most
07:52:19 helpful.
07:52:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Lowest and spruce are just
07:52:22 beautiful, but this -- could you put the elevation of
07:52:34 what this looks like, this view and this.
07:52:40 You really articulated the apartments and the
07:52:42 commercial stuff, but you haven't --
07:52:50 >> This would be a good depiction of what our rear
07:52:53 elevation would look like.

07:52:54 We're.
07:52:59 You have to remember, these were prepared by
07:53:01 Crossland.
07:53:04 We will most likely use their architect or we
07:53:07 typically have our own architect.
07:53:09 And we're going to have to work within the framework
07:53:11 of the overall development.
07:53:12 But this is a good depiction, and until we have your
07:53:16 approval as an affordable housing developer, we can't
07:53:20 fund doing a complete design.
07:53:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The reason I'm concerned about the
07:53:27 other sides, you all are asking for more than 50%
07:53:29 waiver on trees according to my understanding.
07:53:32 And you've asked for palms and the pictures look like
07:53:40 shade trees and looks like a lot of green, but if you
07:53:42 actually look at your plan, it doesn't appear to be
07:53:51 that way.
07:53:51 And I wondered if you could speak specifically to
07:53:53 shade trees and why you are asking for on your plan
07:53:56 palms and why more than a 50% reduction of your tree
07:54:00 planting requirements.
07:54:01 And is there an opportunity -- it's a very, very

07:54:04 attractive plan.
07:54:05 It's very creative.
07:54:06 It does many good things.
07:54:08 That's the only sticking point I have.
07:54:11 >> I can address that, Ms. Saul-Sena.
07:54:13 As you mentioned, there are three waivers related to
07:54:19 or staff has mentioned.
07:54:20 The first, and I think you are touching on this point,
07:54:23 is that one of the waivers is 100% tree removal.
07:54:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That I understand.
07:54:27 You're putting some back, but not enough.
07:54:32 >> We're going to move some of the palms off-site,
07:54:35 some in the Westshore DRI.
07:54:37 We are requesting a reduction in open space as it
07:54:39 relates to the 30% of the total site.
07:54:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm specifically asking about
07:54:53 trees.
07:54:55 Can you put in bigger trees?
07:54:56 You have all these seniors who are there who aren't
07:54:57 going to be moving a lot or walking up and down the
07:54:59 street, we don't want them to keel over in the August
07:55:03 sun.

07:55:04 >> And I touched on this briefly.
07:55:05 We completely agree with the staff comment related to
07:55:08 larger trees.
07:55:09 Our waiver is simply to the number of trees because we
07:55:16 do have reduced open space as a result of the density
07:55:18 on the site.
07:55:19 We have every intention -- and I'm saying this on the
07:55:22 record -- of putting in as large trees that can be
07:55:24 sustained particularly along the right-of-way.
07:55:26 It's very important to the developer.
07:55:27 It's very important to the image and personality of
07:55:30 the project, whether these are four-inch trees or
07:55:35 somewhat larger, three-inch trees, they will be
07:55:39 whatever is sustainable from a spacing standpoint,
07:55:42 particularly along the right-of-way.
07:55:43 Our intent is to plant as many trees and not pay into
07:55:48 a bank, to have the trees on-site, to provide a
07:55:52 greenspace.
07:55:53 What the comment referred to is something that we
07:55:55 hadn't said on the site plan, but I'm telling you
07:55:58 right now, we're committed to putting as many inches
07:56:01 of trees on this site as we can fit.

07:56:03 That is the development plan.
07:56:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we just hear briefly from Mary
07:56:09 Danielson, who is the city tree person?
07:56:12 >>CATHERINE COYLE: She's on vacation.
07:56:14 I can certainly fill in for her.
07:56:15 I actually clarified the comments to give you a clear
07:56:18 understanding of what the code requirements are.
07:56:18 What you are dealing with in chapter 13 is a
07:56:21 quantitative account of trees, the number of trees to
07:56:24 be planted.
07:56:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we translate that to
07:56:27 qualitative?
07:56:28 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The other side of that is
07:56:30 qualitative.
07:56:31 First and foremost, what the code requires is a
07:56:33 planting of one per 1500 square feet for the type of
07:56:36 unit and for the vehicular use area and so on.
07:56:39 What they have asked for is a reduction to one per
07:56:43 3,000 square feet which is a 50% reduction in the
07:56:46 total number of trees to be planted.
07:56:49 Aside -- what the code requires, any tree that you
07:56:53 plant that you're required to plant has to be a

07:56:55 minimum two-inch caliber.
07:56:57 I see your look.
07:57:00 What you have is an overall total of a number of
07:57:04 inches.
07:57:04 The total number of trees at the one per
07:57:06 1500-square-foot ratio times two inches equals a
07:57:09 certain number of inches.
07:57:10 In this particular case, if they did the one per 1500
07:57:14 square feet they would have to do -- let's see --
07:57:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm just interested in getting as
07:57:22 much as we can on this site.
07:57:25 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'll give you exactly what is
07:57:26 missing from the plan in our view.
07:57:27 They need to remove the waiver from the plan at the
07:57:31 one per 3,000 square feet.
07:57:32 They need to commit to the one per 1500 square feet.
07:57:35 They need to commit to the four-inch tree or more.
07:57:38 That way you draw down from that larger pool of inches
07:57:41 and whatever is remaining that they cannot plant, they
07:57:44 pay into the tree bank.
07:57:45 That's the missing piece on the plan is that they are
07:57:47 actually just asking to waive 50% of their required

07:57:51 planting.
07:57:51 That's what we're objecting to.
07:57:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just for my own mental satisfaction
07:57:59 here, this room is about 2800 square feet.
07:58:02 I would imagine this room is 80 feet long by about
07:58:05 20 feet wide counting the ceiling tiles, they are two
07:58:11 feet.
07:58:11 So one tree is entitled under the 3,000 by the size of
07:58:16 this room plus 200 square feet.
07:58:19 Right?
07:58:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Let's say it's 2800 square feet, if
07:58:23 you do it by code, you would be required to plant two,
07:58:26 two-inch trees or one four-inch tree.
07:58:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
07:58:30 Thank you very much.
07:58:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If you cut it in half --
07:58:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not cutting anything in half.
07:58:45 >> Ms. Saul-Sena, I want to address your concerns,
07:58:47 which is one more comment and then I'm going to allow
07:58:50 the hearing to proceed.
07:58:50 This is an exhibit of the greenspace that is available
07:58:58 based on the current site plan.

07:59:00 As you can see, the majority of the open space is
07:59:03 located within the courtyards and adjacent to the
07:59:07 right-of-ways.
07:59:07 Remainders are small areas within the vehicle parking
07:59:10 area.
07:59:11 Our intent again is to plant as many caliber inches
07:59:14 within that area as we can possibly fit.
07:59:17 It's a benefit to the project.
07:59:20 Barring those objections and hopefully our adequate
07:59:28 address, staff otherwise supported this project.
07:59:30 Planning Commission did, and so we'll be here to
07:59:33 answer your questions on rebuttal or anything else you
07:59:36 may have.
07:59:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
07:59:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask a question?
07:59:40 I guess I'm going to do this by direction.
07:59:44 The senior units are -- that's okay, senior?
07:59:49 Can I say that.
07:59:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yeah, you can look at me and say
07:59:52 senior.
07:59:52 [ LAUGHTER ]
07:59:53 >>MARY MULHERN: This is on the south end of the --

07:59:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: West.
08:00:01 >> Right, but that's not oriented.
08:00:04 >> The mall is to the north.
08:00:06 >> So the south end is where the seniors are, right?
08:00:11 >>MARY MULHERN: What is the property, is that part of
08:00:13 your property right below that, looks all green?
08:00:16 >> There is a line of trees along the southern
08:00:19 property line that is located just off-site, and this
08:00:22 is a city retention pond that I believe is related to
08:00:26 Lois street.
08:00:32 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm wondering why you couldn't flip
08:00:34 that so the parking is facing the other building and
08:00:36 then the view for all of those apartments couldn't be
08:00:40 to the green instead of looking at the wall.
08:00:42 Of the other unit.
08:00:52 >> The answer to that is that is certainly an option.
08:00:56 There is a note on the site plan.
08:00:58 My client is not a senior affordable housing
08:01:01 developer.
08:01:01 This was something that was added and agreed to at the
08:01:04 request of the neighborhood.
08:01:05 You met Mr. Damon Cole who is now working with us on

08:01:10 that portion of the project.
08:01:12 The design is still conceptual.
08:01:17 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to suggest you do that
08:01:18 not because they are seniors, because it makes sense
08:01:21 for anyone looking out their window rather than to
08:01:22 have to look under the parking lot and -- or a wall.
08:01:29 View here is the parking lot and their view here is
08:01:31 the wall of the other building.
08:01:37 >> That's correct, commissioner Scott.
08:01:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: [INAUDIBLE]
08:01:39 >>MARY MULHERN: There's going to be a wall?
08:01:41 >> There will be a six-foot wall along that southern
08:01:44 boundary, masonry wall.
08:01:46 >>MARY MULHERN: How many floors?
08:01:48 >> That is six floors.
08:01:49 Five floors over parking.
08:01:50 >>MARY MULHERN: So they still have a view.
08:01:53 They still have a view except for --
08:01:56 >> Still have a view of the parking.
08:01:58 The ultimate design of the, councilwoman, is that the
08:02:05 bottom floor of that building will most likely all be
08:02:10 covered with parking underneath it.

