Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, July 19, 2007
5:00 p.m. session

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

17:09:26 [Sounding gavel]
17:09:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
17:09:28 order.
17:09:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It is my great pleasure to
17:09:39 introduce William Dunn, where he is a high school
17:09:43 honors student.
17:09:44 He's a member of Plant's 2006 state championship
17:09:49 football team.
17:09:50 He is also a member of Plant's 2007 lacrosse team that
17:09:54 was runner-up in the state championship game.

17:09:58 He serves as vice-president of the Key Club.
17:10:00 He recently returned from Tanzania in east Africa
17:10:04 where he participated in a young life project.
17:10:07 He leaves next week to be a counselor at camp rock
17:10:13 Monte in California.
17:10:14 I would like to ask you to stand for the invocation
17:10:18 and remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.
17:10:21 >>> Let us pray.
17:10:22 Dear heavenly father, thank you for all the wonderful
17:10:24 blessings you have bestowed upon us.
17:10:29 Please bless this nation and all who serve us.
17:10:32 Please bless those in this room and those making
17:10:35 decisions so it will be thoughtful and wise for those
17:10:38 in the community.
17:10:39 We pray for all those suffering in the world and ask
17:10:41 to you bless them.
17:10:42 In your name we pray.
17:10:43 Amen.
17:10:46 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
17:11:05 Roll call.
17:11:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

17:11:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
17:11:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT:
17:11:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
17:11:15 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:11:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:11:17 At this time we have a presentation but Dr. Garrity.
17:11:31 >> Thank you for inviting me here tonight to talk
17:11:33 about wetlands.
17:11:34 I think you asked some questions about the importance
17:11:38 of wetlands and the City of Tampa, wetlands
17:11:41 protection.
17:11:41 And I'm here to give you a brief presentation and also
17:11:45 to answer questions.
17:11:57 I thought I would take about ten minutes for the
17:11:59 presentation. If we could have the first slide.
17:12:01 That's my name so we'll go straight to the second
17:12:04 slide.
17:12:04 First what are wetlands?
17:12:06 What is a wetland?
17:12:07 A wetland is a shallow body of water.
17:12:10 You need three characteristics to have a wetland.
17:12:12 You need soils that are wet in nature.

17:12:16 You need water present.
17:12:17 And you need plants present that are indicative of
17:12:21 growing in a wet area.
17:12:22 Now weather R wetland does not have water in it all
17:12:25 the time.
17:12:26 Could be dry part of the year and just inundated
17:12:29 during portions of the year and it can still be a
17:12:31 wetland.
17:12:39 That just shows you a lot of different types of
17:12:41 wetlands.
17:12:42 You can have coastal wetland like the marshes, you can
17:12:47 have like a cypress swamp, you can have marshy
17:12:51 wetlands and even the sea grasses are called wetlands.
17:12:55 What are some of the functions? Wetlands serve as
17:12:58 sort of the kidneys of the landscape.
17:13:01 They serve to cleanse pollution from water.
17:13:05 As water flows over the land and goes through
17:13:08 wetlands, water always flows downhill of course, and
17:13:12 usually as you know, as water flows through the
17:13:16 wetlands the plants in the wetlands filter out
17:13:19 pollutant, nutrients, sediments and so forth.
17:13:24 Another purpose is by the very nature of water flowing

17:13:27 into wetlands ands then back out, it slows down the
17:13:29 flow so it serves as a function of slowing down the
17:13:34 water, helping with flood control.
17:13:37 Wetlands along the shoreline can protect the
17:13:39 shoreline.
17:13:40 And we all saw what happened in New Orleans, fewer
17:13:46 wetlands there that were available to protect the
17:13:48 shoreline there.
17:13:49 And also wetlands can serve to recharge groundwater.
17:13:53 It's an opportunity for water to get down into the
17:13:55 ground.
17:13:58 What are some of the ecological importance of
17:14:01 wetlands? It conserves the fish habitat if they are
17:14:04 wet all the time but they also serve in the Tampa Bay
17:14:06 area as a Poe very important bird habitat, but most
17:14:14 importantly for feeding areas.
17:14:15 A lot of the young shore birds in Tampa Bay need to
17:14:19 fly inland to obtain food from fresh water wetlands
17:14:23 and go back and feed that to their young and they need
17:14:27 that type of food from the small fresh water wetlands
17:14:30 in Hillsborough County for their young to survive.
17:14:37 I skipped two slides here.

17:14:39 But going on to benefits.
17:14:44 Benefits to Tampa.
17:14:47 You ask specifically what are some of the benefits to
17:14:49 the City of Tampa from the weather lands program?
17:14:52 We do have an EPC wetlands differentiation in the
17:14:55 county.
17:14:56 And some of the things that we do as far as having
17:14:58 more wetlands and by protecting wetlands, you are able
17:15:03 to address polluted bodies of water, the DEP,
17:15:07 department of environmental protection, calls them
17:15:10 impaired waters.
17:15:11 There are approximately 70 impaired water bodies
17:15:14 throughout river segments in Hillsborough County.
17:15:17 And DEP is saying that those segments need to be
17:15:21 cleaned up.
17:15:22 Well, the more wetlands you have to filter out
17:15:25 pollutants and dot the landscape, the cleaner your
17:15:30 rivering systems are going to be so wetlands serve a
17:15:33 very important connection, and in protecting, the more
17:15:36 you protect wetlands the lest may cost us on the far
17:15:39 end from having to clean up some of our rivering
17:15:42 systems.

17:15:43 And of course as I said, wetlands protect Tampa from
17:15:46 flooding by slowing down the flow of water.
17:15:54 The benefits of the EPC wetlands program for the City
17:15:57 of Tampa, first of all, we have a 24-7 hotline in our
17:16:02 agency.
17:16:03 Anybody calls with any environmental complaint, be it
17:16:06 noise, been in the news lately or solid waste dumping
17:16:11 or anything like that, we have a 24/7 response line.
17:16:15 So we have a very fast response to whatever the
17:16:18 complaint may be.
17:16:19 Even if it's somebody filling in a wetland we'll get
17:16:24 out there pretty quickly.
17:16:25 We also review any wetland impact proposals.
17:16:28 If somebody has a project where they might propose an
17:16:31 impact to a wetland, we are involved in that.
17:16:34 And, also, we do compliance on any mitigation that
17:16:40 they may construct, if they impact a wetland, they
17:16:42 have to build a replacement wetland that's called
17:16:45 mitigation.
17:16:45 So we are involved in that.
17:16:47 We perform wetland delineations within the City of
17:16:51 Tampa at the request of property owners.

17:16:54 And what that means, sometimes it's kind of
17:16:57 complicated to show exactly where wetlands begin and
17:16:59 where it ends.
17:17:00 And it takes an environmental scientist with training
17:17:03 to go out there and actually do the delineation.
17:17:05 We are involved in that.
17:17:07 And I think most importantly, right here in the City
17:17:10 of Tampa, we are involved in your development review
17:17:12 process.
17:17:14 We also do that for unincorporated county, the cities
17:17:17 of Temple Terrace and Plant City, so the various
17:17:21 projects that come through your development review
17:17:23 process are looked at by our staff, and we try to
17:17:26 influence those to direct development away from
17:17:30 impacting wetlands.
17:17:34 If it's necessary to impact wetlands then we would get
17:17:37 involved with permitting those impacts, and having
17:17:39 mitigation constructed.
17:17:43 And then, finally, I'll flip over to the other part of
17:17:46 the presentation.
17:17:47 If we are not doing these things, of course you would
17:17:50 not have the immediate response that we provide to

17:17:53 you, and the compliance monitoring that we do.
17:17:57 Would you not have us involved in your development
17:17:59 review process, discontinuity of local planning
17:18:04 process and would you rely totally on the state
17:18:07 programs.
17:18:07 And there would be less restrictive standards of
17:18:10 wetlands because our standards are more stringent than
17:18:13 the state.
17:18:14 That's all the slides I had on the PowerPoint.
17:18:16 I want to very quickly walk you through what we have
17:18:19 put together as we call it the hybrid alternative for
17:18:24 our wetlands program.
17:18:25 And it's in your package here.
17:18:32 If you go to about the third page, you will see EPC
17:18:35 wetlands program, improving the process, maintaining
17:18:38 the protection.
17:18:39 And we are trying to use this opportunity to improve
17:18:44 our program, and we have made -- we have some ideas
17:18:47 here I thought you may be interested in.
17:18:51 There are some minor impacts to wetlands that can
17:18:55 probably be approved through noticed exemptions.
17:18:59 And we have listed some of these in that first bullet

17:19:02 such as dredging and filling and artificially created
17:19:06 wetlands, cattle watering ponds.
17:19:10 These are some of the areas that we are considering
17:19:13 some revisions to streamline the process somewhat.
17:19:17 And under future proposed rule changes, we are talking
17:19:20 about developing a basis of review document.
17:19:23 That's a manual to help somebody applying for permits
17:19:26 from us to actually help them walk through the
17:19:29 permitting procedure, to have a better understanding
17:19:32 of how to successfully apply for a permit from us.
17:19:37 We are talking about having a possible classification
17:19:40 system for wetlands, and looking at accepting the
17:19:43 concepts of a net environmental benefit.
17:19:46 So if somebody comes to us with a project that they
17:19:50 want impacted wetland and offer us enhanced mitigation
17:19:56 proposal, that's something we can look at right up
17:19:58 front.
17:20:01 On the second page, I want to tell but some customer
17:20:04 service concepts we have.
17:20:07 And one of them is establishing a wetlands advisory
17:20:09 committee.
17:20:09 If we do this, I hope the City Council, the city is

17:20:13 interested in participating in this.
17:20:15 We have been talking with Dr. Tom Cruzman, who used to
17:20:21 be the sent.
17:20:23 At the University of Florida, now works at USF.
17:20:26 He may be a good candidate to chair this.
17:20:28 We are going to be pointing within our staff a
17:20:30 wetlands ombudsman to help mom and pops and small
17:20:36 farms in the process and trying to promote the
17:20:40 formation of more mitigation banks in Hillsborough
17:20:42 County and in the City of Tampa.
17:20:46 A mitigation bank is something that either public or
17:20:51 the private enterprise can by possible land, create a
17:20:54 wetland.
17:20:55 Then if you have a project where you have no room to
17:20:57 do mitigation, you can buy credits from that
17:20:59 mitigation bank.
17:21:01 It's a pretty neat idea, actually.
17:21:04 In process changes, I'm happy to tell you that we have
17:21:08 a good relationship with the local DEP office, and we
17:21:13 have had very positive discussion busy getting
17:21:15 declaration for their permitting program.
17:21:17 So that first bullet there, we can end up with

17:21:20 one-stop permitting that would include some federal
17:21:23 authorizations, state authorizations, port authority
17:21:27 authorizations, all in one stop.
17:21:30 I think that would be a real, real accomplishment.
17:21:35 We are the sole agency authorized by DEP to handle
17:21:38 mangrove trimming in Hillsborough County.
17:21:40 I know that's an issue that you comes up, everyone
17:21:42 within city limits quite often.
17:21:44 We are involved in phosphate mining reviews.
17:21:47 We are involved in the development and review process,
17:21:49 just like I mentioned with the City of Tampa.
17:21:51 We do that with Hillsborough County.
17:21:53 That's a pretty complicated process.
17:21:55 And my suggestions in this proposal are to actually
17:22:01 have a process audit to see if it can somehow be
17:22:05 streamlined B but still maintain the good efficient
17:22:08 protective service that is we offer, but maybe to try
17:22:10 to do it in a more streamlined way.
17:22:12 And honestly, I believe that there's room for
17:22:15 improvement there.
17:22:17 And finally, SWFWMD coordination.
17:22:20 We have had extensive discussions with the water

17:22:22 manager district.
17:22:23 We think there's lots of room for us to have -- to
17:22:27 help each other, and one of those is that we honor
17:22:31 each other's wetland delineation, if one agency does
17:22:35 it, the other agency accepts it.
17:22:38 We have a memorandum of understanding where we do all
17:22:40 of the compliance monitoring for the permit that they
17:22:43 issue.
17:22:44 I think that's an efficient use of manpower.
17:22:47 And there's many other issues I won't bother going
17:22:52 through them all.
17:22:53 We also, the last, on page 4, the last bullet under
17:22:56 SWFWMD, we are looking at trying to work with the
17:23:00 agricultural community and Swiftmud.
17:23:05 I'm all for farmers being able to exist, and exist
17:23:08 successfully.
17:23:09 And that's more green area to be saved.
17:23:13 So we want to try to have a good relationship with the
17:23:15 agricultural community that brought together
17:23:20 agricultural liaison.
17:23:22 I think that's a very important function.
17:23:24 And that's kind of a quick summary of the presentation

17:23:31 that I delivered to the county commission, and will be
17:23:33 up for discussion at our meeting next Thursday.
17:23:36 It's called the hybrid proposal.
17:23:38 I think it offers -- it offers as you see in the last
17:23:42 page there, it streamlines program, eliminates
17:23:47 multiple reviews, has clear rules, sets priorities in
17:23:50 wetland protection, exemptions for lesser priorities,
17:23:54 drastically receives duplication, emphasizes customer
17:23:58 service, maintains resource protection.
17:24:01 And those are all important, worthy goals, which we
17:24:05 think that we can accomplish.
17:24:06 And that's my presentation.
17:24:08 I'll be happy to try to answer any questions.
17:24:11 >>GWEN MILLER: I know there's a lot of people here in
17:24:13 support of EPC.
17:24:14 I would like to recognize them by having all the
17:24:16 supporters please stand.
17:24:17 All in support of EPC, would you please stand?
17:24:24 We are very happy that you are here supporting them.
17:24:29 Ms. Mulhern.
17:24:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to thank Dr. Garrity for
17:24:33 coming here.