08:02:11 One of the requests that the neighborhood had made
08:02:13 with regard to that particular portion of the project,
08:02:16 that building, was to reduce it from what had been
08:02:20 previously for the last nine months, a seven-story
08:02:24 structure, roughly two weeks ago, 12 days ago, they
08:02:27 asked us to reduce it, and it was reduced down to six,
08:02:30 and it's for that very reason as well that that
08:02:35 building remains conceptual, but we are committed to
08:02:37 the architectural elevations that you've been shown.
08:02:40 The appearance of the building.
08:02:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Cole.
08:02:48 >>JULIA COLE: Mr. Brooks, if I can clarify something,
08:02:51 you have committed on the record to, I guess, the
08:02:54 four-inch tree.
08:02:55 Is what you are really committing to the concern that
08:02:59 staff had?
08:03:01 Is the concern that staff has raised something that
08:03:05 you're not able to commit to?
08:03:07 Because I think we can go ahead and deal with that if
08:03:09 we want to go ahead and try and deal with that this
08:03:11 evening.
08:03:13 >> My commitment was -- what we're struggling with is

08:03:41 we don't have a landscape architect at this stage.
08:03:44 What we want to make sure, if we plant four-inch trees
08:03:47 that they'll be sustainable.
08:03:48 What we can't commit to is four-inch trees certainly
08:03:52 along the right-of-way where they would be most
08:03:55 visible from the public, public thoroughfares,
08:03:58 internal, I think, we're not prepared to say that we
08:04:02 can plant every single tree as four inch.
08:04:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: While you're talking to a
08:04:04 landscape architect, you have a disconnect between the
08:04:14 trees that you pictured, which are all shade trees,
08:04:14 and the trees that you verbalized, which are sabal
08:04:18 palms, which are the cheapest, most uninspired shady
08:04:19 kind of tree.
08:04:21 >> Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe that we've
08:04:23 offered sabal palms as a replacement tree.
08:04:26 >> I'm sure I'm wrong.
08:04:29 >> We're removing sabal palms.
08:04:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That must have been it.
08:04:37 >> And I'm from south Florida, and I love sabal palms.
08:04:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We just need shade.
08:04:38 And the other thing, we have an opportunity between

08:04:40 first and second reading.
08:04:41 Can they clarify that?
08:04:43 >> Ms. Saul-Sena, I think the confusion is that there
08:04:48 are Sabal palms on the property of which we'll
08:04:51 relocate as many --
08:04:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But that doesn't count towards the
08:04:56 ones you're going to put.
08:04:56 >> No, those two things are completely separate.
08:04:58 We did not take credit for those seven trees.
08:05:00 And just to be clear, I'm committing to four-inch
08:05:04 shade trees along the rights-of-way.
08:05:06 And we're going to plant as many inches as we possibly
08:05:10 can internal to the project.
08:05:12 Sustainable.
08:05:15 >>JULIA COLE: Maybe it would be appropriate to allow
08:05:17 the public hearing to move forward and allow staff and
08:05:18 Mr. Brooks to have that conversation and see if that's
08:05:20 something that can be committed.
08:05:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had a question of Mr. Brooks.
08:05:24 >> No, you cannot move into the affordable senior
08:05:27 project.
08:05:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Give me five years.

08:05:29 On the affordable senior housing component, I'm seeing
08:05:35 courtyards, gated courtyards scattered throughout the
08:05:38 market-rate project, but I'm not -- it might just be
08:05:43 that I'm not seeing it.
08:05:45 But is there a greenspace gated courtyard, whatever,
08:05:52 greenspace area for the senior project?
08:05:56 >> I'm going to ask Mr. Cole to come forward.
08:05:59 Again, what he's going to reiterate is some of the
08:06:02 limitations we have dealt with, particularly at the
08:06:04 request of the neighborhood within the last two weeks.
08:06:08 And I know he's going to do his best to answer that
08:06:11 question for you.
08:06:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You mean it's not a yes or no?
08:06:17 >> Good evening, again.
08:06:18 As Mr. Brooks first indicated, we are at the
08:06:21 conceptual design stage.
08:06:25 I'll definitely take into consideration once we meet
08:06:27 with our architect the sort of layout for the parking,
08:06:31 and then we recognize that we want to provide a fresh
08:06:36 air green spot, a communal sort of green area on-site.
08:06:42 We are limited to the one acre, and as your planning
08:06:45 and zoning staff can tell you, parking is always the

08:06:48 issue.
08:06:48 Parking eats up surface area.
08:06:52 So if you want to reduce the waiver further, I can
08:06:56 take out a few more parking spaces and then I'll have
08:07:00 some room for more greenspace.
08:07:03 But at the minimum, we think we can provide some sort
08:07:06 of green court.
08:07:07 We're working on design studies, but like I said,
08:07:10 until we've kind of moved bast this point, I'm not
08:07:13 going to have a building footprint and engineer a
08:07:17 design until I sort of know.
08:07:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, as I look at this picture,
08:07:23 what floor level am I looking at for this parking
08:07:26 area?
08:07:29 >> That would actually -- and because of sort of the
08:07:31 changes we've had in just the past two weeks, we're
08:07:34 really looking at just a single level of parking now.
08:07:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Surface parking?
08:07:40 >> Surface parking underneath the building.
08:07:42 You remember, we only have a one-acre footprint, so
08:07:45 the one acre, to get the unit count, it's going to
08:07:48 take the entire footprint other than outside of the

08:07:52 buffers and setbacks above the parking.
08:07:54 So the elevations that we've shown -- it's consistent
08:07:59 with the elevations that we've shown in that all of
08:08:01 the parking will be located under the building.
08:08:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So is there an answer to my
08:08:06 question, what am I looking at here?
08:08:08 >> You would be looking at a variation when it was
08:08:10 actually two levels of parking.
08:08:12 Now what we'll -- assuming that, you know, the Council
08:08:16 is able to grant a waiver, that was actually parked at
08:08:21 a greater number, I believe.
08:08:23 So we're hopeful that by a reduction of parking we'll
08:08:27 be able to capture some space, some greenspace.
08:08:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yeah, I mean, you have a U-shaped
08:08:35 building.
08:08:35 >> Right.
08:08:35 And we're working on another conceptual design is an
08:08:38 E-shaped building where one sort of court out of the
08:08:43 eve is green is kind of what we're looking at.
08:08:46 Trying to do it where at least one of the courts,
08:08:48 similar to the market rate side.
08:08:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And then the other option is to add

08:08:56 the additional floor that you took away, which might
08:08:59 give you greater ability to -- at the end of the
08:09:06 day --
08:09:07 >> We're trying to strike a balance here between the
08:09:09 neighborhood.
08:09:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: To me, I don't know what the
08:09:11 difference is between, what is it shall 70 feet --
08:09:14 >> We're at 66 feet to the top of the parapet.
08:09:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: -- versus 80 feet is not a huge
08:09:19 difference.
08:09:20 You have a tall building, you have a tall building.
08:09:22 >> I think visually, they tried to make that argument.
08:09:24 But sometimes the numbers make more sense.
08:09:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Anyway, I don't know if we're
08:09:29 coming back for another first reading on some of these
08:09:32 changes, especially in terms of the four-inch caliber,
08:09:35 but I just think that it's really critical.
08:09:38 I admire what your company does.
08:09:41 I've heard of you, and I admire that you're building
08:09:45 senior affordable housing.
08:09:46 That's a good thing.
08:09:47 But at the same time, even senior affordable folks

08:09:50 deserve some greenspace, especially if they are next
08:09:53 door neighbors and the projects next door will have
08:09:57 swimming pools, gated courtyards and everything else.
08:10:00 So they are not going to be allowed --
08:10:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Might have some friends next door.
08:10:04 You don't know.
08:10:04 Is there anyone in the public who wants to speak on
08:10:06 item number 7?
08:10:07 Come up and speak.
08:10:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question when you all come back
08:10:14 for rebuttal, I want you to be able to describe what
08:10:17 the person who lives in the senior housing, how they
08:10:20 are going to get in and out, what it's going to be
08:10:22 like.
08:10:24 >> Madam Chairman, Council members, good evening.
08:10:28 My name is Wilson Robertson junior.
08:10:30 I reside at 4221 west art street.
08:10:33 I do have some concern on this development, the
08:10:38 Crossland.
08:10:40 I have talked to several of my neighbors, and we feel
08:10:43 very strongly that this will bring a tremendous impact
08:10:47 on our community.

08:10:50 And the miles -- I would say a mile square, we have
08:10:54 about 10 to 12 developments coming into our community.
08:10:57 That certainly brings a tremendous stress on our
08:11:00 community, on our families not only are we dealing
08:11:06 that, but dealing with the interstate that will start.
08:11:08 That's a five-year project.
08:11:09 We'll be having noise level increase.
08:11:13 Pollution, congestion, detours through our community.
08:11:17 We have a safe -- we want a safe community for our
08:11:20 families.
08:11:21 I'm a senior, proud to be 64 years of age.
08:11:25 And I raised my family there, that is my community,
08:11:29 regardless of where I go in this world, in a few days,
08:11:33 you want to come back to your home.
08:11:35 And I feel that we not only just concerned about the
08:11:39 senior home that we're talking about, but we're
08:11:41 talking about our whole community.
08:11:43 We're talking about the whole project here of the
08:11:46 Crossland.
08:11:47 The other 350 units, what impact will have it on --
08:11:51 will of it on our neighborhood.
08:11:53 Also, we're concerned about the infrastructure.

08:11:56 Do we have the roads?
08:11:57 Can we accommodate the traffic that's going to come
08:11:59 into our community?
08:12:00 As of now, you cannot hardly cross Lois Avenue 5:00,
08:12:07 6:00 in the evening.
08:12:08 The football games are going to be beginning in the
08:12:10 near future.
08:12:11 We got to deal with all of that.
08:12:13 The quality of life, from what I can see, my
08:12:17 perspective, is that it is diminishing.
08:12:21 And I don't feel real good about our community have to
08:12:25 have such an impact with all of these developments
08:12:28 coming into our area.
08:12:30 I know that growth is important, but not to this
08:12:34 magnitude.
08:12:35 So I hope that we would be able to come back and sit
08:12:38 down and talk to the Crossland and work something else
08:12:41 out.
08:12:41 Because there are some issues that have not been
08:12:44 resolved.
08:12:45 I certainly wish that I had lawyers and consultants
08:12:50 who assist us, but we don't have those resources.

08:12:52 So we have to stand on our own, and I've always said
08:12:57 is that, I believe in my heart that you all are the
08:13:01 heartbeat in our community.
08:13:03 I believe that is the Council's high character, and I
08:13:07 believe that you all bring dignity to this city, and
08:13:11 I'm leaning dependent on you all to be concerned about
08:13:16 the citizens and homeowners who have worked so hard,
08:13:18 who have struggled to raise their kids, to educate
08:13:21 them.
08:13:21 Seems as though now we're leaving no legacy for our
08:13:25 children.
08:13:25 And I just hope we would consider this as all these
08:13:28 developers are coming from across the country and to
08:13:31 develop in our neighborhood, let's not throw those
08:13:33 away who have given to this city, given to this county
08:13:37 and this state all that they have to offer.
08:13:39 And I appreciate you all giving me this opportunity.
08:13:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sir, I had a question for you.
08:13:45 There's no doubt that this is 500 additional units.
08:13:49 And you've expressed some concern, I guess, about
08:13:53 traffic and that sort of thing.
08:13:54 And I agree.

08:13:55 Your neighborhood is getting surrounded on all sides
08:13:59 by redevelopment and new development and the
08:14:01 interstate.
08:14:02 You mentioned that you would like them to come back to
08:14:07 you -- I assume you've been in some discussions
08:14:10 already, but you had mentioned you would like them to
08:14:12 come back to you to have some additional discussions
08:14:15 on some of the details.
08:14:16 Are there any details that you could share with us
08:14:21 that -- we're not embarrassed to go ahead and ask the
08:14:26 developers to consider certain things, and if there
08:14:28 are certain things that you would like us to consider
08:14:31 right now, maybe we could just do it and be done with
08:14:34 it tonight.
08:14:36 >> Well, that was a lot of discussion I hear.
08:14:40 I don't think we've been informed to make a real good
08:14:44 decision.
08:14:45 And I would like to see us have an opportunity to sit
08:14:48 down and talk.
08:14:49 Talk about the setback, the tall buildings,
08:14:54 residential homes are sitting right across the street.
08:14:57 It's almost like you are kind of boxed in, you know.

08:15:01 And that bothers me, especially the traffic and the
08:15:05 noise level of the interstate being reconstructed.
08:15:11 The pollution, our natural resources.
08:15:14 We're going to put strain and stress on, you know, on
08:15:18 our roads, on our sewers, storm drainage, all these
08:15:22 things we have to consider.
08:15:24 We just like to know a real are we a part of the
08:15:29 equation as a community?
08:15:30 As you look at the demographics, we know that we have
08:15:34 a lot of senior citizens.
08:15:35 I'm not planning on retiring real soon, so I won't be
08:15:40 needing that apartment over there.
08:15:41 I plan on remaining a homeowner.
08:15:43 That's my plans, not to leave my home and then rent.
08:15:47 That doesn't make good sense to me.
08:15:49 So that's basically what I have to say.
08:15:51 Thank you.
08:15:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
08:15:54 Next.
08:15:58 >> Thank you.
08:15:58 My name is Eric Armstrong, I have been sworn in.
08:16:03 4215 LaSalle in Carver City.

08:16:06 And my big concern is like he said, the impact on the
08:16:10 community as a whole.
08:16:11 I mean, we have a lot of developments going on all
08:16:14 around us.
08:16:15 And my biggest concern, because I'm raising my family
08:16:19 out there.
08:16:20 I look at kids every day trying to get across the
08:16:22 street as it is now.
08:16:23 I mean, we have in that neighborhood, we used to --
08:16:27 until about three years ago, four different schools
08:16:29 that were feeding out of just those two neighborhoods
08:16:32 for elementary school kids.
08:16:34 I see elementary school kids trying to make it from
08:16:36 one side of the street to the other during rush hour
08:16:39 traffic in the morning and rush hour traffic in the
08:16:41 evening, elementary all the way up to high school in
08:16:43 that little area.
08:16:44 I mean, the people coming into that area, you got --
08:16:48 you got to wonder, what's the impact going to be as
08:16:50 far as the security for the people and the safety of
08:16:52 the people in that neighborhood.
08:16:54 We got to also look at, like he was saying, the

08:16:58 infrastructure, I look at the streets, the streets
08:17:00 over there have been patched, they haven't been
08:17:03 repaired, the impact is also going to be the city.
08:17:07 I mean, the city is going to be responsible for a lot
08:17:10 of that stuff that needs to be done to justify the
08:17:12 area.
08:17:13 I see when they are working on the interstate and they
08:17:15 have one lane blocked off.
08:17:16 That one lane had traffic backed up from cypress
08:17:19 almost all the way down to spruce with people trying
08:17:21 to get through and across there.
08:17:23 That's one lane that was just blocked so they can do
08:17:26 something for the interstate.
08:17:27 And all this is, affecting our neighborhood, it's
08:17:30 affecting our quality of life.
08:17:32 Like I say, when they go to do the excavations, we got
08:17:38 dust and allergens and stuff flying around, where is
08:17:41 the concern for the people in the neighborhood, I
08:17:43 mean, like I said, I look at their project, the
08:17:45 project is a good project.
08:17:47 But it's a little overwhelming for the area that they
08:17:49 are trying to put it in.

08:17:50 I mean, it seems to me like you're trying to squeeze
08:17:53 something and it's like squeezing a basketball into a
08:17:57 cup.
08:17:57 You're trying to put something that's bigger than it
08:17:59 need to be in the area that's not designed to really
08:18:02 hold that.
08:18:02 And that's just basically my concern.
08:18:06 Thank you.
08:18:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
08:18:20 >> Good evening.
08:18:20 I'm Melanie Rodriguez representing the Westshore
08:18:23 alliance.
08:18:24 And I have been sworn in.
08:18:26 The Westshore business district has transformed from
08:18:30 what was runs recognized as a primary commercial
08:18:32 office market and has emerged to a dramatic regional
08:18:35 activity center.
08:18:37 Westshore is the largest -- state's largest office
08:18:41 market and has more hotels than anywhere else in
08:18:44 Hillsborough County, boasts a wide array of retail
08:18:49 restaurants and entertainment in the area.
08:18:51 Including the Yankees and the Bucs, nearly 100,000

08:18:55 people currently work in the Westshore district.
08:18:57 Westshore has it all.
08:18:58 In recent years, we have seen an interest of
08:19:02 infrastructure of residential development in the
08:19:04 Westshore marketplace as an organization, we
08:19:07 wholeheartedly generally support the inclusion of
08:19:10 residential in the business district.
08:19:13 You know as we do that residential units in Westshore
08:19:16 will take commuter trips off the congested roadways,
08:19:20 including a residential unit in the business district
08:19:23 would be a goal for the city, the alliance, and the
08:19:25 state.
08:19:26 In fact, the district seven office of the Florida
08:19:29 Department of Transportation requires residential
08:19:31 units to be included in the Westshore DRI.
08:19:34 We as an organization are planning for more pedestrian
08:19:37 friendly Westshore with a greater dependence on
08:19:41 transit and as a commute alternative.
08:19:45 Widening roads to get into Westshore, in and out of
08:19:48 Westshore is no longer a viable option.
08:19:50 For every one person that lives in Westshore, we
08:19:54 remove one business commuter trip from the already

08:19:56 burdened roadways.
08:19:57 We urge City Council to support the inclusion of
08:20:01 quality new residential developments in Westshore.
08:20:03 It's good for the city and good for business.
08:20:05 Thank you very much.
08:20:16 >> Good evening, my name is Sheila downing.
08:20:18 I have been sworn.
08:20:19 I reside at 4317 west LaSalle street.
08:20:22 I am a homeowner.
08:20:24 At this time, my concern is, our kids.
08:20:26 Our kids are basically in danger, like Russian
08:20:32 roulette, to cross Lois is a health hazard.
08:20:36 I mean, it's very dangerous.
08:20:37 We have no lights for them.
08:20:39 We have no -- I mean, no nothing.
08:20:41 They cannot cross the street.
08:20:43 I am actually terrified to come off of Lois exit off
08:20:46 the interstate and make a left onto LaSalle street.
08:20:51 I'm terrified to look in my mirror and see the traffic
08:20:54 that is just zooming past you.
08:20:57 And I don't know if anyone notice it, when you close
08:21:00 down one lane, on Lois Avenue, that traffic detours

08:21:05 through our city, through our neighborhood.
08:21:07 I have seen our animals run over.
08:21:10 I mean, our kids have to dart out of the way of
08:21:12 traffic for people who are just trying to race home or
08:21:16 go to work, so this, trust me, it has an impact on us
08:21:19 in the community, on our kids, on our lifestyle.
08:21:22 The -- has presented one of the best -- has been one
08:21:27 of the developers has presented one of the best
08:21:30 projects to us.
08:21:30 However, it truly has impacted us, our kids and our
08:21:35 family.
08:21:36 I bought my house five-and-a-half years ago, and I
08:21:39 don't know how much more I can take of the
08:21:40 development.
08:21:41 Something has got to stop.
08:21:43 Thank you.
08:21:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
08:21:49 The way I'm reading this map, and this appears to be
08:21:53 on the east side of Lois.
08:21:56 >> If you exit off of Lois Avenue, across cypress
08:22:00 going north, if you make a left, we're on the
08:22:03 left-hand side.

08:22:03 We make a left.
08:22:05 You can no longer go down Lois --
08:22:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, no.
08:22:09 I'm just trying to establish location.
08:22:10 The project is on the east side of Lois, and the
08:22:13 single-family residential neighborhood is on the west
08:22:16 side of Lois.
08:22:20 >> East and west.
08:22:21 It's on both sides.
08:22:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I was most concerned about in
08:22:31 terms of the site plan was pedestrian safety as you
08:22:35 were referring to.
08:22:36 And on the site plan, it appears that the developer is
08:22:39 creating particularly wide and with a little nudging,
08:22:44 shady sidewalks.
08:22:45 So what I'm wondering is, if we then also could
08:22:49 encourage them to perhaps participate in creating
08:22:53 crosswalks.
08:22:54 >> That's all I ask for.
08:22:55 As a community, that's what I have talked to my
08:22:58 neighbors.
08:22:58 I have talked to many neighbors.