17:24:34 I'm not sure if everyone knows, but we all live in
17:24:38 Hillsborough, Tampa, and the Environmental Protection
17:24:40 Commission's Board of Directors a few weeks ago
17:24:45 decided to -- that they should eliminate the wetlands
17:24:49 protection.
17:24:50 The wetlands department of Dr. Garrity's department.
17:24:54 And we were concerned, and I have come here and really
17:24:59 appreciate his willingness to do that.
17:25:04 He's under a lot of pressure.
17:25:06 It's a difficult thing.
17:25:08 How long have you been director of the EPC?
17:25:12 >>> For seven years.
17:25:13 And speaking of time frames, it's kind of nice to be
17:25:16 back here.
17:25:17 I worked here about 25 years ago.
17:25:20 I see you still have the same elevator.
17:25:25 >>MARY MULHERN: And the same elevator operator, too.
17:25:28 So he's been there for seven years.
17:25:30 The EPC was established 40 years ago, in 1967.
17:25:35 And the wetlands differentiation a -- has been around
17:25:42 for 27 years.
17:25:43 I think I and all of my colleagues were very, very

17:25:46 concerned when we heard that this division might be
17:25:49 eliminated, and as Dr. Garrity told us, the health.
17:26:00 Weather lands effects everyone in Hillsborough County
17:26:02 including Tampa.
17:26:02 One of the things he didn't mention but I think is
17:26:04 obvious is that our Hillsborough River where all of
17:26:07 our water comes from is dependent on healthy wetlands.
17:26:11 And in our meeting this morning, we must have spent at
17:26:14 least a third of our time talking about water issues.
17:26:17 So this is a huge issue.
17:26:19 And I just thought it was really important that we
17:26:22 could hear from you.
17:26:24 We want to show you our support for this division.
17:26:28 And also wanted you to have the opportunity to tell us
17:26:35 how the division -- do you have like a statistic on
17:26:39 how many acres or how much wetland your division has
17:26:43 been able to protect over all these years that
17:26:48 wouldn't have been protected under the state
17:26:50 regulation?
17:26:52 >>> Right.
17:26:53 We actually do not have those.
17:26:55 I wish we did have those statistics.

17:26:57 I can tell you that we do have statistics showing that
17:27:04 we have resulted in a net improvement, a net gain of
17:27:08 wetlands over the last 20 years of probably almost a
17:27:15 thousand -- I think about 600 acres from development
17:27:19 and we have 500 acres from phosphate mining, that
17:27:23 there's actually been a net improvement, a net gain in
17:27:26 wetlands, which is surprising to some people.
17:27:28 Because historically, there's been almost a 50% loss
17:27:33 of wetlands in Hillsborough County.
17:27:34 Going from the turn of the century.
17:27:37 And the same also for the entire state.
17:27:39 There's been about 50% loss of wetlands.
17:27:42 And if you look up in the northern part of the City of
17:27:44 Tampa, I went over one of the slides probably too
17:27:48 quickly, there's a map up there that shows the
17:27:51 wetlands that used to be in Hillsborough County.
17:27:54 You do have a lot of wetlands in the northern part of
17:27:57 the city limits up near the Pasco County border that
17:27:59 need to be looked at very carefully.
17:28:02 I would like to try to minimize impacts on them.
17:28:05 If you do authorize impacts, make sure the mitigation
17:28:07 is done appropriately.

17:28:10 And SWFWMD does a good job.
17:28:12 But our standards are a little more protective.
17:28:16 The way that you prove that you immediate to impact
17:28:19 the wetlands is a little more stringent standard.
17:28:22 And we also protect wetlands of one half acre that the
17:28:27 state does not protect.
17:28:28 >> And have other counties looked at you as a model to
17:28:33 build that kind of protection?
17:28:36 It kind of reminds me of what's going on in the
17:28:39 country with certain states like California, and
17:28:42 recently our governor here wanting to have higher
17:28:46 environmental controls and fuel standards, because
17:28:48 nationally we are not having it instituted.
17:28:53 I'm just wondering, I've heard that it's been a model
17:28:56 for other -- it's been looked up to for years.
17:29:01 >> I think the program at EPC has been a model.
17:29:03 There are about 19 counties throughout Florida that
17:29:06 have local programs, that also have local wetlands
17:29:13 programs.
17:29:13 So it's not unique in Hillsborough County that there
17:29:17 is a standard of a little bit higher protection to
17:29:20 protect wetlands.

17:29:21 I think it has worked here. The water quality in
17:29:23 Tampa Bay, as you will find out from Dick actenrod
17:29:30 from the national estuary program, is improving.
17:29:33 It's a good sign.
17:29:34 I can't tell you it's because we have a stricter water
17:29:37 program but if water is improving and we have a
17:29:39 stricter water program here in Hillsborough County,
17:29:46 you put two and two together, it's working.
17:29:49 If it's working let's keep that the way.
17:29:51 >>MARY MULHERN: In your department, are you hearing
17:29:53 from citizens that they would like less protection of
17:29:56 the wetlands, just your average Hillsborough County,
17:30:01 Tampa resident, that they think there's too much
17:30:03 protection?
17:30:06 >>> We are hearing from a lot of people, and I would
17:30:08 say the average person is very happy with having more
17:30:13 wetlands protection.
17:30:14 We are also hearing from developers that wish to work
17:30:22 with us.
17:30:22 I'm hearing from all sides.
17:30:23 Some developers that maybe think we have gone
17:30:27 overboard and our rules have not been clear enough.

17:30:29 And honestly that is why I tried to address that on
17:30:32 the front of this hybrid model, to try to take care of
17:30:35 some of those concerns, to make rules clearer, and
17:30:40 take the priorities a little better from the higher
17:30:42 priority wetlands.
17:30:45 >> Clearly you have gone to a lot of work, and you
17:30:48 seem to have looked at every detail to accommodate
17:30:52 that.
17:30:52 I just hope that we are not going to be weakening any
17:30:56 of our standards.
17:30:57 And I know as I said, you are going to really take a
17:31:03 prop position and I so much appreciate you coming here
17:31:05 and talking to us and I'm hoping -- I'll stop talking
17:31:09 now.
17:31:10 In case any other council people have questions.
17:31:12 I'm sure they do.
17:31:13 But I'm also hoping since people came here, we don't
17:31:16 have that many items on our --
17:31:20 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a 5:30.
17:31:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, shoot. If we could delay that a
17:31:26 little bit and give some people a chance ton ask some
17:31:29 questions. This is huge 25 years of wetlands

17:31:31 protection, and we are about to lose it.
17:31:34 So I'll stop talking.
17:31:36 I do have one question for legal after we are done
17:31:38 with it.
17:31:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to thank you, Dr. Garrity,
17:31:42 for being here.
17:31:43 I want to thank you, Ms. Mulhern, for asking him and
17:31:46 to reinforce City Council support for the protection
17:31:50 you afford our water bodies and our citizenry.
17:31:56 >>> Thank you, councilman.
17:31:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On page 3 of your hybrid proposal,
17:32:04 you mentioned eliminate, review of off-site.
17:32:10 Can you give us an example of how -- what exactly we
17:32:14 are eliminating, how that's been going on over the
17:32:17 last three years and does that apply to just your
17:32:20 county projects, or to all jurisdiction projects?
17:32:23 >>> Well, I can understand why you may ask that
17:32:26 question and wonder what on earth does that mean?
17:32:28 We have been reviewing all projects, whether they have
17:32:32 wetlands on them or not.
17:32:35 And that may not make sense to some people.
17:32:39 Obviously we look at projects with wetlands but why

17:32:41 would we look at projects that don't have wetlands on
17:32:44 it?
17:32:44 The idea was that the project may impact an adjacent
17:32:48 parcel that does have a wetland.
17:32:51 I'm not saying that should not be looked at but I
17:32:53 think it is being looked at by the county stormwater
17:32:56 department and other groups, and trying to find ways
17:32:59 here to streamline and reduce any duplication that may
17:33:02 be present.
17:33:12 >> But just because a wetland might be off the site
17:33:14 doesn't mean it's any lesser wetland.
17:33:17 >> That's correct.
17:33:17 You would not want the parcel you are looking at,
17:33:20 would you not want somebody, for instance, to put a
17:33:22 borrow pit up from the corner that is right next to a
17:33:25 wetland on the adjacent parcel.
17:33:27 So even though I put this on here, you need to have a
17:33:31 safeguard that that doesn't happen.
17:33:32 And if nobody else is looking at that, that's
17:33:35 something that --
17:33:38 >> Don't want to dry out the adjacent wetland,
17:33:41 depending on which way the water is going.

17:33:43 >> Exactly.
17:33:47 >> Mary mentioned about legal.
17:33:49 I think in many cases, when the city is happy that the
17:33:53 county is doing a good job, we abide by the county's
17:33:57 regulations.
17:33:57 But if we believe that we want to have additional
17:34:01 rules, we can adopt our own rules, our own ordinances,
17:34:06 and then figure out a way to enforce them.
17:34:09 So I think that's a possibility.
17:34:11 I think the first thing that we can do as a body and
17:34:14 as an organization is to urge the county commissioners
17:34:21 up the street not to do any of this, or perhaps
17:34:25 teacher their enthusiasm.
17:34:28 Secondly, if they proceed on a course that we think is
17:34:34 harmful to the city and the city residents and the
17:34:36 city's wetlands, we can adopt our own ordinances, and
17:34:39 then figure out a way to enforce them and maybe hire
17:34:43 you to do that within the city.
17:34:45 So I think that there is an option there that we can
17:34:47 ask legal to explore.
17:34:51 The last question I had relates to mitigation banks.
17:34:54 Mitigation banks have been fairly controversial around

17:34:57 the nation and the state.
17:35:02 I haven't read a whole lot of success stories on them.
17:35:05 Maybe I'm reading the wrong things, I don't know.
17:35:08 But one of the things that concerns me -- and I read
17:35:10 some of the controversy -- that somebody has a project
17:35:14 over here, let's say for argument sake in South Tampa,
17:35:17 but build a mitigation bank in New Tampa, now, 30
17:35:21 miles away, and they said what's the relationship of
17:35:24 the different basin, et cetera, how do you plan on
17:35:28 addressing that?
17:35:29 >> You're really up on this stuff, commissioner,
17:35:32 councilman, because that is probably the biggest
17:35:35 criticism of mitigation banks.
17:35:37 Because you don't want to take an impact that occurs
17:35:39 in one basin, then fix it in another basin, because
17:35:42 that first basin loses the functions that were there.
17:35:45 But what we are saying is if you had sufficient number
17:35:48 of mitigation banks, not just one for the county, you
17:35:52 would have to have a number throughout the county so
17:35:54 you had representation throughout the various drainage
17:35:58 basins.
17:35:59 But there's some projects like a small commercial site

17:36:02 or everyone a mom and pop project where they don't
17:36:05 have room for mitigation on that site where you take a
17:36:07 ten acre commercial site where every square inch is
17:36:10 worth a gazillion dollars, and they don't want to take
17:36:15 and put a mitigation project on the corner of the
17:36:18 property.
17:36:19 And if they do, they may take care of it for a couple
17:36:21 of years till it passes our test.
17:36:23 After that, it may be full of shopping carts.
17:36:27 So the thought here is to try to do -- have some
17:36:30 better results than that.
17:36:31 And that would be the type of instance where I could
17:36:33 see mitigation banks could be very helpful.
17:36:36 >> I guess the criteria would be important in terms of
17:36:39 what the threshold is to allow the mitigation banks,
17:36:44 because whether or not somebody just says, well, I
17:36:47 want to do it, because it's economical for me to do
17:36:51 it, I don't know, might not be adequate environmental
17:36:54 justification to allow it.
17:36:56 >>> That's absolutely true.
17:36:57 You first try to have them do mitigation on-site.
17:36:59 We would always, even under this scenario, try to have

17:37:02 them do mitigation on-site.
17:37:04 But if that was not possible, or it was impractical
17:37:10 then you could look towards mitigation banks.
17:37:12 I think in the past they probably were not as
17:37:14 successful.
17:37:15 Just like mitigation itself was not successful in the
17:37:17 past, because people did not know how to design
17:37:22 mitigation.
17:37:23 From the beginning it was designed, and people never
17:37:29 had a proper flow of water so you had a lot of
17:37:31 mitigation areas that would dry up.
17:37:33 Science today is much, much better and we now know how
17:37:37 to construct a successful mitigation area.
17:37:41 >> I want to commend not only Dr. Garrity but also
17:37:44 Roger Stewart, his predecessor, for decades of
17:37:46 vigilance.
17:37:47 I think the local vigilance provided by EPC has
17:37:52 provided exemplary results for the wetlands systems,
17:37:56 for the ecosystem generally, and specifically also for
17:37:58 the Hillsborough River and for the bay.
17:38:01 And if the county commission proceeds on this course,
17:38:06 and you can put your earmuffs on, doctor, because I am

17:38:10 not directing this at you, but if the county
17:38:12 commission proceeds, I say same shame on the county
17:38:15 commission.
17:38:16 They are not listening to the community.
17:38:17 What they are doing is listening to a handful of
17:38:20 developers one of which has mitigated with the
17:38:26 counties for years and I say shame on the county
17:38:27 commission approximate they proceed down this course.
17:38:29 You have done a great job of trying to make, what do
17:38:31 they say, a silk purse out of a sow's ear?
17:38:37 Anyway, thank you.
17:38:43 >> Lemons out of lemonade.
17:38:45 Fresh water out of -- what can we do?
17:38:47 I know John made some suggestions.
17:38:49 And we would like to adopt the EPC.
17:38:55 What can we do as a city, as a municipality that's
17:39:01 been dependent on them for so many years, for so many
17:39:05 things, to protect our water supply?
17:39:07 What can we do?
17:39:08 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
17:39:11 I think for now, probably the best thing you can do is
17:39:15 maybe draft a letter to the Environmental Protection

17:39:17 Commission indicating City Council support of what
17:39:20 they are trying to accomplish with their hybrid plan
17:39:23 and support for the wetlands division.
17:39:25 I think that would be at least expressing to the EPC
17:39:30 the will of City Council and how important it is,
17:39:35 municipalities in Hillsborough County, moving forward
17:39:39 depending on how -- what action EPC takes.
17:39:43 I understand that would take not just one action but
17:39:46 it would actually be several actions that would be
17:39:49 required to move forward to either eliminate the
17:39:52 wetlands division or everyone to move forward with
17:39:54 this plan, where we continue to monitor us moving
17:39:59 forward.
17:39:59 I can research we as a legal department the best way
17:40:02 to proceed.
17:40:03 We would have the right to have our own regulations.
17:40:07 However, I think as Mr. Dingfelder said, it would be
17:40:10 up to us to enforce and how we move forward with
17:40:12 enforcing would be -- I think for now, our best thing
17:40:19 top do is support EPC as it stands today and hopefully
17:40:24 move forward.
17:40:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just one other.

17:40:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Wait a minute.
17:40:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to mention before we are
17:40:34 done, and part of the reason why we invented Dr.
17:40:37 Garrity, the next EPC meeting where this is going to
17:40:40 be under discussion is when is that?
17:40:42 And I know we can't be there because we are going to
17:40:44 be in a council meeting.
17:40:46 >> July 26th at 10 a.m.
17:40:48 >>MARY MULHERN: So that will be an opportunity for
17:40:50 people to weigh in and support you.
17:40:54 And thank you so much.
17:40:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think council already sent a letter
17:41:02 with a motion a few weeks ago if I recall.
17:41:05 So let me just say that.
17:41:06 And then also let me also say that when we start
17:41:11 talking about adopting EPC, I think it's a lot more
17:41:17 than that, because they are structured through a
17:41:19 special act.
17:41:21 And which required legislature to participate in their
17:41:25 involvement, to write into law.
17:41:27 That's number one.
17:41:28 Number two is, given the budget constraints, and it

17:41:37 falls under administration which at that time it does
17:41:39 not fall under City Council, it goes over to
17:41:43 administration based on the charter, is that right?
17:41:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
17:41:52 >> The city administration.
17:41:53 If there was a motion to adopt an EPC ordinance.
17:42:06 >> You would ask the legal department to bring back
17:42:10 something that would do it.
17:42:12 Obviously, it would be something that would be going
17:42:15 to the mayor for implementation by signature or veto.
17:42:19 But ultimately, it would be initiated by City Council.
17:42:22 >> But, still, my point is that it will go over to
17:42:25 administration and still would not be within our
17:42:30 purview.
17:42:31 Let me just say that Dr. Garrity is a strong advocate
17:42:36 of EPC, and you are one of the county commissioners
17:42:40 voted to hire you
17:42:48 And I think in all my evaluations, you have been there
17:42:52 eight years now?
17:42:53 >>> Seven years.
17:42:57 >> Have given you the highest evaluation each time.
17:42:59 I have great respect for you.

17:43:01 And you have represented the county well.
17:43:05 You represented this community well.
17:43:07 And they have always had diverse opinions when it
17:43:16 comes to these kinds of issues.
17:43:20 But you have proven not only wetlands but also when we
17:43:28 dealt with the amphitheater.
17:43:30 You stood tall, when there were only, I think, at that
17:43:34 time only two commissioners voted against it.
17:43:36 That was commissioner Norman and myself.
17:43:38 And you stood out, and you stood tall, and came to the
17:43:42 rescue of the commission.
17:43:44 So, you know, I think people don't understand the
17:43:48 value of EPC as a whole, what you mean to this
17:43:52 community, what you mean to this county.
17:43:54 And the fine job that you have done.
17:43:58 As council Dingfelder said, Mr. Stewart, your
17:44:02 predecessor.
17:44:03 So hopefully, hopefully, the decision that is made by
17:44:08 the county commission that the council will wait and
17:44:11 see what their decision is, and at that particular
17:44:15 time maybe look at additional action that may be
17:44:18 necessary.

17:44:20 And I understand your proposal on page 5 reduces
17:44:26 staffing as well as the budget.
17:44:31 The issue is the elimination, the budget constraints,
17:44:35 as I understand it.
17:44:36 So with this hopefully that will address that concern.
17:44:42 >> By the way, that wall is working pretty good, at
17:44:46 the amphitheater.
17:44:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to wrap it up.
17:44:49 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to adopt the EPC, adopt
17:44:56 them, but I know we can't do that.
17:44:58 I wasn't suggesting that as an actual.
17:44:59 So I would like to make a motion, that we do send a
17:45:02 letter but it was to governor Crist.
17:45:04 I think what Ms. Cole is recommending, we do send a
17:45:07 letter to the county commission stating our support
17:45:11 for the EPC and for the wetlands protection.
17:45:15 >>JULIA COLE: Just to clarify. The letter that was
17:45:20 sent previously went to the governor and to the
17:45:23 legislative delegation.
17:45:24 Do you want the letter -- and I know this is kind
17:45:26 after new audience, that the EPC is separate and
17:45:29 distinct, the Hillsborough County commission.

17:45:32 I think you probably want to go to the Board of
17:45:35 Directors.
17:45:38 To the Board of Directors, to the EPC.
17:45:41 The letter should go stating our support for the EPC
17:45:45 and the wetlands division.
17:45:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:45:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am going to completely support
17:45:52 the motion.
17:45:52 It's already been seconded.
17:45:54 That's great.
17:45:55 The only other thing I was going to mention was that
17:45:59 in doing some of these changes, Dr. Garrity, in his
17:46:02 document, has referenced some potential rule changes.
17:46:06 And if there are rule changes, and if the city is not
17:46:10 pleased with the rule changes the city can always
17:46:14 enter a rule challenge.
17:46:16 And I think that's something that I would like legal
17:46:19 staff to just monitor, and get back with us about the
17:46:24 various rule changes that might be pending that we
17:46:27 might be interested in.
17:46:28 So I just wanted to bring that up as another possible
17:46:32 Avenue, another possible opportunity, to address these

17:46:37 in a very formal fashion.
17:46:39 And I think that would require probably the mayor's
17:46:43 concurrence, but I'm not sure of that.
17:46:48 >>JULIA COLE: If I could make a suggestion, assuming
17:46:54 the EPC adopt some of these regulations that are being
17:46:57 discussed, one of the recommendations is for wetland
17:47:01 advisory committee, and briefly spoke with Dr.
17:47:05 Garrity, and I think it would be appropriate to
17:47:07 request that we have City Council representation on
17:47:09 that committee, so the adoptions that come out of this
17:47:13 proposal is -- if in fact no proposal comes forward
17:47:17 and it ends up that is not what the EPC decides to do
17:47:20 we can come back and address what our next steps could
17:47:23 be about.
17:47:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to clarify my motion, to state
17:47:34 our support for the department, and for the division.
17:47:37 Not for any proposal.
17:47:39 Just for the existing wetlands division -- wetlands
17:47:44 division and the EPC.
17:47:46 So whatever rules, I am not getting involved in that.
17:47:49 We don't know what's going to happen with that and we
17:47:51 don't think that's our place to do that right now.

17:47:53 But asking Julia to watch that.
17:47:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Are we anticipating allocating
17:48:02 money in order to start the EPC?
17:48:07 >> No, we are not.
17:48:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Clarification on the motion.
17:48:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My clarification is, it is my
17:48:16 understanding the department, and not the proposal
17:48:21 here.
17:48:22 I think the board is going to take action on the
17:48:26 proposal, is that right, Dr. Garrity?
17:48:28 I stand to be corrected.
17:48:33 >>> Right now there is a 4-3 vote to do away with the
17:48:35 wetlands division.
17:48:38 And/or possibly accept my hybrid proposal.
17:48:42 So that's the way things stand right now.
17:48:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My point was, and I haven't talked to
17:48:52 anybody, the paper can get it wrong, too, in case you
17:48:55 don't know that.
17:48:56 But based on what I read in the paper, apparently they
17:48:59 are waiting to hear in terms of the proposal.
17:49:04 >> That's correct.
17:49:05 >>> That may be the opportunity to -- for the vote to

17:49:08 change.
17:49:09 And so that's why I was saying, you know, I thought
17:49:13 the issue more was going to be the proposal, because
17:49:17 they are only taking one vote and the proposal is what
17:49:20 they are waiting to hear from Dr. Garrity on.
17:49:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:49:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to offer just a
17:49:32 slightly friendly amendment and then I know we need to
17:49:36 get on with the rest of the meeting.
17:49:39 >>GWEN MILLER: This is your last.
17:49:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is a friendly amendment to the
17:49:43 motion.
17:49:44 We'll see how the motion goes.
17:49:45 But the first part of our letter would be leave the
17:49:49 department and the existing rules alone.
17:49:51 Okay?
17:49:53 Isn't that what we always want?
17:49:55 It's been working good for 20, 40 years.
17:49:59 Leave it alone.
17:50:00 Ain't broke, don't fix it.
17:50:01 That would be the first part.
17:50:02 However, the second part would be, if you are intent

17:50:08 on making changes to accept Dr. Garrity's hybrid
17:50:12 recommendations, but I would specifically say -- and I
17:50:18 have heard this from the environmental community,
17:50:20 tremendously, that this notion of the review of
17:50:23 off-site wetland impacts is a big mistake and that the
17:50:27 mitigation banks is of great concern.
17:50:29 So those are two of the things that I think, with all
17:50:34 due respect to Dr. Garrity, and I know what he's
17:50:36 trying to do, I think that we should ask them, if they
17:50:41 have got to do the hybrid, do the hybrid, but do those
17:50:44 without the off-site wetland impacts.
17:50:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to move on.
17:50:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I made a motion.
17:50:51 And I did not -- I don't want to add anything onto it.
17:50:55 Because this is a very complicated document.
17:50:57 It's not in our purview.
17:51:00 We don't have time to review the whole thing.
17:51:06 >> Vote on the original motion.
17:51:07 >>GWEN MILLER: The original motion.
17:51:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I clarified my motion.
17:51:10 >>GWEN MILLER: We are moving.
17:51:11 Mr. Miranda.