08:23:00 I have been petitioning for them to come out.
08:23:03 And that's all we ask for is something that will --
08:23:06 our kids can push and cross over and feel safe about
08:23:10 getting over.
08:23:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
08:23:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there a possibility -- are there
08:23:20 existing crosswalks at spruce?
08:23:21 Is there a possibility for additional crosswalks?
08:23:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We're changing our transportation
08:23:31 impact fees so the impact fees could go to pedestrian
08:23:33 improvements instead of just capacity improvements.
08:23:39 >> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
08:23:41 I just wanted you to know that I did put on the ELMO.
08:23:44 This is the intersection of Lois and spruce.
08:23:46 Just recently, as you know, the transportation
08:23:48 division did do some improvements on Lois.
08:23:50 They did provide some landscape medians as well as
08:23:53 crosswalks, at pedestrian signals, you can see
08:23:57 pedestrian and they provide a crosswalk.
08:23:58 It is on all four sides.
08:24:00 Just like one side.
08:24:01 There's also landscape medians they put in.

08:24:04 They reduced the lanages, but kept the same number of
08:24:06 lanes but reduced the lanes for traffic calming to
08:24:08 help slow down the traffic.
08:24:10 They also have the same type here also at the
08:24:13 intersection of cypress and Lois.
08:24:17 As far as I know, too, there's a mid block cross walk,
08:24:20 because there's that after-school, so they did put
08:24:23 that with flashing lights so people are aware that
08:24:26 there is a crossing at that section.
08:24:27 Just wanted you to know what is already existing
08:24:30 there, what recently we have done.
08:24:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the question that I was saying,
08:24:36 is there an opportunity possibly to enhance that with
08:24:41 crosswalks at union and/or green which appears to be
08:24:45 the other two streets that are adjacent to this
08:24:48 project?
08:24:48 >> We don't normally encourage a mid block cross walk.
08:24:52 It's not safe for the pedestrian, because we would
08:24:54 like those at signalized intersections.
08:24:56 We do provide at the two signalized intersections
08:25:00 already.
08:25:00 It's a safety concern for us.

08:25:01 They want to make sure they can cross safely and do
08:25:03 have time for the signal to cross when it's safe for
08:25:06 them to cross.
08:25:07 So there's already a mid block cross walk there that's
08:25:11 no, ma'am normally.
08:25:11 I want to say green.
08:25:15 I know it's one of them.
08:25:19 >>GWEN MILLER: It's green.
08:25:20 It's going to Loretta Ingrid park.
08:25:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it the same type of cross walk
08:25:26 with the pavement --
08:25:29 >> I think it is.
08:25:29 And I know there's at least --
08:25:34 >>GWEN MILLER: The next speaker.
08:25:39 >> Good evening, Council.
08:25:41 My name is Dan Smith, and I have been sworn in.
08:25:44 I reside at 4315 west LaSalle street.
08:25:48 I represent the Carver City Lincoln gardens civic and
08:25:51 homeowners association.
08:25:52 I am the president.
08:25:53 And a lot of discussion going on today.
08:25:56 Had a prepared speech, but the fact of the matter is,

08:25:58 a lot of things going on in our homeowners association
08:26:01 and a lot of questions asked were asked tonight.
08:26:04 Same kinds of concerns.
08:26:06 I will read some.
08:26:07 First, let me make it clear that I'm no attorney nor
08:26:11 am I politician.
08:26:12 Our responsibility is to express and convey and report
08:26:14 the concerns and needs of our desires to the
08:26:20 developers, city council, and the public.
08:26:22 As you may already know, Carver City is a
08:26:24 predominantly African-American community.
08:26:27 Rich history of integrity and legacy that reaches as
08:26:30 far back as five generations.
08:26:33 Our residential boundaries consist of Boyscout to the
08:26:36 north, cypress to the south, Manhattan Avenue to the
08:26:41 west, and Dale Mabry to the east.
08:26:43 That gives approximately two miles in diameter for the
08:26:49 section.
08:26:49 With that, we already have to deal with the effects
08:26:51 from without walls ministries, their traffic.
08:26:55 The International Mall's traffic from 275, the
08:26:59 expansion of 275 has affected us and the houses that

08:27:02 live on the tail end of our -- south end of our
08:27:05 community.
08:27:06 And also the seasonal gridlock from Raymond James
08:27:08 Stadium.
08:27:08 So when you consider those things as well as the
08:27:12 newest, some already approved and some not approved,
08:27:17 developments that are coming on in our area, the new
08:27:21 expressway to the airport will bring more traffic we
08:27:23 believe.
08:27:24 The 19 acres of mixed use property, named Avion Park
08:27:29 of Westshore, I believe developed by McKibbon.
08:27:33 31 acres of property developed on Spruce by Metlife.
08:27:36 Spruce -- excuse me, Boyscout and Lois.
08:27:39 Ten acres of mixed use property by a company by the
08:27:43 name of McDibb, which is off of Dale Mabry, but it
08:27:46 sits on the back end of Palmetto Street, which is
08:27:50 going to affect our Lincoln Garden residents.
08:27:53 Parkland Development on Spruce Street has a
08:27:55 development.
08:27:56 Spruce and Manhattan.
08:27:57 A developer at Boyscout and Trask -- I believe that's
08:28:00 Parkland also -- Jim Micas, an attorney, has some

08:28:04 property that he's about to sell that may bring
08:28:06 another developer in the area.
08:28:06 Ron Rotella's 57 apartment building development on
08:28:14 Clark Street which is in the heart right behind this
08:28:17 development we're talking about now.
08:28:18 Crossley, six acres of mixed use property in the area.
08:28:24 That's in the heart of the community.
08:28:26 I may have left out a few.
08:28:27 But the fact of the matter is, the Carver City Lincoln
08:28:32 Gardens civic and homeowners association is not
08:28:34 against progress.
08:28:36 We are, however, very concerned with gentrification.
08:28:38 We're very concerned with density in our area.
08:28:42 As you pointed out, these buildings, the sides of
08:28:47 these buildings immediately face houses that are very
08:28:49 concerned with the height.
08:28:50 We do appreciate, however, the Crossland development,
08:28:57 their initiative to listen to us.
08:28:59 Their initiative to work with us.
08:29:00 And to make some very good suggestions that will cause
08:29:03 us to better coexist.
08:29:05 We would like to, however, continue those discussions.

08:29:08 It just so happens that on the 25th of June, we had
08:29:12 a board meeting, and on the 25th of June is when
08:29:15 they proposed the latest meetings.
08:29:17 Our next meeting is on the 12th of July.
08:29:19 And we would like to continue the discussion so we can
08:29:21 finalize our position on the situation.
08:29:23 We hope the Council will consider our position on
08:29:26 this.
08:29:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
08:29:28 Anyone else like to speak?
08:29:34 >> Sanford Meyer.
08:29:35 I have been sworn.
08:29:37 I'm a commercial realtor and have done business in the
08:29:41 Westshore district for 25 years.
08:29:45 I've had the opportunity to work with many developers,
08:29:49 both -- and throughout the Tampa area.
08:29:52 Crossland is one of the finest development companies
08:29:56 that I've come across for this type of product.
08:29:58 They've made an earnest commitment to the
08:30:00 neighborhood.
08:30:01 They have been very conscious to become very good
08:30:04 citizens of Tampa as they enter this market and

08:30:08 contribute to the city both in terms of its tax base
08:30:12 and both in terms of their neighborhood
08:30:14 responsibility.
08:30:15 I'm conscious of the Westshore overlay commercial
08:30:21 district that I believe encompasses this area.
08:30:24 And I sat in this honorable chamber and listened to
08:30:28 staff speak to what was described as a bustling
08:30:35 commercial area and neighborhood that was designed for
08:30:38 this.
08:30:38 I looked at CROSLIN's plan, and I looked at the
08:30:41 neighborhood centric, which is what the term is
08:30:43 referred to of the retail component of this project,
08:30:46 and it is designed to create a neighborhood value for
08:30:50 the neighborhood in a community that will offer and
08:30:53 afford the neighbors that have gotten up here to speak
08:30:57 and the houses and the residents, an environment where
08:31:00 they can share with the apartment dwellers.
08:31:03 I have personally fielded from other calls as has
08:31:07 staff within my company, calls from members and
08:31:10 workers and the workforce of the office buildings in
08:31:13 Westshore, at the international plaza, from athletes,
08:31:17 from athletes' families in the major sports complexes,

08:31:21 all of which are desirous of quality, rental housing
08:31:24 in this area, which will in effect address many of the
08:31:28 issues that these wonderful people have raised, that
08:31:31 is reducing traffic.
08:31:34 The facts -- we have 275 being expanded.
08:31:40 The facts on the ground are, that the International
08:31:42 Mall today is a destination location for people, not
08:31:47 just to shop, but people to go eat to be with their
08:31:50 families, to go to hotels, to enjoy recreation and a
08:31:53 lifestyle.
08:31:54 This will let people take their cars off that road,
08:31:58 work there, live here, and be a part of the
08:32:01 neighborhood and contribute and be integrated into the
08:32:04 neighborhood that exists.
08:32:05 I listened to one gentleman speak to the value of the
08:32:09 legacy that he wants to leave to his children and
08:32:12 grandchildren.
08:32:13 And I would offer and submit to you that the value
08:32:18 that will be added by the quality of this developer
08:32:21 and by the project that they are offering this
08:32:24 community and our wonderful city will leave a legacy
08:32:29 and offer value for that generation going forward that

08:32:32 we'll all be proud of.
08:32:33 This is a win-win-win project, not just for the site
08:32:39 but for Carver City, Lincoln gardens and for all of us
08:32:42 in Tampa.
08:32:42 Thank you for your time.
08:32:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
08:32:46 Can't speak but once.
08:32:52 >>JULIA COLE: If I can just make a comment in
08:32:54 listening to the testimony, I wanted to make sure it
08:32:58 was clear to Council what is in front of them.
08:33:00 This site currently has a zoning on it, which would
08:33:03 allow for 100 -- I'm sorry, approximately 100 --
08:33:10 >> 80 town houses.
08:33:10 >>JULIA COLE: -- town houses and 68,000 square feet of
08:33:13 commercial.
08:33:13 So when you're considering this request, you are
08:33:17 considering it in light of the current zoning on it.
08:33:19 This isn't a vacant, empty piece of property or with
08:33:22 very minimal zoning on it.
08:33:24 I want to make that clear.
08:33:25 Quite frankly, it wasn't real clear to me.
08:33:27 So I wanted to make sure that Council understood that.