17:51:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, silence means a lot of words.
17:51:16 Now you all understand why I rarely speak.
17:51:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Call the question.
17:51:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I need to know what I'm voting on.
17:51:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to us write a letter to
17:51:33 the Board of Directors of the Environmental Protection
17:51:37 Commission of Hillsborough County stating our support
17:51:43 for the department of environmental protection and for
17:51:46 the division of wetlands.
17:51:50 Period.
17:51:51 >>GWEN MILLER: And the second?
17:51:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:51:54 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say Aye.
17:51:56 Opposed, Nay.
17:51:57 Okay.
17:51:57 Thank you.
17:51:58 Thank you, guys.
17:51:59 And I thank all the supporters who came here to
17:52:02 support Dr. Garrity.
17:52:03 You all keep supporting him so he can stay there.
17:52:07 Okay.
17:52:11 6:00.

17:52:16 We have CDBG.
17:52:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to open the public hearing.
17:52:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Need a second.
17:52:24 Second?
17:52:25 Second?
17:52:26 >> Oh, second.
17:52:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
17:52:28 (Motion carried).
17:52:32 Mr. Stefan?
17:52:38 Mr. Stefan?
17:52:39 To the podium.
17:52:42 >>JIM STEFAN: Budget officer.
17:52:44 I have a handout for council.
17:52:49 I have a very brief PowerPoint presentation.
17:53:21 I tried to meet with each of the council people
17:53:24 individually to explain before this coming before you
17:53:28 today.
17:53:29 Also in the audience we have a lot of representatives
17:53:31 from the various departments to also listen to the
17:53:35 public's comments and stuff like that.
17:53:38 And the brief PowerPoint presentation I have, if I
17:53:43 can -- it's on?

17:53:45 Okay.
17:53:49 Basically, I think I explained that we are about
17:53:53 halfway into -- or about three quarters of the way
17:53:55 into the process.
17:53:57 The process actually began in January where we had a
17:54:03 session for all the RFP processes that we go through.
17:54:07 We meet with the citizen advisory group.
17:54:09 We meet with them about every two months to give them
17:54:11 updates on where we are going.
17:54:13 We meet with City Council in March.
17:54:15 And that's where the citizens come in and give their
17:54:18 needs and recommendations.
17:54:19 We responded to some of the needs and recommendations
17:54:22 in early June.
17:54:26 And we will again in November, once the budget is
17:54:28 adopted and departments know exactly how much funding
17:54:31 they have.
17:54:31 And how many things they can actually do on the needs
17:54:34 and recommendations.
17:54:36 We met last Monday with the advisory program people
17:54:41 and we actually went over the program with them.
17:54:44 And they are going to be here to go over some of their

17:54:48 comments and concerns.
17:54:52 The funding that we are talking about is not just the
17:54:54 community development block grant which up here you
17:54:57 can see is about 3.8 million dollars, and the 4,000.
17:55:03 But the total program is about $11.8 million.
17:55:08 And you can see here some of the things that we are
17:55:13 actually proposing funding for.
17:55:15 The idea -- the important thing to realize -- and I
17:55:19 think I imparted this not only to the advisory group
17:55:22 but to you all before, is the declining force of money
17:55:27 that we have.
17:55:27 It's not just the federal government reducing the
17:55:29 entitlement amounts over time, but it's also the
17:55:32 amount of money from prior years that's available.
17:55:36 All of those dollars that weren't being spent during
17:55:39 the early 2000, after the days of the break, are being
17:55:45 used up very quickly.
17:55:46 And so the amount of carryover money from prior years
17:55:50 is decreasing so the entitlement is decreasing,
17:55:53 available money from prior years is decreasing so the
17:55:56 grant is come down quite a bit.
17:55:57 To give you an idea of the amounts, it was about $7.8

17:56:01 million on the 6th, about $6 million in the
17:56:04 current year, and next year it's about $5.2 million.
17:56:08 That has a tremendous impact on the number of public
17:56:12 service programs you can do, the number of capital
17:56:14 projects that you can fund with this, the amount of
17:56:17 administration that you can do with it.
17:56:19 So we are trying to address all of those concerns over
17:56:22 time.
17:56:23 But it is a dwindling source of money.
17:56:26 Not just from the reduction from the feds but also
17:56:29 internally, how much money is from prior years' money.
17:56:37 And we mailed out most of these things to the advisory
17:56:42 committee last month, and I thank the City Council
17:56:48 also.
17:56:48 And if there are no more questions of me, then the
17:56:51 chairman of the advisory committee Frank Rhoder is
17:56:58 here if you would like to hear a brief presentation by
17:57:01 him.
17:57:02 >>> Good evening members of council.
17:57:03 Frank Rhoder, 908 east la Avenue in southeast Seminole
17:57:08 Heights.
17:57:09 I sit as chair of the advisory committee for CDBG.

17:57:13 I'm here tonight to tell you several success stories.
17:57:16 For many years we have come up a battle on CDBG funds.
17:57:21 But I would like to talk about some good things that
17:57:22 are happening.
17:57:23 Number one was transportation notification system.
17:57:25 And basically that was to alert neighborhoods to
17:57:28 upcoming projects so neighborhoods could be prepared
17:57:31 beforehand.
17:57:32 This came about because of the Nebraska Avenue
17:57:35 repaving that went from Hillsborough Avenue north.
17:57:37 The neighborhoods up that way were not notified at all
17:57:40 until the paving actually started.
17:57:42 I'm pleased to announce that Shannon Edge has started
17:57:45 the neighborhood relations office, taking a lead in
17:57:48 this effort.
17:57:48 And she is notifying all neighborhoods of projects
17:57:51 that will impact the neighborhood prior to it actually
17:57:54 happening.
17:57:54 So it's definitely win-win.
17:57:56 We also ask for neighborhood insurance for events in
17:57:59 the neighborhood, and this city has come up with some
17:58:03 mini grants, $2,000 for mini grants.

17:58:05 I'm pleased to say at this point that 26 neighborhoods
17:58:08 have applied for mini grants, which I thought was
17:58:10 great.
17:58:11 However, only one was done for insurance for an event.
17:58:15 And that is kind whereof we are going with this.
17:58:17 I think what we need to do is do a better effort of
17:58:20 promoting this kind of funding so all the neighbors
17:58:23 could take advantage of it.
17:58:24 I'm pleased to say that 26 neighborhoods have
17:58:26 benefited from this project.
17:58:28 Trash receptacles, it's kind of interesting.
17:58:31 I read it one way, and apparently I read it the wrong
17:58:34 way.
17:58:34 I felt when I first read it, they were only getting
17:58:38 ten trash receptacles city-wide and I found out it's
17:58:41 going to be 50 trash receptacles installed city-wide
17:58:44 which is exactly what we asked for.
17:58:46 City of Tampa was named as one of America's dirtiest
17:58:51 cities and that greatly concerns members of the
17:58:52 citizens advisory committee and so I know there's an
17:58:55 anti-littering campaign being promoted through the
17:58:58 clean city division.

17:58:59 We are pleased about that.
17:59:00 We are excited to be a part of that.
17:59:01 We are also excited with the 50 trash receptacles we
17:59:05 asked for are going to be installed city-wide.
17:59:07 I think that will help alleviate some of the litter we
17:59:09 have.
17:59:10 So that was a big success story.
17:59:12 The Nebraska Avenue lighting and drainage, as many of
17:59:15 you know the makeover of Nebraska Avenue from Kennedy
17:59:17 Boulevard to Hillsborough has finally gun.
17:59:20 Long wait for it but it has actually begun.
17:59:25 We are excited.
17:59:26 However there, was a response by Michael burwell, the
17:59:29 stormwater department, about some limited drainage
17:59:31 improvements.
17:59:32 And one of our concerns is if you go back up to when
17:59:36 Florida Avenue was repaved about a year and a half ago
17:59:38 they wound up having worse drainage problems after
17:59:40 they repaved maybe beforehand.
17:59:42 So we don't want that mistake to happen on Nebraska
17:59:44 Avenue so we are asking the city to be actively
17:59:47 involved with D.O.T. to make sure that the drainage is

17:59:50 going to be addressed on Nebraska Avenue so we don't
17:59:52 have the flooding problems.
17:59:53 We also continue to ask for signature lighting to be
17:59:56 installed along Nebraska Avenue and we are aware that
17:59:59 the TIF funds is a possibility for this and we hope
18:00:02 that will be considered in the future.
18:00:05 We also asked for environmental police officers.
18:00:07 And we realize that the budget as it is for the city,
18:00:12 would be possible.
18:00:12 However we would like to see an anti-dumping campaign
18:00:15 implemented city-wide along with anti-littering
18:00:18 campaign.
18:00:19 It kind of goes hand in hand.
18:00:21 That environmental police officers in East Tampa have
18:00:25 been very successful, a lot of impact on illegal
18:00:28 dumping.
18:00:28 However we feel that illegal dumping occurs city-wide,
18:00:31 not just East Tampa.
18:00:32 We would like to have a more adequate way of a
18:00:35 dressing that and we realize environmental police
18:00:37 officers are very expensive so with F we could do the
18:00:40 anti-dumping campaign it might be very successful.

18:00:42 Another thing we asked for, the lighting initiative.
18:00:46 Another success story.
18:00:48 Basically the city is three years ahead of schedule in
18:00:50 implementing and upgrading the lighting throughout the
18:00:53 neighborhoods.
18:00:53 However, one of our concerns is it is still dark, dark
18:00:57 pockets in neighborhoods that were not being
18:00:58 addressed.
18:00:59 And basically the city is willing to work with
18:01:03 neighborhoods for additional lighting for purposes of
18:01:06 safety.
18:01:07 And it's just great that they are willing to listen to
18:01:12 neighborhoods.
18:01:13 Again another success story. The last thing we asked
18:01:15 for on the city-wide request was gridlock along Gandy
18:01:18 Boulevard.
18:01:19 When we made the proposal in March little did we know
18:01:21 that there was actually a Gandy study group going on
18:01:25 so our timing is kind of good.
18:01:27 It worked out well.
18:01:28 And basically a lot of the concerns we had about Gandy
18:01:30 Boulevard will be addressed by this committee.

18:01:34 And we do support those efforts.
18:01:35 We have come a long, long way.
18:01:37 I'm pleased to say that all the seven requests we
18:01:40 have, all seven have been addressed and that's never
18:01:42 happened in my involvement with CDBG which runs back
18:01:45 almost 20 years.
18:01:46 We have come a long way.
18:01:48 Also I want to make sure you are aware of everything
18:01:50 the Department of Community Affairs is doing to assist
18:01:52 us.
18:01:53 Unfortunately with the budget cuts a lot of those
18:01:54 positions are being eliminated and a lot of their jobs
18:01:57 are changing but I want you to know we could not have
18:02:00 done this without the Department of Community Affairs.
18:02:02 They have helped us he have step. Way so I would like
18:02:04 to publicly thank them.
18:02:05 At this time I am going ask anybody from neighborhoods
18:02:07 to please come up and discuss their needs and we'll
18:02:10 discuss it in nine block areas and go from there.
18:02:14 I'm not sure who is here.
18:02:16 Block area 1.
18:02:24 Block area 2.

18:02:26 Block area 3.
18:02:40 CDBG funding, yes.
18:03:19 For block area 3 which happens to be my neighborhood,
18:03:22 I'll talk about that.
18:03:24 In southeast Seminole Heights we are very active
18:03:27 neighborhood association.
18:03:28 Many people on council knows quite well because we
18:03:30 have been around for a long time.
18:03:32 I sequin nodding her head.
18:03:34 For those of you knew to council you'll get to know us
18:03:36 quite well.
18:03:42 Charlie.
18:03:42 Glad to see I wearing white, by the way.
18:03:45 I was so used to black it's kind of a shock.
18:03:48 One of the things in the center which is a very small
18:03:50 building, it is two very -- too small to meet the
18:03:55 needs of our civic association.
18:03:56 You can't fit more than 25 people in there.
18:03:59 For the last couple years, several years actually, we
18:04:01 have asked for a new community center to be built in
18:04:03 Giddens.
18:04:05 We understand it's on the drawing board.

18:04:06 We would like to see it being implemented because we
18:04:08 really need it.
18:04:09 And it will definitely help our neighborhood become a
18:04:11 more effective neighborhood association.
18:04:15 Another request that we made in block area 3 dealt
18:04:17 with the speed on 12th Street.
18:04:19 And our residents complained about speeding on 12th
18:04:22 Street ever since our neighborhood was established in
18:04:26 1989 so we are talking about 18 years of complaints.
18:04:29 And the city is looking at the between MLK and
18:04:33 Osborne.
18:04:35 Basically they made their location list.
18:04:38 However we are concerned of 12th Street between
18:04:41 Osborne is not qualified for any traffic calming
18:04:43 devices.
18:04:44 12th Street has no sidewalks.
18:04:46 A very busy street.
18:04:47 It borders Giddens.
18:04:50 In fact Giddens park is on one side.
18:04:54 You have to cross the street and it's a very dangerous
18:04:56 situation.
18:04:57 And we continue to request traffic calming devices be

18:05:00 installed at least along 12th Street near Giddens
18:05:05 park.
18:05:05 We also have request a for traffic calming to 12th
18:05:09 Street to Taliaferro.
18:05:12 It's a very busy residential street without sidewalks.
18:05:15 Residents everybody complaining about the speeding for
18:05:17 years.
18:05:17 We have asked the city to initiate efforts to address
18:05:20 the speeding concerns, because it did not make the
18:05:22 list.
18:05:23 But if TPD could increase enforcement or whatever
18:05:26 because our neighbors are real concerned about the
18:05:28 speeding problems there.
18:05:29 That's block area 3.
18:05:30 Block area 4?
18:05:32 Block area 5?
18:05:39 Block area 6?
18:05:41 8 and 9.
18:05:49 >>GWEN MILLER: You're the only one here.
18:05:52 >>> At this time I turn it over to request for
18:05:53 proposals for the CDBG process.
18:05:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Who is in charge of that?

18:06:06 >>> I think if there's anybody else in the audience.
18:06:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:06:11 wants to speak now, you can come up and speak.
18:06:22 >>> Do I have to be sworn?
18:06:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
18:06:25 >>> My name is Charlene Russell, property manager for
18:06:28 Methodist place apartments.
18:06:30 And I'm here to talk on behalf of our request for
18:06:36 proposal for the elevator upgrade.
18:06:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We are listening.
18:06:47 >>> I wanted to make sure I was in the right time.
18:06:50 Methodist place apartment provides housing for nearly
18:06:53 200 elderly persons in the downtown Tampa area.
18:06:58 Our new management team has made many improvements.
18:07:01 Even with these improvements, a lot still remains to
18:07:04 be done at Methodist place to ensure that it provides
18:07:07 safe, affordable and decent housing to the residents
18:07:09 of Tampa.
18:07:12 One of these improvements is to upgrade the two
18:07:14 pedestrian elevators that serve the residents of the
18:07:16 14-story building.
18:07:21 They told us that we had to come and get your

18:07:23 approval.
18:07:24 And I have with us 32 residents and probably eight
18:07:28 board members and nurses and have been else.
18:07:31 Everybody stand up.
18:07:35 We need an elevator.
18:07:37 Okay.
18:07:39 They said we had to ask Tampa City Council approval
18:07:41 and we are here today.
18:07:51 We are good?
18:07:51 So we can go?
18:07:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:07:58 We do have a letter from representative Fay Culp.
18:08:04 Okay.
18:08:13 >> I apologize.
18:08:15 >>> I just want you to know.
18:08:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Did you get one of these?
18:08:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, I would like to
18:08:32 request in the future that the staff provide -- tells
18:08:37 people that they don't have to come down here and they
18:08:40 have copies so they know they are in the budget.
18:08:43 >> This is a representative of Fay Culp.
18:08:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file.

18:08:51 Madam Chair, on the same thing, on the same volume of
18:08:54 paper that we see here, under capital improvement
18:08:57 programs under city sidewalks, streets, resurfaces,
18:09:00 traffic calming, so forth, there are some streets that
18:09:02 are listed here and I would like to add something to
18:09:04 it if I may.
18:09:06 It provides sidewalk replacement street resurfacing,
18:09:09 traffic calming to eligible, low and moderate, and to
18:09:13 support affordable workforce housing projects.
18:09:20 >> Second.
18:09:21 (Motion carried).
18:09:29 >> Nice to see you all.
18:09:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, with a major effort to come
18:09:34 tonight, this is advertised as a public hearing.
18:09:36 And it's their opportunity.
18:09:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But they are under no obligation.
18:09:45 >>GWEN MILLER: While they are leaving, does anyone
18:10:45 else want to speak?
18:10:49 I see no one else wants to speak.
18:10:50 We can close the public hearing.
18:10:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:10:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

18:10:54 (Motion carried)
18:10:56 We go to item number 3.
18:10:58 We need to open that.
18:11:04 >> Move to open number 3 and withdraw based on the
18:11:08 letter from petitioner Gina K. Grimes.
18:11:12 (Motion carried).
18:11:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Continued public hearing.
18:11:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Maybe we want to do clean-up before.
18:11:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We have two cleaned up.
18:11:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's clean up, Ms. Finney.
18:12:09 >>JILL FINNEY: I have not been sworn.
18:12:13 >>GWEN MILLER: We haven't sworn yet.
18:12:15 Clean up the agenda first.
18:12:16 >>JILL FINNEY: Hopefully I'll make this evening a lot
18:12:19 shorter.
18:12:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Please do.
18:12:22 If you all will be quiet.
18:12:28 Fun fin item number 5, request for continuance to
18:12:30 August 9th.
18:12:33 >> So moved.
18:12:33 >> Second.
18:12:33 (Motion carried).

18:12:34 >>JILL FINNEY: Item number 7, I have a letter from the
18:12:50 petitioner.
18:12:51 Withdrawn.
18:12:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to withdraw, receive and
18:12:56 file the letter.
18:12:57 (Motion carried)
18:13:01 Fun fin item number 8, I had a verbal confirmation
18:13:05 that they were requesting to withdraw their petition.
18:13:07 I have not received a letter as of 5:30.
18:13:10 So it's up to council what they wish to do.
18:13:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is petitioner present?
18:13:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't see petitioner.
18:13:22 >>JILL FINNEY: I had a hard time getting in contact
18:13:25 with them as well.
18:13:31 And item number 9 has requested a continuance to
18:13:34 August 9th.
18:13:36 Item number 9 has requested a continuance to August 9.
18:13:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to continue to August 9th.
18:13:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 6 p.m.
18:13:47 (Motion carried).
18:13:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public that's going to
18:13:50 speak on item number 4, 6, that's it, please stand and

18:13:57 raise your right hand.
18:14:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all written communications
18:14:14 relative to tonight's hearings which have been
18:14:16 available for public inspection in City Council's
18:14:18 office be received and filed prior to the action
18:14:20 tonight.
18:14:22 Motion, please.
18:14:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:14:24 >> Second.
18:14:24 (Motion carried).
18:14:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Very briefly, council, please a
18:14:28 reminder if any ex parte communications occurred to
18:14:31 disclose them prior to the vote.
18:14:33 Finally, to speed things along, when you state your
18:14:37 name, please reaffirm that you have been sworn in so I
18:14:39 don't have to direct you.
18:14:40 I put a sign to remind you.
18:14:42 It would be very helpful.
18:14:44 Thank you.
18:14:51 >>JILL FINNEY: Land Development Coordination.
18:14:53 I have been sworn.
18:14:54 We are here on petition Z-07-23 located at 4010 and

18:15:00 4100 Boy Scout Boulevard.
18:15:02 This petition was originally heard on March 22nd
18:15:06 of '07, and was heard a couple weeks ago but could not
18:15:10 be heard to the end.
18:15:12 We had some legal issue.
18:15:13 It's requested to go from CI commercial intensive to
18:15:16 PD planned development.
18:15:18 Consisting of 1,042,650 of square office use, retail
18:15:28 restaurant use, 270 hotel rooms, and 254 residential
18:15:33 units.
18:15:35 As directed by City Council, the petitioner has made
18:15:37 all the corrections -- all the corrections to the site
18:15:41 plan recommended by the DRC staff.
18:15:45 It has previously been heard.
18:15:46 I don't know how much detail.
18:15:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Not too much.
18:15:52 >>JILL FINNEY: Not too much.
18:15:55 Okay.
18:15:55 >>GWEN MILLER: The petitioner is going to give us the
18:15:57 rest.
18:16:00 >> This is the aerial.
18:16:08 Staff has no objections to the petition.

18:16:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:16:23 >>> Keith Bricklemyer, 500 East Kennedy Boulevard,
18:16:26 attorney for the applicant.
18:16:28 I am very pleased to be here tonight with a full team
18:16:33 of consultants who are representing metropolitan life
18:16:36 insurance company on this project.
18:16:39 Our team has worked very hard to address each of the
18:16:42 issues that have been raised by staff during the
18:16:46 review of this project and we are happy to come before
18:16:48 you tonight with staff support.
18:16:51 Our presentations will explain why we have earned that
18:16:53 support.
18:16:55 Before we get into those presentations, I would like
18:16:58 to introduce chuck Davis, who is the director of the
18:17:01 Tampa office for Liss investments to tell you a little
18:17:06 bit about his company.
18:17:07 Thank you.
18:17:11 >>> Good evening.
18:17:12 My name is chuck Davis.
18:17:14 I'm the regional director for MetLife here in Tampa.
18:17:24 In making the presentation tonight we thought we would
18:17:26 kick this off because it's important to tell you why

18:17:29 we are developing this site.
18:17:30 MetLife had a large presence in Tampa for over 35
18:17:33 years.
18:17:34 We have nearly 2,000 employ that's currently work in
18:17:37 Tampa.
18:17:37 Incidentally, the size of the workforce in Tampa is
18:17:40 equal to the size. Workforce in MetLife's corporate
18:17:43 headquarters in New York City.
18:17:46 Roughly two years ago, we purchased two newer
18:17:48 buildings in the New Tampa area, and agreed to lease
18:17:51 space in a third building demonstrating our continued
18:17:54 commitment to the City of Tampa.
18:17:56 Our former operations building located on the subject
18:17:59 property is vacant and considered obsolete according
18:18:02 to today's office standards.
18:18:05 We believe in Tampa's future and its continued growth.
18:18:08 We also believe this particular site is one of the
18:18:11 best commercial sites in Florida.
18:18:13 This is why we are seeking to redevelop the use on
18:18:15 this site in conjunction with our company's commercial
18:18:18 real estate investment strategy.
18:18:21 Our goal is to create a high quality project that

18:18:24 MetLife would be proud of and would further enhance
18:18:26 Tampa's reputation as a major employment center and a
18:18:29 great place to live.
18:18:31 As a demonstration, we are seeking a LEED
18:18:35 certification on the first phase office building.
18:18:39 To help with us a quality project we have hired TVS, a
18:18:43 leading international design firm, Carolyn Moffitt as
18:18:47 design manager, Wilson Miller as our civil engineer,
18:18:54 and our contractor.
18:18:55 We are excited about building a high quality project.
18:18:58 We would like you to hear a presentation by the rest
18:19:00 of our team.
18:19:01 Thank you for your time.
18:19:04 >>> Thank you.
18:19:05 I have been sworn.
18:19:06 My name is Bob Balke. I'm with Thompson, Ventulett,
18:19:07 Stainback and Associates, and we are very pleased to
18:19:13 be here tonight.
18:19:13 With me is my associate David Fulmer.
18:19:17 We are part of a large organization in Atlanta,
18:19:21 Chicago, Dubai and Shanghai, 350 person architectural
18:19:26 firm.