08:33:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
08:33:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I spent about an hour, hour and
08:33:35 a half at this site yesterday driving that whole area,
08:33:40 looking at it.
08:33:41 And then discovering what the zoning is today and you
08:33:45 look at what you have you are actually getting a
08:33:48 better product.
08:33:49 In other words, if this does not pass tonight, what
08:33:57 you could potentially end up with without them having
08:34:00 to come before us, don't have to come to us, don't
08:34:04 have to come to you because it's already zoned, this
08:34:06 is a much better product.
08:34:08 I'm just telling the community that.
08:34:10 And then when you look at the whole area, Lincoln
08:34:13 Garden, Carver City, you're right.
08:34:18 You are really enclosed into a whole lot of
08:34:20 development, whole lot of growth, whole lot of things
08:34:23 that have gone on over in that area.
08:34:25 In fact, you have Roland elementary school that's a
08:34:31 few blocks over.
08:34:32 You have the suites hotel over there.
08:34:35 You have another housing project that's there.

08:34:42 You have some more probably coming.
08:34:45 You have the county senior center that's there, which
08:34:48 is an enhancement to the senior housing.
08:34:53 I will tell you, I love affordable housing.
08:34:55 And when I saw the senior affordable housing that
08:34:58 really caught my attention.
08:35:00 We start talking about low income affordable housing
08:35:04 on top of that.
08:35:07 The crosswalks are there.
08:35:08 I mean, I spend a lot of time looking at this site
08:35:12 yesterday, plus you also got the city police and solid
08:35:17 waste garage that's right behind there, and I kept
08:35:21 saying, what's the name of the street, you have
08:35:23 St. Mary Baptist church there, and all the way up, you
08:35:26 have target and all that, park and stuff.
08:35:30 It's all there.
08:35:32 But this site, I'm telling you will be a much better
08:35:36 product then 180 townhomes as well 68,000 commercial.
08:35:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner may come up for rebuttal.
08:35:51 >> Briefly, members of the Council.
08:35:53 Cathy Coyle and I have discussed the four-inch tree.
08:35:56 I think what we were all saying is the same thing.

08:35:58 I think she has some suggestions on maybe tweaking the
08:36:02 language.
08:36:02 I believe she has some hand-written notes to that
08:36:05 effect.
08:36:05 I also spoken in great detail outside with Mr. Cole,
08:36:11 who is dealing with, again, a last-minute
08:36:15 accommodation to a request to reduce the height of the
08:36:18 building.
08:36:19 We have now two architects that are working on it, but
08:36:22 he is committed to making sure that there is some type
08:36:25 of architectural -- not architectural, but there's
08:36:30 some type of green enhancement on top of that parking
08:36:33 deck so folks looking to the south in those units
08:36:36 don't see a gravel rooftop.
08:36:39 That was something I'm glad we were able to work out
08:36:44 outside.
08:36:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The only other question I would ask,
08:36:48 you have been in consultation with the neighborhood,
08:36:51 and they have said there are some other issues that
08:36:54 have not -- I don't know what they are -- have you all
08:36:58 addressed those with the neighborhood?
08:36:59 Have they made you aware of those issues in terms of

08:37:05 specific requirement, I guess?
08:37:16 >> We have not been given a list of any specific
08:37:20 issues that we have not addressed.
08:37:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Brooks or staff, I'm not sure.
08:37:29 Traffic analysis.
08:37:32 Mr. Scott and others have pointed out that there's an
08:37:35 existing project on there.
08:37:36 It has a certain number of trips, et cetera.
08:37:38 Has somebody worked that out as compared to the
08:37:41 proposed project?
08:37:42 Because, I mean, I do have concerns about this area
08:37:46 and the intensity of all these developments.
08:37:51 But if we already have X number of trips approved on
08:37:54 the project, I would like to know what this project
08:37:58 is.
08:37:59 >> Randy Cohen, Cohen and company.
08:38:01 I have been sworn.
08:38:03 No doubt there is more traffic associated with this
08:38:06 project.
08:38:06 It's about a 35% increase over the prior project that
08:38:09 was approved.
08:38:10 However, one thing to keep in mind, the prior project

08:38:13 at 68,000 square feet of commercial with a lot of
08:38:15 traffic coming in and out all day long, this project
08:38:19 is primarily residential, 350 apartment units maximum
08:38:23 of 160 retirement units, 160 retirement units actually
08:38:28 translate into less than 20 trips in the morning, 20
08:38:30 trips in the afternoon, given the nature of that
08:38:33 particular product.
08:38:33 So the traffic is more of a going out in the morning,
08:38:38 coming in in the afternoon, hopefully a lot of those
08:38:41 folks having destinations in Westshore.
08:38:44 So shorter trips.
08:38:45 Overall, daily, substantially less trips.
08:38:47 However in the morning and in the afternoon because of
08:38:49 predominant residential -- we did find the levels of
08:38:54 service were not different on any of the
08:38:56 intersections, roadways, analyzed under the previous
08:39:00 rezoning, which I actually did the traffic study for
08:39:02 as well as this particular rezoning.
08:39:04 So -- more traffic in the morning than the afternoon.
08:39:09 Substantially less traffic on a daily basis, though.
08:39:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Cohen, as long as you are here
08:39:17 and you have the expertise, how about the notion on

08:39:21 the senior parking?
08:39:22 Have you done analysis on that?
08:39:25 >> Actually, I have been involved in a number of ALF,
08:39:28 ILF senior housings, give it whatever name you want,
08:39:31 and I have spoken a great deal with the developer of
08:39:34 this particular retirement residential because, in
08:39:38 fact, it is restricted by state process to retirement
08:39:41 residential, it's also restricted to a great deal with
08:39:44 income.
08:39:45 I think the parking they are providing is more than
08:39:50 adequate.
08:39:50 A substantial number of folks living in this building
08:39:53 will not be at an economic level to own a vehicle much
08:39:56 less operate a vehicle.
08:39:57 The average age is somewhere in the low to mid 70s
08:40:00 of the residents there which again begins to point to
08:40:03 some folks choosing not to drive at that point in
08:40:05 their life.
08:40:06 I think it's a pretty reasonable parking situation.
08:40:09 Unfortunately, City of Tampa Code really doesn't
08:40:11 reflect at this point this emerging type of
08:40:13 residential, so you're caught with a code for a

08:40:17 nursing home versus a code for an apartment complex.
08:40:20 Generally speaking, you just don't have that
08:40:22 residential land use in between.
08:40:23 I think that will happen over time.
08:40:25 The code will be amended and changed as it becomes
08:40:28 more and more of a residential type in Tampa.
08:40:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Brooks, do you have anything else
08:40:34 to say?
08:40:36 >> No, Council.
08:40:37 Thank you for your consideration.
08:40:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions from Council members?
08:40:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the hearing.
08:40:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second to close.
08:40:52 All in favor of the motion, aye.
08:40:53 [Motion Carried]
08:40:54 What's the pleasure of council?
08:40:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Coyle, did you have some
08:40:59 changes or language?
08:41:07 >> Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
08:41:09 I read through them with Mr. Brooks and he concurs.
08:41:12 First of all a number of the waivers, one through
08:41:16 nine, the last waiver listed on the table -- the last

08:41:30 waiver is removed.
08:41:31 Number nine is modified.
08:41:32 The beginning piece is taken out.
08:41:34 What it says specifically, developer will comply
08:41:37 with -- code requirements regarding tree plantings and
08:41:41 payments in lieu.
08:41:42 Contributions to the tree trust fund will require tree
08:41:45 plantings is not feasible due to the reduction of
08:41:49 on-site greenspace per waiver note number three above.
08:41:52 The important piece for permitting and in the end we
08:41:56 were all saying the same thing.
08:41:57 He actually did not need a waiver.
08:41:59 The tree numbers changed to 42 for the remaining VUA
08:42:05 space.
08:42:06 54 for total number required.
08:42:08 155 for the multifamily, and then it's a total of 209
08:42:12 trees to be planted.
08:42:14 The -- says specifically developer required to plant
08:42:18 418 inches on-site.
08:42:20 That's the two-inch tree.
08:42:22 209 trees.
08:42:22 And that he will provide four-inch caliber trees

08:42:26 minimum to meet the required inches to be planted and
08:42:29 developer shall contribute to the tree trust fund for
08:42:32 those trees, open paren, inches, not able to be
08:42:36 planted within the on-site greenspace.
08:42:39 What it's saying essentially, he's going to plant
08:42:41 minimum four-inch trees.
08:42:42 He's going to meet the code requirement of the number
08:42:44 of trees to be planted, and those that they he cannot
08:42:47 plant, he will pay into the trust fund.
08:42:49 There technically is no waiver on the plan.
08:42:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about the greenspace on the
08:42:59 senior housing?
08:42:59 Did you have a note on that?
08:43:04 >> I thought Mr. Brooks actually addressed that
08:43:07 particular building.
08:43:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: He addressed it and then committed
08:43:08 to it --
08:43:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: What was the commitment?
08:43:10 I missed that one.
08:43:11 I apologize.
08:43:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yeah, you were deep into numbers
08:43:14 there.

08:43:16 >> We're committed to the design of having -- what
08:43:21 you're looking at is the top of a parking deck.
08:43:26 And you're looking at greenspace treatments that are
08:43:29 on top of that, whether they might be planters or
08:43:33 trellises or something along those lines.
08:43:37 That's what we're going to commit to.
08:43:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we want usable greenspace.
08:43:42 I don't think we're as concerned from the view people
08:43:45 looking out their windows and looking down, although
08:43:47 that's important, too, as something that people who
08:43:51 live in the building can go outside to greenspace so
08:43:53 that it isn't all just parking.
08:44:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Wait a minute.
08:44:01 We are going into -- we closed the public hearing.
08:44:05 You all are asking --
08:44:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We're talking to each other.
08:44:09 >>GWEN MILLER: No, you're talking to Mr. Brooks.
08:44:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to reopen.
08:44:12 >>GWEN MILLER: In the beginning, I said are there any
08:44:15 questions from Council?
08:44:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That was the only break I have
08:44:18 taken in the last hour.