18:19:26 And you may know some of our work by way of the
18:19:33 Washington, D.C. convention center, the Atlanta
18:19:37 aquarium, and here in town bay port plaza not too far
18:19:43 from our site.
18:19:44 So we are here tonight to explain briefly the master
18:19:51 plan for met west international development, formerly
18:19:54 known as metro center development.
18:19:58 This is 31 acres along Boy Scout Boulevard between
18:20:02 Lois Avenue and Grady Avenue.
18:20:11 Is this projected properly?
18:20:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
18:20:14 >> This is an urban mixed use development that brings
18:20:17 together residential, hotel, retail, office, and
18:20:22 recreational landscape spaces in a complementary,
18:20:26 holistic way, in keeping with the pedestrian-friendly
18:20:29 concepts of the Westshore area pedestrian system plan.
18:20:34 At the very heart of the master plan is a retail
18:20:37 village with a Central Park amenity, and village
18:20:41 curbside parking.
18:20:44 It's expected that approximately 50% of the retail
18:20:49 village development will be restaurant use and about
18:20:54 50% specialty shops.

18:20:56 The retail village is linked to all of the other parts
18:20:59 of the master plan by an extensive network of
18:21:03 pedestrian walkway which are in yellow and red here,
18:21:10 such that they create perimeters for different
18:21:15 districts of a master plan.
18:21:20 With the access to one of the entries through the
18:21:22 pedestrian village at the heart of the master plan, as
18:21:25 you enter at the end of that axis is a cluster of
18:21:30 high-rise office buildings, and this is a little
18:21:33 perspective taken from that retail village sort of in
18:21:37 the direction of that one axis.
18:21:39 So that you can see that these office buildings are
18:21:42 gathered around a central drive-on plaza.
18:21:50 There's another view.
18:21:53 Of the office building area of the master plan.
18:21:59 These office buildings create a business district and
18:22:01 are sort of a vertical culmination of the building
18:22:04 complex.
18:22:06 As chuck mentioned, we have already made application
18:22:08 for a LEED certification for the design and
18:22:12 construction of this first building in the complex.
18:22:24 A link by covered walkway and landscaping as well as a

18:22:27 physical building to build and connection next to this
18:22:31 first office building is a hotel, a business class
18:22:34 hotel, and this hotel will have a spa, health club,
18:22:39 and will be an amenity really to the entire area, as
18:22:43 well as to the met west international development.
18:22:45 The hotel is strategically located in such a way that
18:22:50 it's with the second existing entry into the site and
18:22:56 directly across from the existing office building on
18:22:59 this property.
18:23:07 The hotel also serves in the area anchored to the
18:23:13 cross active which again goes through the middle of
18:23:15 the site and through this pedestrian retail village
18:23:20 and arrives at the other end of the site where it's
18:23:22 anchored by a residential development.
18:23:24 So we really do have a mixed use development here with
18:23:27 all of the components, residential, retail office and
18:23:33 commercial, and these are all connected by pedestrian
18:23:37 spaces that link the individual landscaped areas
18:23:44 around ponds and gardens, and the office area and so
18:23:52 forth.
18:23:52 And not only link within the complex but link outside
18:23:56 the complex, too, to the pedestrian development that's

18:23:59 part of the overall plan for Lois and the trail
18:24:04 development, the Westshore trail development on the
18:24:06 other side of Boy Scout Boulevard, and trying to make
18:24:09 those connections to areas off site.
18:24:12 So the plan has been developed.
18:24:14 We appreciate the input of Wilson Miller.
18:24:17 We did take the opportunity to review with him at one
18:24:20 of our attempts to present the very first time and he
18:24:25 was very helpful to give us some pointers that we
18:24:28 incorporated.
18:24:31 So thank you.
18:24:33 I'm sorry, Wilson Stair.
18:24:37 Wilson Stair.
18:24:45 >>> Good evening.
18:24:47 My name is Elizabeth Abernathy, a planner with Wilson
18:24:50 Miller, our offices are located at 2205 north 20th
18:24:54 street in Tampa.
18:24:55 I have been sworn.
18:24:57 I'm here just to talk a few minutes about our outreach
18:25:00 efforts with the neighborhood.
18:25:03 The first meeting we had with the neighborhood
18:25:05 association, the Lincoln garden Culver city group back

18:25:10 in January.
18:25:10 They expressed some concerns about additional traffic
18:25:14 that the project would have, and we looked at some
18:25:19 ways to help perhaps mitigate some of their concerns.
18:25:24 Specifically they were concerned about pedestrian
18:25:25 crossings along Lois.
18:25:28 And we looked at ways that we could help to mitigate
18:25:33 the additional impacts that our project would have by
18:25:35 bringing more traffic along Lois, and that concern
18:25:40 specifically about the crosswalk.
18:25:42 I did some research about a crosswalk system that the
18:25:44 city of St. Petersburg is currently using, and they
18:25:48 have been very successful.
18:25:50 Let me put that on the Elmo.
18:25:57 I talked with the city of St. Petersburg
18:25:59 transportation manager as well as the D.O.T. gentleman
18:26:05 about this crosswalk system.
18:26:07 It basically consists of -- let me put this other
18:26:13 photo up here so you can see a little bit more detail.
18:26:21 We did some research on this technology that they are
18:26:24 utilizing in the city of St. Petersburg.
18:26:26 They started these crosswalks about a year ago.

18:26:28 They have been very successful.
18:26:32 We have the gentleman that has created this system
18:26:33 come and do a presentation to the neighborhood
18:26:36 association board.
18:26:37 The board came out to one of the locations in the city
18:26:41 of St. Petersburg to see how it worked firsthand, and
18:26:45 again this was an idea to help again mitigate some of
18:26:48 the concern about pedestrian safety.
18:26:51 So we committed to continuing to work with the City of
18:26:54 Tampa, to see if this was something that they might
18:26:58 entertain, and committed to providing up to two of
18:27:02 these crosswalks on Lois Avenue.
18:27:04 So that was part of our commitment and in the zoning
18:27:07 conditions.
18:27:08 When we went back to the board, they also were
18:27:10 concerned about the speed along Lois, so we looked
18:27:14 into other opportunities for mitigation to help with
18:27:17 that issue.
18:27:22 And there is a permanent radar sign, I believe in one
18:27:29 area of the city.
18:27:30 And again if the City of Tampa transportation group is
18:27:33 amenable, we have committed to providing two of these

18:27:36 signs to help slow the traffic down on Lois.
18:27:39 And again, this is in direct relationship to the fact
18:27:43 that we are bringing more traffic to the area, that
18:27:46 these are mitigation opportunities that will help to
18:27:49 alleviate some of the concerns about speeding and
18:27:53 pedestrian safety.
18:27:55 So if you would like any more information on this, I'm
18:27:57 happy to answer questions.
18:27:59 I have much detailed information to present if you so
18:28:04 desire to have any more detailed information on that.
18:28:07 But that's what we have done to work with the
18:28:09 neighborhood association.
18:28:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there any opportunity -- I know
18:28:15 the city has been to some meetings along Lois.
18:28:17 Did you all look at --
18:28:19 >>> Currently, there are some marked crosswalks.
18:28:22 There is one that has a flashing yellow amber.
18:28:26 It flashes continuously.
18:28:28 What's unique about this system in St. Petersburg is
18:28:30 that the pedestrian activates the light so it only
18:28:34 flashes when there's a pedestrian wanting to cross,
18:28:37 which they found is more effective at getting the

18:28:40 attention of the drivers, because it's not a
18:28:42 continuous light that people tend to ignore after
18:28:47 awhile that drive along that route.
18:28:51 It also is an L.E.D. flashing light, flashes at a much
18:28:56 higher rate so it gets the attention of the drivers
18:28:58 better.
18:28:59 It's the same type of light they use on a police
18:29:02 cruiser so when it flashes you see it.
18:29:04 You can't ignore it.
18:29:05 And the system also provides for lighting of the
18:29:10 pedestrian at nature, so when they push the button
18:29:13 there's a down light that lights the pedestrian so
18:29:15 that the driver can see that there is a person
18:29:17 standing there waiting to cross.
18:29:20 There's a voice-over that comes on the system that
18:29:23 tells the pedestrian to wait until traffic stops, then
18:29:28 to cross the street and to thank the drivers, an
18:29:32 interesting addition to the system.
18:29:35 Which is kind of clef can.
18:29:37 And it's been very effective.
18:29:40 They have very high compliance rates in the city of
18:29:42 St. Petersburg and the system has been approved by

18:29:45 D.O.T. for use in where in the State of Florida they
18:29:48 started using it and some other jurisdictions and they
18:29:51 were anticipating the green book, to allow this system
18:29:56 anywhere as our standard --
18:29:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other question I had was about
18:30:01 medians.
18:30:02 There's medians along Lois but are there any
18:30:05 opportunities to enhance those?
18:30:09 >>> As far as landscaping?
18:30:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, in terms of adding any more --
18:30:14 or is Lois already totally medianed?
18:30:17 >> I don't know -- we can take a look at the area.
18:30:20 The entire way of what we were anticipating, one
18:30:24 additional crosswalk.
18:30:25 And then upgrading this crosswalk.
18:30:29 >> You mentioned speed.
18:30:32 Median being a traffic calming opportunity.
18:30:36 And I'm going to need your help.
18:30:41 >>> I have a traffic consultant.
18:30:43 >>> Randy Coen, Cohen and company.
18:30:44 I have been sworn.
18:30:45 Lois Avenue was recently resurfaced by the City of

18:30:48 Tampa about 12 to 18 months ago.
18:30:51 They created a 4-foot striped median in the center of
18:30:55 the road.
18:30:55 They also created medians just to the north of spruce
18:30:59 and just to the -- just to the south of spruce, just
18:31:03 to the north of Lois.
18:31:04 I mean Cyprus.
18:31:06 It was the only two areas where they could really put
18:31:08 in a structured median.
18:31:10 They have provided a 4-foot striped median area
18:31:13 between those two structure medians.
18:31:15 You basically do have a median of sorts all the way --
18:31:20 >> You couldn't dig out those four --
18:31:22 >>> No, it's too small.
18:31:23 If you were to do anything would you end up with about
18:31:25 a two-foot concrete median which would be more of an
18:31:28 eyesore and hazard than it would a substantial benefit
18:31:32 so the city looked at that strongly.
18:31:34 I know the city spent over a year looking at Lois
18:31:38 Avenue trying to find ways to provide landscaping, a
18:31:41 median.
18:31:41 What they actually did was lower the lanes on Lois'

18:31:44 four lane undivided roadway to have a refuge.
18:31:48 And that's basically all you can do with a
18:31:51 right-of-way that's there at this point.
18:31:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know the Westshore area -- I
18:32:00 wonder if you are connected -- if you are providing an
18:32:03 opportunity for people to cross safely from your
18:32:05 proposed development to the International Plaza area.
18:32:09 Because I would anticipate having shops, restaurants,
18:32:12 you know, variety of uses at your place.
18:32:14 Somebody might want to cross the street.
18:32:19 >>> My understanding is that the D.O.T. and the city
18:32:22 have looked at the intersection of Lois and Boy Scout
18:32:25 to provide enhanced pedestrian crossings there.
18:32:28 However, one of the difficulties, once you cross the
18:32:32 street, there is no pedestrian connection on
18:32:34 International Plaza to take you from Boy Scout to the
18:32:37 mall.
18:32:38 There are actually no sidewalks or anything.
18:32:41 >> Which is horrible.
18:32:42 >>> Yes, it is.
18:32:44 >> However, people are probably going to do it anyway.
18:32:47 Are you going to provide for that?