08:44:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't realize that was a roof when
08:44:24 I asked for -- I thought that was a parking lot we
08:44:27 were looking at.
08:44:28 So I would be fine with putting some green treatment
08:44:32 on there.
08:44:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That people would use or would just
08:44:39 look green.
08:44:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I said just because they are
08:44:47 seniors doesn't mean they don't deserve a little
08:44:49 courtyard.
08:44:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The green roof that the garden
08:44:51 would be.
08:44:54 >>MARY MULHERN: They are asking for more than I was.
08:44:56 I didn't realize that was a roof.
08:44:57 I thought they were looking at parking lots.
08:45:04 >> I cannot answer for what they are willing to commit
08:45:07 to.
08:45:10 >>GWEN MILLER: The public hearing is closed.
08:45:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to reopen the public hearing
08:45:13 to get an answer from the petitioner on what kind of
08:45:15 commitment they are making.
08:45:17 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to reopen

08:45:18 the public hearing.
08:45:19 All in favor, aye.
08:45:20 Opposed, nay.
08:45:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Can't hear you.
08:45:27 [ LAUGHTER ]
08:45:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Charlie, will you sing for us in
08:45:39 the meantime?
08:45:42 >> Damon Cole, once again, with the Richmond Group.
08:45:46 As I've said throughout the evening, we have a
08:45:48 conceptual sort of aerial view right now.
08:45:52 I think what I can do, because you've given me some
08:45:59 leeway and you haven't prescribed a certain size, you
08:46:04 haven't said out of one acre we'll take 10,000 square
08:46:08 feet of greenspace, if you give me some design
08:46:11 flexibility, I think we can fit -- and this is, once
08:46:14 again, this assumption on my part that we're granted
08:46:16 the waiver in the parking reduction, which is really
08:46:19 going to drive a lot of this.
08:46:23 If we are granted the waiver, I think we can
08:46:26 accommodate the parking we'll need for the number of
08:46:28 units and we will be able to design in a courtyard
08:46:31 space that will have either a fountain or something, a

08:46:34 gathering area, you know, an actual resident gathering
08:46:38 area.
08:46:38 I don't know if we'll get to the point where we'll
08:46:40 have a swimming pool.
08:46:41 You know, unfortunately, I don't have a design study
08:46:47 that's going to -- I'm not sure what --
08:46:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Talking about some sort of minimum
08:46:52 size so we can put it on the record, put it on the
08:46:54 site plan and get off of this and be done with it.
08:46:58 I haven't heard anybody have a problem with the
08:46:59 parking issue.
08:47:00 So I think if you go on that assumption --
08:47:04 >> Well, then if I factor in your parking space size
08:47:06 of 200 square feet, I think that a thousand square
08:47:10 feet I can probably --
08:47:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Usable courtyard.
08:47:15 >> Of a courtyard space, which is basically the
08:47:18 equivalent.
08:47:19 I mean, on a residential level, I think it's
08:47:22 sufficient.
08:47:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Coyle, you can add that to the
08:47:26 site plan real quickly?

08:47:27 >>CATHERINE COYLE: You want a commitment of a minimum
08:47:29 thousand square feet usable greenspace for the senior
08:47:32 building.
08:47:33 >> Yes.
08:47:33 And can I have the flexibility where that can be
08:47:35 either provided on the first level, if we're able to
08:47:38 work around it or on a second level roof deck as long
08:47:41 as I have that flexibility, I think we can do it.
08:47:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I just want to make sure -- we're
08:47:46 going to keep it at -- okay.
08:47:49 Sorry.
08:47:53 >> Okay, Ms. Cole and I have discussed this, and we'll
08:47:57 give a trial run for the new process.
08:47:59 If Council is willing to move this on first reading,
08:48:02 what I would ask in your motion to approve on first
08:48:04 reading is to cite the approval with the conditions
08:48:08 that I've read into the record and additionally with
08:48:11 the condition of the provision of a minimum thousand
08:48:15 square feet of usable greenspace either on the first
08:48:19 or second floor for the senior residence.
08:48:21 You'll read the ordinance.
08:48:22 The petitioner will be required to submit the plan next

08:48:25 Thursday by 4:00.
08:48:25 And that plan will be certified by me, if it meets the
08:48:28 conditions of the first reading.
08:48:29 You could say so moved if you want to at this point.
08:48:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Council members, speak up?
08:48:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
08:48:41 [Motion Carried]
08:48:42 What's the pleasure of Council?
08:48:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's read the ordinance with those
08:48:45 conditions.
08:48:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second.
08:48:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move an ordinance rezoning
08:48:50 property in the general vicinity of 1903, 1905 and
08:48:54 1513 North Lois Avenue -- that's a strange address.
08:49:00 Is that correct?
08:49:01 1903 and 1905 and 1513 North Lois.
08:49:06 In the City of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly
08:49:12 described in section one from zoning district
08:49:14 classifications PD, planned development, to PD,
08:49:16 planned development mixed use, residential,
08:49:18 multifamily, retail, providing an effective date.
08:49:21 And including the conditions that Ms. Coyle just

08:49:23 stated on the record as related to the active
08:49:28 greenspace and the tree calculations and four-inch
08:49:33 trees.
08:49:33 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
08:49:34 All in favor of the motion, aye.
08:49:35 Opposed, nay.
08:49:36 [Motion Carried]
08:49:37 >> Madam Chair, good evening, Phil Schulz, Land
08:49:47 Development Coordination.
08:49:48 I have been sworn.
08:49:49 Next item on your agenda is rezoning case Z 07-43.
08:49:54 This is a continuance from 6/14/07 located in district
08:49:59 five in the West Tampa overlay district bordered by
08:50:03 north Rome Avenue, West Fig Street, West Gray and
08:50:08 North B.
08:50:08 The DRC has reviewed the revised plans presented
08:50:12 before you this evening, and they have no objections.
08:50:14 As requested by the City Council and the
08:50:20 recommendations of the DRC, were implemented into the
08:50:23 site plan and elevations so that the elevations and
08:50:26 the site plans do correlate with each other now.
08:50:30 With no further objections, I'll be available for any

08:50:33 questions.
08:50:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions from Council members?
08:50:35 Petitioner?
08:50:42 >> Good evening, Madam Chairman, members of Council.
08:50:45 Brian sikes, attorney for the petitioner.
08:50:48 No, I have not been sworn.
08:50:51 (Oath administered by clerk).
08:50:56 >> Wasn't quite sure if it counted when I was outside
08:50:59 looking through the window.
08:51:00 I figured we wouldn't take a chance.
08:51:03 Peninsulas Schulz said, we have addressed all staff's
08:51:08 concerns.
08:51:08 We're here before you last time, we did a full
08:51:11 presentation, discussed the entire scope of the
08:51:13 project.
08:51:14 Unless someone would like me to go further into that
08:51:16 I'll kind of skip over that at this point.
08:51:19 Staff has found that the project is consistent with
08:51:21 the Land Development code.
08:51:22 We have met and all the requirements of the
08:51:26 Hillsborough County comprehensive plan as well as the
08:51:29 West Tampa overlay district.

08:51:30 And we respectfully request your support of the zoning
08:51:34 petition.
08:51:34 And as Councilman Miranda said at the last hearing,
08:51:37 which I thought was a very good quote, it takes great
08:51:40 neighborhoods to make a great city.
08:51:41 We're looking forward to being a part of this
08:51:43 neighborhood and to moving it forward in the future.
08:51:45 I'm available for any questions.
08:51:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public want to
08:51:49 speak on item number 8?
08:52:03 >> Good evening.
08:52:04 My name is Addie Holten.
08:52:05 I have been sworn.
08:52:07 1520 West Fig Street.
08:52:10 Even though my property is not inclusive in the area
08:52:13 that's going to be rezoned, I have a couple of
08:52:15 questions I need to have answered.
08:52:17 Well, I've got five.
08:52:19 One, I need to know what is PD.
08:52:24 And they didn't show it tonight, but when we were here
08:52:27 two weeks ago, they had a drawing up there, and I need
08:52:31 somebody to put it up there that has the block of the

08:52:34 Fig Street, your design that you have for Fig Street.
08:52:38 Because as far as I know, you own all of the property
08:52:49 in that neighborhood except my house and from the
08:52:57 design I saw, the whole block is taken care of.
08:52:59 I just want to know where is my house in that block.
08:53:03 Also, if the rezoning is approved -- no, that's not
08:53:08 it.
08:53:08 It shows the town houses or whatever.
08:53:11 Okay.
08:53:16 All right.
08:53:16 No, but you had a pretty one with the pretty little
08:53:20 town houses, the courtyard and everything.
08:53:22 But at any rate, what I need to find out, if the
08:53:25 zoning is approved, what impact will it have on our
08:53:31 property?
08:53:32 Will I still have the ability if I don't reach an
08:53:35 agreement with anybody to sell my property, will I
08:53:39 still have the ability to make renovations to my
08:53:42 house, improving the surrounding grounds?
08:53:44 Okay.
08:53:48 Good.
08:53:49 I also wanted to ask one other question.

08:53:53 If we don't come to an agreement and still want to buy
08:53:56 our property and we still say no, I need to find out,
08:54:01 does eminent domain come into play?
08:54:03 I think that about takes care of it.
08:54:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's no eminent domain related
08:54:20 to this project.
08:54:21 This is not a CRA area.
08:54:22 Over in the heights, we have a CRA area, there was
08:54:25 eminent domain over there, but that's not related to
08:54:28 this.
08:54:28 So I wouldn't worry about that at all.
08:54:32 If your property is not included in the zoning, okay,
08:54:36 and I'm going to check with staff or the developer to
08:54:39 confirm that, it looks like you're carved out of the
08:54:42 zoning, so whatever zoning you have, you probably have
08:54:45 an RS-50 zoning or something like that, whatever
08:54:48 zoning you have, you continue to have.
08:54:51 You're just a little carve-out in the middle of this
08:54:54 project.
08:54:55 You can continue to do whatever you've been able to do
08:54:58 for as long as time.
08:55:00 The other part is, what is a PD?

08:55:02 Much of the city is zoned in these large areas like an
08:55:09 RS-50.
08:55:12 A 50-foot lot that sort of thing or an RS-75, which is
08:55:17 single-family 75-foot lot.
08:55:22 Every now and then, somebody comes along and wants to
08:55:24 do a big project.
08:55:25 It's called a PD, a planned development.
08:55:27 When they do that, they bring a site plan in, which we
08:55:31 have in front of us, with great detail that shows what
08:55:34 they want to do.
08:55:35 When they get the PD, they don't have an RS-50 don't
08:55:44 have one of those types of nomenclature.
08:55:46 What they have instead is a planned development.
08:55:48 Once they submit this and if we approve it, they are
08:55:50 held to all of the conditions and drawings and
08:55:53 everything else that is submitted with this.
08:55:56 So, you know, sometimes it's good news.
08:55:58 Sometimes it's bad news about a PD, but the good news
08:56:01 is with the PD, at least, you know, you can get a copy
08:56:04 of this, keep it forever.
08:56:06 And if they don't abide by this, you come tell us and
08:56:09 we can enforce it.

08:56:11 >> Thank you very much.
08:56:16 >> Good evening, I'm here again.
08:56:17 My name is Ruth McNair.
08:56:19 I have been sworn.
08:56:23 1121 west Nassau street.
08:56:26 I'm the president of west riverfront neighborhood
08:56:28 crime watch association, and also a member of the West
08:56:31 Tampa overlay committee.
08:56:34 -- a couple of months ago and also with the overlay,
08:56:43 and I do approve the project.
08:56:46 We do have concerns with the traffic that will be
08:56:48 coming in on cypress and Rome, we do not have a light
08:56:53 there.
08:56:54 It's a four-way stop sign, and that's going to be a
08:56:56 great impact with traffic.
08:56:59 And the sewer and water and I'm concerned about that
08:57:04 because you already have us on water.
08:57:06 We can't water too much so we're bringing all these
08:57:08 apartments and condos, what's going to happen to our
08:57:11 water.
08:57:11 So that's my concern.
08:57:12 So thank you very much for -- but I do support this

08:57:17 project.
08:57:18 In fact, they've been better to us this time than they
08:57:20 were the first time.
08:57:21 [ LAUGHTER ]
08:57:29 >> Good afternoon.
08:57:30 Evening, right.
08:57:34 I've had a long day.
08:57:36 I have not been sworn in.
08:57:38 I want to make sure.
08:57:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else need to be sworn in?
08:57:41 Please raise your right hands.
08:57:44 (Oath administered by clerk).
08:57:48 >> Yes.
08:57:49 My name is Robert Allen.
08:57:52 I represent the north Hyde Park Civic Association, not
08:57:58 homeowners association, but a Civic Association.
08:58:01 Three weeks ago, we had a meeting with Mr. Moore and
08:58:07 his staff.
08:58:08 In fact, we had two meetings.
08:58:09 And in those meetings, he brought to our attention the
08:58:17 magnitude of the two projects that will be going on in
08:58:20 our community and also Mrs. McNair's community.

08:58:25 I'm concerned about the second phase of the project,
08:58:31 which is the Logan Lumber company.
08:58:35 Logan Lumber company right now is probably one of the
08:58:40 largest land owners in our community.
08:58:42 And by them purchasing this property and contemplating
08:58:51 doing a large-scale apartment project, 500 apartments,
08:59:01 this brings on a lot of concern.
08:59:06 And the concerns deal with our current problems in the
08:59:12 infrastructure.
08:59:14 Number one, as Mrs. McNair did allude to, and that
08:59:21 is stormwater runoff.
08:59:24 If you live in my community and I give you some
08:59:32 geographics, Kennedy looking north to the interstate,
08:59:35 which is Laurel, willow to the east and Armenia to the
08:59:41 west.
08:59:42 When we have rain like we do during this time of the
08:59:50 year, we are actually flooded in if you are in the
08:59:55 community.
08:59:55 If you happen to be out of the community, you can't
08:59:58 get in, because of the flooding of the streets.
09:00:01 Now, I know there are three criteria that have to be
09:00:08 met before something will be done coming from the City

09:00:15 of Tampa.
09:00:15 And that is, one, you must have home flooding now.
09:00:20 Two, property, and three streets.
09:00:22 Well, we meet two those criteria.
09:00:26 Homes have been flooded out and the streets are
09:00:28 flooded out.
09:00:29 The project, looking out of my eyes is a well-planned
09:00:39 project.
09:00:40 It will certainly, certainly bring into our community
09:00:48 the growth that we had looked for for the past ten
09:00:51 years.
09:00:52 However, we understand that with change comes
09:00:59 problems.
09:01:03 And a problem that exists will be compound by bringing
09:01:05 all of these people into our community, not only from
09:01:11 the folks who are driving in with their vehicle, but
09:01:16 because of the fact that you're going to probably
09:01:18 bring in 1500 people just in phase two.
09:01:23 Our concerns are, number one, I don't think their
09:01:30 system will be adequate for the stormwater runoff.
09:01:36 And as I have been explained is that they will have
09:01:40 vats under their specific buildings, and I think those

09:01:44 are the parking garages.
09:01:47 These vats will hold a certain amount of water.
09:01:51 However, during the course of a week, that water if
09:01:57 not dissipated will be pumped back into the community.
09:02:02 I understand first on their property and then back
09:02:06 into the inadequate system that's there.
09:02:09 I have a letter that I want to pass around to you to
09:02:14 let you know that the group itself voted unanimously
09:02:21 to back this project.
09:02:25 However, those things that I just talked to you about
09:02:27 are some of the things that we talked to Mr. Ken
09:02:30 Warren about, and these are some of the things that's
09:02:33 going to be compound.
09:02:35 Going to be a big impact with all the people coming
09:02:38 in.
09:02:38 But then, it compounds the other problems that were
09:02:44 already existing in our community.
09:02:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Allen, are there stormwater
09:02:54 drains in your system, or are we talking about
09:02:56 ditches?
09:02:58 >> There are ditches and there are, according to the
09:03:01 City of Tampa, inadequate systems, from, if I may,

09:03:08 from Laurel street at the interstate, down to Cass
09:03:16 Street, there is none.
09:03:17 When it rained in our community, Cass is flooded for
09:03:22 three or four days.
09:03:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I avoid your community when it
09:03:26 rains because I know it goes under pretty bad.
09:03:30 We'll hear from staff and perhaps from the developer
09:03:34 to speak to the stormwater program.
09:03:37 The existing buildings that Logan Lumber has right
09:03:40 now, my guess is -- and just looking at the aerial
09:03:44 shot and in my mind, I picture big metal structures
09:03:50 and they probably just dump that rainwater out and it
09:03:53 just goes everywhere and out into your neighborhood.
09:03:56 So I'm thinking there's got to be an improvement over
09:04:00 the existing condition.
09:04:01 It might not be as good as you want it, but it's
09:04:04 definitely got to be an improvement over the existing
09:04:07 condition.
09:04:07 >> I think I know where you come from.
09:04:09 What you're saying is the street -- the parking
09:04:15 lots -- lots available for them to store the lumber
09:04:19 have been paved over.

09:04:20 That will not dissipate.
09:04:21 It will run back into the community.
09:04:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Plus the buildings are just like
09:04:26 those covered metal buildings.
09:04:28 >> We were concerned about the fact that maybe the
09:04:32 vats will capture the water, but how much of that
09:04:36 water is going to go between Monday and Friday, and
09:04:40 you have two or three rains.
09:04:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: At what point do they max out?
09:04:45 That's a good question.
09:04:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
09:04:46 Thank you.
09:04:47 The next speaker.
09:04:54 >> Good evening, for the record.
09:04:55 I have been sworn in.
09:04:57 For the record, my name is Michael Randolph from the
09:04:59 West Tampa Community Development Corporation.
09:05:02 The CDC has met and did wait to get a -- from the
09:05:09 neighborhood as it relates to the project.
09:05:11 The CDC -- does support the project.
09:05:20 We believe that it's imperative that the
09:05:23 revitalization that's going on in West Tampa does

09:05:26 continue.
09:05:27 We hear the concerns of these neighborhoods and stand
09:05:31 behind them in making sure those issues are addressed.
09:05:35 We did meet with the old West Tampa Neighborhood
09:05:38 Association's, crime watch association, while they are
09:05:43 not immediately affected by this project, per se, but
09:05:47 they are a part of the overlay committee so we listen
09:05:49 to all of the neighborhood group, they are in our
09:05:52 position to the project.
09:05:54 There are two reasons why they are in our position.
09:05:57 First, they feel that should -- they disagree with the
09:06:04 on-street parking.
09:06:06 They think everything should be on the property
09:06:07 itself.
09:06:08 And the second reason why they disagree is because
09:06:10 they wanted the project to be half the size and they
09:06:14 believe that's because they didn't think that the
09:06:16 condos would sell.
09:06:17 So what we try to do is present the whole community,
09:06:20 be they pull the project -- be they for the project or
09:06:25 against the project and -- again, we are happy that
09:06:28 the revitalization in West Tampa has taken place.

09:06:32 We encourage all the developers to come.
09:06:34 West Tampa is the place to be.
09:06:35 And again, by saying it's a West Tampa CDC does back
09:06:41 the project.
09:06:42 Again, after we felt that the community back the
09:06:45 project and we also back the project, and we think
09:06:48 it's a win-win for the neighborhood.
09:06:50 Thank you very much.
09:06:57 >> Jeanette LaRussa Fenton.
09:06:59 City of Tampa economic and urban development.
09:07:01 My comments are similar to my comments early on
09:07:04 another project in West Tampa.
09:07:06 I support the project.
09:07:08 We believe that it is consistent not only with the
09:07:10 comprehensive plan, but with the West Tampa economic
09:07:13 development plan, which like the comp plan envisions
09:07:16 West Tampa as an urban village and encourages mixed
09:07:19 use projects.
09:07:20 So this fits that perfectly.
09:07:21 As, as you know, this is a transitional area, former
09:07:25 industrial area, and we feel that this is an excellent
09:07:28 use for this area in transition and recommend support.