18:32:49 >>> Yes.
18:32:49 There are things going on regarding that intersection.
18:32:52 We are also looking at special assessment in the
18:32:54 Westshore special assessment to convert some of those
18:32:57 moneys for pedestrian use in the future.
18:33:04 Will be back in front of you in about a month to deal
18:33:06 with that.
18:33:06 That may also provide some moneys there.
18:33:08 We are also looking at enhanced pedestrian crossing at
18:33:12 this intersection as well.
18:33:13 >> So is then project going to contribute in any way
18:33:17 toward this?
18:33:18 >>> No.
18:33:21 My understanding is those improvements have been
18:33:23 funded or were funded at one point in time for that
18:33:26 crossing in the upgrading of Lois and Boy Scout.
18:33:42 >>> We have assembled the materials that we provided
18:33:43 to staff in a binder.
18:33:45 I would like to submit those for the record.
18:33:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Give them to Mr. Caetano, please.
18:34:02 >>> That completes our presentation.
18:34:04 Of course our team is here to answer any questions you

18:34:06 might have.
18:34:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:34:08 wants to speak on item number 4?
18:34:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I had a quick question.
18:34:18 I can't figure out what's on the south border.
18:34:22 Is there actually a street there?
18:34:24 It doesn't seem to be labeled on any of my material.
18:34:33 Just behind the site there's a large ditch to the
18:34:35 south and beyond that it's the Lincoln gardens park.
18:34:40 So that's the big green area here.
18:34:46 I'm sorry, I can't see.
18:34:50 >> It's a hotel.
18:34:52 >>> So there's no street?
18:34:57 Just a huge ditch.
18:34:58 Okay, thanks.
18:35:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: When somebody presents a PD, they
18:35:08 are supposed to present pictures of what's going on on
18:35:11 all four sides.
18:35:12 I can't figure out if there are any pictures at all of
18:35:15 the residential component and of the structured
18:35:18 parking, and what that's going to look like.
18:35:22 But I want to see what the structured parking is going

18:35:24 to look like if you were on the south facing north.
18:35:28 If you're facing the structured parking how tall is
18:35:32 it?
18:35:32 What is it going to look like?
18:35:36 >> We did submit elevations of. That I don't think we
18:35:38 have those here.
18:35:39 >> Someone should have one.
18:35:41 Either our staff or you.
18:35:48 >> There may be an earlier package.
18:35:52 We do have elevations.
18:35:54 If we don't have them here, we'll be glad --
18:36:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We need to see them tonight.
18:36:09 Is this going to be LEED silver?
18:36:12 >>> We are not sure what level of LEED at this point.
18:36:14 >> Is it indicated on your plan?
18:36:16 >>> We won't know until we actually finish the
18:36:20 construction.
18:36:21 We are shooting for a LEED silver.
18:36:22 >> Does it say anywhere that you are committed to lead
18:36:25 anything?
18:36:27 >>> On our plan?
18:36:29 >> Yes.

18:36:31 As a legal commitment from you, does it say LEED
18:36:33 anywhere?
18:36:34 >>> I don't think it says anything on the drawings
18:36:36 per se.
18:36:38 >> Well, where would it say it?
18:36:44 >>> Our process has begun with the LEED organization.
18:36:46 >> Have you made a commitment anywhere in your
18:36:52 materials that you have given the city that will be
18:36:54 part of the officials record that you will create a
18:36:58 LEED building?
18:37:01 >>> I don't know.
18:37:06 >> That is not included as any conditions or notes on
18:37:08 the site plan.
18:37:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, but it's something you told us.
18:37:13 >>> That's correct.
18:37:14 >> And sometimes products change and there's an Ernest
18:37:17 desire on the part of council representing the public
18:37:18 that when you make verbal commitments that we can look
18:37:22 back six, ten, twelve months from now, five years from
18:37:26 now, and see that you put those in your commitment.
18:37:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can do it for second reading
18:37:32 under our procedure.

18:37:35 >> Yes.
18:37:35 Write down, we are going to go to LEED building.
18:37:38 >>> All you can represent, and I have to defer to the
18:37:40 architects, is that we have made application to do
18:37:42 that.
18:37:43 That's our desire.
18:37:46 There is an approval process with which I am not
18:37:48 personally familiar.
18:37:49 And I guess you can qualify or not qualify.
18:37:55 >> You actually don't know until you go through the
18:37:57 whole process.
18:37:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know but you can --
18:38:01 >> You can aim for it.
18:38:02 >>> Exactly.
18:38:04 And that's our intention, is to go through the
18:38:06 process.
18:38:08 >> You can write that down.
18:38:12 But we have long memories.
18:38:16 >>> Which was our first submission on round one.
18:38:20 >> It's getting better.
18:38:24 >>> These are little less developed but this is
18:38:26 indicative.

18:38:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, can we have part of that as
18:38:29 part of this?
18:38:30 >>> Yes.
18:38:30 It's been submitted to the city.
18:38:32 I don't know if it's in part what you are looking at
18:38:37 there.
18:38:38 >> I'll tell you my concern specifically.
18:38:40 We are very concerned that this proposal is a high
18:38:44 quality proposal from all angles and we keep getting
18:38:50 better.
18:38:51 It was pointed out that it doesn't have any pedestrian
18:38:54 access.
18:38:55 It's a disaster from pedestrian access.
18:38:56 Your project is much better particularly in
18:38:59 consideration.
18:38:59 It's getting better.
18:39:01 We are trying to make sure that every time there's a
18:39:03 project in the Westshore area that is a higher
18:39:06 quality, and it's not clear from this picture, it's
18:39:08 not clear to me but I'm sure you can tell me how many
18:39:11 stories it is, and if the parking is screened, so that
18:39:15 the adjacent neighbors that are going to be looking at

18:39:19 all my lighting and structured parking, we want to
18:39:23 know what's going to be there. So can you tell me?
18:39:27 >>> Well, I can tell you that we have addressed -- I
18:39:30 can tell you the number of stories, one, two, three,
18:39:34 four, five stories.
18:39:36 >> Surface parking on the roof?
18:39:38 >>> Yes.
18:39:39 >> So is that six?
18:39:40 >>> No, that's included in the five.
18:39:44 And we will take -- there is a design that is in
18:39:48 process to develop screening, and to articulate the
18:39:53 entrances to the garage in a special way.
18:39:56 So it's getting architectural attention.
18:39:58 >> But shouldn't that be part of what we approve
18:40:00 either now or at second reading?
18:40:02 This is my concern.
18:40:05 >>> Mary Daniels, Land Development Coordination.
18:40:08 I have been sworn.
18:40:09 They do have a note on the plan that the parking
18:40:11 garage will be screened, to create 80% opacity either
18:40:15 through ornamental screening, and or vegetation entry.
18:40:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And the lighting so the

18:40:24 neighbors --
18:40:27 >>> Again, I don't know for sure what's on the
18:40:29 drawing.
18:40:30 But, yes, we will address the lighting.
18:40:39 >> Is that written down anywhere?
18:40:43 >>> Abernathy: If I may step in.
18:40:45 On our plan we are showing that all of the palm trees
18:40:47 on the site are going to be relocated along the south
18:40:50 property line.
18:40:51 The only place where there are any residential
18:40:54 neighbors are to the south.
18:40:55 There is a proposed project.
18:41:02 We did work with that neighbor.
18:41:04 You can see on the landscape plan on the second sheet
18:41:06 of your zoning.
18:41:07 There is a -- a commitment to replant all along the
18:41:16 south property line a row of trees so there will be a
18:41:20 heavy vegetative buffer consisting of -- and that's
18:41:30 going to consist of palm trees as well as understory
18:41:35 trees along the south property line to create a very
18:41:38 effective buffer to that residence.
18:41:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the buffer?

18:41:43 Is it like 15 feet, 20 feet?
18:41:47 >>> It's a minimum of 10 feet of landscaping plus the
18:41:49 ditch, and the ditch, I believe, is over 50 feet in
18:41:52 width.
18:41:52 So essentially you have got a minimum of 60, and we
18:41:57 actually believe that the garage will be kept up a
18:41:59 little bit further than that.
18:42:00 We wanted to keep a little flexibility in the design
18:42:04 so it's a minimum of 10 feet.
18:42:07 But in all likelihood it will be passed back a little
18:42:09 more than that.
18:42:10 Again there's only one residence to the south, this
18:42:15 proposed condominium project, that I believe may be
18:42:17 currently under construction.
18:42:19 They have approved commercial site plan.
18:42:21 They have a PD approved a couple years back.
18:42:23 And so there's just one residence there that could
18:42:28 potentially be a residential project that could be
18:42:32 effective but we really filled that in with
18:42:34 landscaping to provide a good buffer, and along Grady,
18:42:39 on the north side of the site, there's an existing row
18:42:42 of live oaks.

18:42:43 We will be saving all of those trees.
18:42:45 And again filling in, in between to help provide a
18:42:48 screening of the garage that is at the northeast
18:42:50 corner, and the garage that is on the southeast
18:42:55 corner.
18:42:56 Again, we are planning on planting four-inch trees all
18:42:59 along Grady to help screen that side of the garage, as
18:43:03 well as providing additional architectural features
18:43:05 along that side of the garage.
18:43:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It says here on the waiver request
18:43:12 you are removing more than 50% of the protected trees?
18:43:15 >>> Correct.
18:43:17 There are over 100 trees in the two existing parking
18:43:20 lots that we need to remove in order to put the
18:43:24 parking garages up. The trees at the southeast side
18:43:27 of the site, I have some photographs of those.
18:43:30 They are also in the book under the section of the
18:43:35 trees.
18:43:37 And what's significant there is the majority of the
18:43:41 trees are 66 elm trees, thank you, there's 66 elm
18:43:47 trees that are in declining condition.
18:43:53 I'll put a couple photos up on the board here.

18:44:03 They are not in the best condition.
18:44:05 And those will all be removed and there will be
18:44:09 replacement trees provided.
18:44:10 Another shot of those trees.
18:44:12 Again, they are just not very happy trees.
18:44:15 So those trees will be removed.
18:44:17 We did redesign one of the other existing parking
18:44:20 lots.
18:44:26 The parking lot in this area was redesigned, and will
18:44:30 retain the live oaks that are in that area.
18:44:32 So we went through many design iterations, in
18:44:39 particular the live oaks.
18:44:40 So what's being removed, the majority of what's being
18:44:42 removed now are the elm trees, some pine trees.
18:44:48 We have reduced the canopy impact by redesigning.
18:44:52 >> Do you have a picture in here of the residential
18:44:55 proposal?
18:44:58 >>> I think I have one in my bag.
18:45:02 You mean residential building?
18:45:04 >> Yes.
18:45:04 >> I don't believe the elevation has been provided
18:45:08 yet.

18:45:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: When we look at the PD we are
18:45:15 supposed to look at what's being proposed, and this is
18:45:17 a ten-story building.
18:45:23 You don't have a picture of it?
18:45:25 >>> Do you want us to address the architectural style
18:45:28 of the residential building?
18:45:29 It's going to be similar to some of these other
18:45:32 buildings that we proposed.
18:45:39 >>> This is the third first reading that they have
18:45:42 previously provided.
18:45:43 Wilson Stair has reviewed all of that.
18:45:46 And --
18:45:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, I'm glad that he reviewed it.
18:45:53 If we could see a picture --
18:45:56 >>> And I do believe it was in the packet that I did
18:45:59 hand out today.
18:45:59 Is it not in there?
18:46:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't think so.
18:46:03 I mean, they showed the commercial with office, but
18:46:09 nobody shows a building -- at least I didn't recognize
18:46:13 the picture.
18:46:15 >>> It may not be identified.

18:46:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Residential structure on Lois.
18:46:22 >>> That view is the most comprehensive view we have.
18:46:25 You are correct, it does not show the residential
18:46:27 structure.
18:46:27 The reason for that is, the elevation for that
18:46:30 building, you know, the design has not been developed.
18:46:35 It will be developed in response to the entire
18:46:38 project, but it is not designed -- submit ago master
18:46:46 plan.
18:46:46 We are going for zoning for mixed use development.
18:46:49 But we don't have every building in it designed.
18:46:54 >>> They have committed to do the 30, 60, 90 review
18:46:57 with urban design.
18:47:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to hear from the public.
18:47:02 You may come up and speak now.
18:47:09 >>> Madam Chairman, council members.
18:47:10 I'm Wilson Robertson, Jr., 4221 west arch.
18:47:15 I have been sworn.
18:47:17 As we all agreed this afternoon, this evening, this is
18:47:21 a huge project, a huge project that is going to have a
18:47:24 tremendous impact on our community.
18:47:27 And these are some of our concerns.