09:07:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
09:07:33 Petitioner?
09:07:34 Do you want to rebuttal?
09:07:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you address the stormwater --
09:07:42 >> Absolutely.
09:07:43 I was going to address two points.
09:07:45 One point was on the notes to the plan, we have
09:07:48 committed to the installation of a signal at such time
09:07:51 as it's warranted.
09:07:52 So we are looking at traffic concerns.
09:07:56 Additional, being a part of the neighborhood and
09:07:59 bringing more residents down there and obviously
09:08:01 wanting the project to be successful.
09:08:03 Ken has also committed to look at the area road
09:08:06 network for traffic-calming devices to make sure the
09:08:10 road network stays as a local traveled road and not a
09:08:13 lot of cut-thru traffic occurs because of the project.
09:08:15 As for the stormwater, as was noted, by Mr. Allen, the
09:08:20 project does have a series of stormwater vaults that
09:08:22 are designed under the parking decks.
09:08:25 We are -- we actually reduced the impervious area by
09:08:30 15% over what exists today with the new development

09:08:34 that's proposed.
09:08:35 The stormwater vaults will provide retention that's
09:08:38 not there today.
09:08:39 As we all know, a good example, go anywhere and do a
09:08:42 suburbia, you see large stormwater ponds because
09:08:46 there's land there to accommodate it.
09:08:48 Here in the urban setting, there's not land to
09:08:50 accommodate a large stormwater pond, so the vaults
09:08:53 function as a stormwater pond retaining water from a
09:08:54 25-year storm event and then releasing it back into
09:08:57 the system over a period of time when the system can
09:08:59 handle it once again.
09:09:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess the question that Mr. Allen
09:09:04 sort of asked is, if the system isn't sophisticated
09:09:06 and well-developed enough to take it, you know, are
09:09:10 you all going to be doing off-site improvements to
09:09:13 make sure that that handles it?
09:09:15 >> I don't believe there's going to be any off-site
09:09:17 improvements being done.
09:09:18 The system is being designed according to city
09:09:21 standards.
09:09:21 And it will function just as a stormwater pond would.

09:09:25 It has to accommodate a certain volume of water.
09:09:28 25-year storm event volume of water, no matter what
09:09:35 happens, it will be significantly better --
09:09:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm talking about on the kickoff,
09:09:39 when you're releasing it, if there's an inadequate
09:09:42 system off-site, then, you know, how is it going to
09:09:47 deal with it?
09:09:48 And I'm not sure.
09:09:49 You know, he said it's partial ditches and partial,
09:09:53 you know --
09:09:54 >> I think there are two things that come into play.
09:09:55 One is that the study by Dyer, Riddle, I believe, has
09:09:58 been submitted to the city with respect to the
09:10:00 concerns of Cypress Creek and Spanish Creek and some
09:10:02 of the other drainage systems.
09:10:04 I think they've identified downstream issues that the
09:10:09 city if they address help convey stormwater out of
09:10:11 West Tampa and some of the other affected areas more
09:10:13 effectively.
09:10:13 I think it goes back to the fact that today, the way
09:10:16 it exists, the stormwater is hitting the buildings,
09:10:18 hitting the pavement and going right into the streets

09:10:21 and into the system.
09:10:22 With the retention of that stormwater over time, it's
09:10:24 going to improve it greatly.
09:10:25 Thinking of it as not being pumped out of the system
09:10:32 on a huge volume, I mean, it's a release over time.
09:10:35 It's almost like a weir type of setup.
09:10:38 We have our civil engineer here who might be able to
09:10:41 offer a little better than my attempt at civil
09:10:43 engineering explanation.
09:10:45 >> And also, while Melanie is not our stormwater
09:10:48 engineer, I think she might be able to address some
09:10:52 issues.
09:10:52 >> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
09:10:54 I'm not a stormwater engineer, but I can play one on
09:10:57 TV.
09:10:57 [ LAUGHTER ]
09:10:58 According to the note, it seems as though they are
09:11:02 doing a study in that area.
09:11:05 The stormwater is conducting a study because I guess
09:11:07 it is flooding in that area.
09:11:09 And the developer has said he may choose to complete
09:11:11 rehab work in conjunction with the study currently

09:11:13 being completed by Dyer, Riddle, Mills & Precourt to
09:11:16 correct some of the hydraulic issues of the southern
09:11:19 system.
09:11:19 So they are already committing to maintain what they
09:11:21 have.
09:11:22 They have to keep their water.
09:11:23 They are not getting any credit for existing
09:11:25 impervious.
09:11:26 So they do have to maintain it.
09:11:28 But they have to outfall to somewhere.
09:11:30 If they don't have enough capacity, the developer may
09:11:32 be able to alleviate that drainage issue.
09:11:35 So they seem to have a study and know it's an issue.
09:11:41 >> What condition is it?
09:11:53 >> They are doing a study because of the capacity.
09:11:55 On the inside, you see stormwater.
09:12:08 >> The only last comment I wanted to bring up was with
09:12:10 respect to the parking.
09:12:11 We are parked 100% on-site.
09:12:14 What we have shown and this was kind of contentious
09:12:18 point in the first hearing with transportation, but we
09:12:21 have shown that we will put in on-street parking to

09:12:25 allow for more pedestrian friendly environment subject
09:12:28 to approval from transportation department.
09:12:30 But we are not counting those in our overall -- other
09:12:34 than that, if there are any other questions.
09:12:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions from Council
09:12:43 members?
09:12:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
09:12:44 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
09:12:46 All in favor of the motion, aye.
09:12:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Madam Chair, move an ordinance
09:12:57 rezoning property in the general vicinity of 310, 400,
09:13:01 405 North Rome Avenue, 1503, 1505, 1506, 1507, 1508,
09:13:11 1509, 1512, 1514, and 1518 West Fig Street, 1510 West
09:13:20 Gray Street, and 1515, 1519, and 1521 North B Street
09:13:26 in the City of Tampa, more particularly described in
09:13:26 section one from zoning district classifications
09:13:26 RS-50, residential single family, and IG, industrial
09:13:26 general, industrial single family, to PD planned
09:13:32 development, mixed-use retail, office and residential;
09:13:34 providing an effective date.
09:13:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:13:37 All in favor of the motion, say aye.

09:13:39 Opposed, nay.
09:13:42 >> Who was the second on that, please?
09:13:45 >> Second.
09:13:46 >>THE CLERK: Thank you.
09:13:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:13:50 I just wanted to comment that tonight we had three
09:13:53 major rezonings previously zoned industrial areas or
09:13:57 heavy commercial uses that are all becoming very nice
09:14:03 residential uses within the city.
09:14:05 I think this is pretty extraordinary.
09:14:06 I mean, areas that used to be industrial uses up
09:14:10 against residential uses, which kind of made the
09:14:12 residential uses crazy, now going to be other people
09:14:15 living there and contributing to the neighborhoods.
09:14:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anything else to come before
09:14:19 Council?
09:14:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two quick things to staff.
09:14:22 I don't know if Cathy is still here or not.
09:14:24 Number one, senior parking.
09:14:26 I'd like to just make a motion that on the next
09:14:30 opportunity for chapter 27, that we do address the
09:14:32 senior parking ratio.

09:14:34 If we haven't made that motion yet, that's the motion.
09:14:38 It keeps coming up.
09:14:40 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
09:14:42 Opposed, nay.
09:14:42 [Motion Carried]
09:14:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And number two is, on the issue
09:14:45 of -- this developer made a very good offer to do
09:14:49 affordable housing, and I agree that the offer should
09:14:55 not be made to the community.
09:14:57 The offer should be made to the city.
09:15:00 But then the last time the issue came up, the city
09:15:04 staff came and said, well, we don't have a mechanism
09:15:06 to deal with that.
09:15:07 And we can't accept the money, so the community
09:15:10 accepted the money.
09:15:11 Well, that's water under the bridge, because that was
09:15:13 phase one.
09:15:14 Now we're in phase two.
09:15:15 And I'm not even relating this to this project.
09:15:18 Phase two, they had an opportunity to contribute
09:15:19 several hundred thousand dollars, you know, it all
09:15:22 came into a big hubbub, and that's an opportunity

09:15:29 that's lost.
09:15:29 I'm not saying that money should go to the CDC.
09:15:32 I agree.
09:15:32 It shouldn't go to the CDC.
09:15:34 But it should somehow come into the city.
09:15:36 So my motion is to ask our affordable housing staff
09:15:39 and Cindy Miller and the rest of them to come up with
09:15:42 a mechanism to be able to accept funds, you know, just
09:15:47 like we accept funds for tree banks and now greenspace
09:15:52 waivers result in funds and in lieu parking results in
09:15:57 funds, we need to establish an affordable housing fund
09:16:00 so when developers have these projects and they say,
09:16:03 well, we want to help the city out with affordable
09:16:06 housing, that we have a fund.
09:16:08 We have a mechanism to be able to work with them on
09:16:10 that.
09:16:10 So that would just be a direction to come back to us
09:16:13 in 90 days, and tell us how you're going to come up
09:16:18 with that mechanism through an ordinance or what have
09:16:21 you.
09:16:25 >> Second.
09:16:26 >>JULIA COLE: I understand Ms. Miller is coming -- she

09:16:30 just put it off for another two weeks.
09:16:32 Well, I don't know if that's the thing she will be
09:16:35 addressing then.
09:16:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't want to rush them.
09:16:38 I'll give her 90 days and have plenty of time to
09:16:41 address it thoroughly.
09:16:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second.
09:16:44 All in favor, aye.
09:16:45 [Motion Carried]
09:16:48 >> Move to receive and file.
09:16:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:16:50 All in favor, aye.
09:16:52 If nothing else comes before Council, we stand
09:16:54 adjourned.
09:16:54 (The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m.)