18:47:30 As a homeowner, and of course there are some other
18:47:34 homeowners sitting in the rear who have some of the
18:47:38 same concerns.
18:47:41 Population growth.
18:47:44 With this type of development, there are going to be a
18:47:47 lot of people coming into the community.
18:47:50 Traffic.
18:47:50 Something that we really have to work with.
18:47:53 Because it's frightening to cross Lois Avenue at
18:47:58 certain times of the day so we know what's going to
18:48:00 happen once development is finished.
18:48:02 We are also concerned about infrastructure.
18:48:08 I don't know how we are going to leave this out
18:48:13 because we need streets, we need roads, we have sewer
18:48:16 problems at times, storm drainage.
18:48:21 I don't know how a community of this size can
18:48:25 accommodate all of the new development that is coming
18:48:27 in.
18:48:27 This is a real deep concern that we have.
18:48:30 We're talking about natural resources.
18:48:33 Talking about our water and our air.
18:48:34 A lot of landscaping is going on, fertilized --

18:48:39 fertilizing, all these things we have to deal with
18:48:41 that's going into our groundwater, so to speak.
18:48:44 Safety for our children.
18:48:45 We know that our community is going to be filled
18:48:48 with -- impacted tremendously with traffic coming
18:48:51 through our local streets.
18:48:53 Our streets need to be resurfaced.
18:48:56 These are some of the concerns that we have.
18:48:59 Emergency services.
18:49:02 Police department.
18:49:02 Fire department.
18:49:04 Ambulance services.
18:49:06 Evacuation.
18:49:06 All these things that we must be concerned.
18:49:09 And most of all is our quality of life.
18:49:12 I've lived in that community 37 years, and this is
18:49:17 something that we are faced with, that is a deep
18:49:20 concern.
18:49:21 And I hope that you all will consider this.
18:49:25 Transportation.
18:49:26 We talked about the light.
18:49:32 That is not sufficient.

18:49:33 We need stop lights.
18:49:34 We need other types of devices that will show the
18:49:37 speed, that will have some type of control on the
18:49:40 vehicles that's coming back and forth.
18:49:43 It is very frightening crossing Lois Avenue.
18:49:48 We see the beautiful development that we have in the
18:49:51 north part of this area, but what about the south?
18:49:54 Are we a part of this equation?
18:49:56 We care about our families.
18:49:58 This is our community that we have contributed a lot.
18:50:03 So I just want do say that this is something that I
18:50:07 hope you all will look into, who are going to deal
18:50:11 with the infrastructure, how we are going to be as a
18:50:16 community once our redevelopment is finished.
18:50:18 Developers can come in and do a good job, they can
18:50:22 look beaut beautiful but we are the one that is have
18:50:24 to live there.
18:50:25 So I hope you all will consider what has been said.
18:50:27 Thank you very much.
18:50:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:50:31 >>> Errol Richards, Jr., I live at 3920 west Laurel
18:50:40 street in Tampa.

18:50:43 I'm a licensed registered electrical contractor, and I
18:50:49 have been sworn.
18:50:52 I would like to ask Williams, I think is the name of
18:50:55 the company, Wilson Miller, somebody from Wilson mill
18:51:00 area question, is the name of the contractor who you
18:51:03 have hired to develop this land.
18:51:07 Is it the same people who developed Walters crossing?
18:51:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This is comment directed to the
18:51:17 chair.
18:51:18 Direct your questions to the chair.
18:51:19 >>> Okay.
18:51:20 Then, unfortunately, I live right in front of that
18:51:27 development.
18:51:28 And my old friends, they had little regards for me.
18:51:38 They even asked that I would come in and discuss my
18:51:43 grievances and I went in and I talked to the general
18:51:46 contractor and my statement to him bass, sir, if you
18:51:54 are allowed to build a building in this area, in my
18:51:57 neighborhood, go home to your neighborhood, and if
18:52:05 anyone disturbs you, call the police.
18:52:08 So what I have done to you and have cost him money.
18:52:13 Unfortunately, also, I had to walk off of Saska's jobs

18:52:21 as an electrician. The latest one was in
18:52:26 St. Petersburg, a utility company out of North
18:52:30 Carolina, that's building a 15-story building in
18:52:34 St. Petersburg.
18:52:36 My complaint was, they placed Port-O-Johns in closed
18:52:41 environments in that building, the 15-story building,
18:52:47 and the fumes from Port-O-Johns are toxic.
18:52:50 And the electrical contractor who was involved was
18:52:56 powerless to do anything.
18:52:57 I called the -- the proper channels, and they made a
18:53:02 report, and I cannot find what happened.
18:53:08 Now, I found out just recently that there was a
18:53:11 development that City of Tampa develop the area where
18:53:19 I live.
18:53:19 How did I find out about it?
18:53:21 Because life became miserable.
18:53:23 The sewers start to back up.
18:53:26 Now I got a question I would like to ask the council.
18:53:29 Is there a lift station located inside the City of
18:53:31 Tampa utilities lot which serves that area?
18:53:37 And if there is a sewer lift station there, is it
18:53:41 overworked?

18:53:44 The stink was so bad one night, about a week ago --
18:53:47 I'm sorry, about a month ago, I called the police.
18:53:49 The police came out and investigated.
18:53:51 They called the city.
18:53:54 The next morning, a gentleman from the city called me
18:53:57 and he said these words:
18:54:00 The city does not have the funds to buy the chemicals
18:54:02 to treat, and the chemicals are called -- the
18:54:09 chemicals have a certain name.
18:54:12 For odor control.
18:54:15 So what I'm asking for in addition is speed bumps on
18:54:20 Laurel street.
18:54:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up, sir.
18:54:22 Thank you.
18:54:22 Next.
18:54:30 >>> Good evening, council.
18:54:33 Dan Smith, president of gardens homeowners civic
18:54:37 association and I have been sworn in.
18:54:40 Out of over ten commercial developers, that own land
18:54:44 in or around neighborhoods, in or around our
18:54:49 neighborhood, if not the, it is the largest of all of
18:54:56 them, and that causes a great concern for our

18:54:58 neighborhood, as you have heard already.
18:55:01 Some feel like the development around us with a
18:55:04 tribute to the value of our properties.
18:55:06 The neighborhood seems to disagree, and a lot of us
18:55:09 feel that it will be a detriment to the value of our
18:55:12 properties.
18:55:16 Not to mention the increased property tax.
18:55:19 When that comes to me personally, I'm employed, my
18:55:21 wife is employed.
18:55:22 When it comes to a fixed income family or elderly
18:55:24 person that's in a home, that doesn't have means of
18:55:28 making too many other choices, just to be threatening.
18:55:33 We are confident that if and when this property on
18:55:37 Lois Avenue is built at Lois Avenue, when MetLife
18:55:42 build, Lois Avenue will become a through-way.
18:55:46 They are not even here yet.
18:55:48 I mean, MetLife hasn't built, obviously.
18:55:52 We just had crossway, it was moved to a PD.
18:56:01 Already we have had a death reported crossing Lois
18:56:03 Avenue.
18:56:04 And people from the neighborhood.
18:56:08 We have children that attend Rolland park, Jefferson

18:56:11 high school that walk to school from Lincoln Gardens
18:56:14 through Carver City through to Manhattan and poses a
18:56:18 threat.
18:56:18 Needless to say, we have had -- we are not against
18:56:21 progress.
18:56:22 We want the city to prosper.
18:56:24 But, however, this $41 billion company in our
18:56:29 neighborhood, our neighborhood believes is in a
18:56:33 position to consider us in their building.
18:56:38 I have heard a lot.
18:56:39 I have heard some concerns about, you know, the same
18:56:42 concerns that we have had.
18:56:43 But unfortunately those concerns tonight were
18:56:44 addressed to the front of the property.
18:56:46 And when you address it to the south of the property
18:56:49 the only thing you considered was the crossland
18:56:52 project.
18:56:52 We are behind the crossland lot, the fact of the
18:56:57 matter is we are the crossland and there are houses,
18:57:00 single family house that is stand behind the crossland
18:57:02 and we are very concerned with the traffic, very
18:57:06 concerned with the open ditches, very concerned with

18:57:08 the interstate, Dale Mabry and spruce, and we would
18:57:10 like to see the city, like to see the developers pay
18:57:13 closer attention to not only the trees, the buffer
18:57:17 that keeps them in, south of the project, but we would
18:57:20 like to see them pay closer attention by making this
18:57:26 happen.
18:57:26 So I have to say as a community we are not in favor at
18:57:29 this time of the PD rezoning and we would like to
18:57:34 continue dialogue.
18:57:34 We had some success, what we considered success moving
18:57:37 towards some answers to some very serious questions
18:57:40 with Mrs. Abernathy.
18:57:46 There's so much more to talk about.
18:57:48 We would like to continue dialogue.
18:57:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:57:55 >>> I'm not the best speaker.
18:57:56 My name is A. Wright.
18:58:00 I got here late.
18:58:02 I was not sworn in.
18:58:03 (Oath administered by Clerk) at the moment of impact
18:58:25 on our neighborhood, we have met with -- we have met
18:58:28 with state and government officials.

18:58:32 Neither one them have gave us a positive solution to
18:58:37 the problems, Lois, the high school, Roland park
18:58:48 elementary school.
18:58:49 They have a bus to take them across Lois it's so
18:58:52 dangerous.
18:58:52 But with all the development going in, that's what the
18:59:00 whole neighborhood was concerned about.
18:59:02 My mother was killed on Lois.
18:59:04 With the international mall, with MetLife's big
18:59:12 project, you know, when are we going to get a positive
18:59:20 answer to the solution?
18:59:24 Of the traffic problem.
18:59:30 There's a problem now and you bring another
18:59:32 development.
18:59:33 That's the main concern.
18:59:35 State and government hasn't gave us anything.
18:59:37 I mean, we have been walking in circles here.
18:59:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:59:51 >>> Ron row till a.
18:59:58 I have been sworn in.
19:00:06 (thunder).
19:00:07 >>GWEN MILLER: You get sworn and see what happens to

19:00:08 you?
19:00:09 >>RON ROTELLA: I have been sworn in.
19:00:14 Not too many years ago the Westshore business district
19:00:16 was known as a commercial office market.
19:00:19 And today it is truly evolved into the most dynamic
19:00:24 regional activity center on the west coast of Florida.
19:00:28 We are all aware of the congestion that exists
19:00:32 throughout the county, throughout the city, throughout
19:00:33 the state, and we are very cognizant of that.
19:00:37 But one of the reasons the organization supports this
19:00:41 project is because of the mixed use nature of the
19:00:43 project.
19:00:44 And the internal capture that this project will
19:00:47 promote with the restaurants and the retail and the
19:00:50 hotels, and specifically we are really pleased with
19:00:53 the inclusion of the residential units, where people
19:00:57 hopefully will live where they work, which gets
19:01:01 additional trips off the road.
19:01:04 The other thing that I would like to point out, and I
19:01:07 really don't want to appear to be in conflict with the
19:01:11 neighborhood concerns at all because I am very
19:01:13 sensitive to them, and I truly understand what they

19:01:16 are saying, and some of the frustrations that they
19:01:19 feel.
19:01:20 But if this community, and this region, is going to
19:01:26 promote transit, as a solution to our transportation
19:01:31 congestion problems, in the way transit works, is you
19:01:33 have to have the congestion that exists.
19:01:37 We have that.
19:01:39 You have to have the intensity and density that
19:01:43 supports transit.
19:01:44 So it's because of the mixed use nature of the project
19:01:50 that we wholeheartedly support the development before
19:01:53 you.
19:01:53 Thank you.
19:01:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:01:54 Would anyone else like to speak?
19:02:03 Is there anyone else came in that was not sworn in?
19:02:06 Would you please stand and raise your hand?
19:02:08 (Oath administered by Clerk).
19:02:17 >>> As I said, I was watching this on TV.
19:02:20 And I had a couple questions.
19:02:21 I figured I would just quickly drive down here.
19:02:24 I noticed the things that are being built and since we

19:02:29 had this water discussion, I was wondering if they
19:02:32 intend on the reclaimed water system, and, you know,
19:02:42 many of the small businesses in Tampa are frequently
19:02:46 asked to pay for a lot of roadway improvements.
19:02:50 You know, we say that they are associated with the
19:02:52 impacts of the project.
19:02:54 So appropriate for them to pay that money to the City
19:02:57 of Tampa.
19:02:59 If that's the standard we are going to use, I just
19:03:01 noticed they were discussing earlier, that we are
19:03:06 there is going to be some improvement but a few of
19:03:08 them they were looking for basically looking for the
19:03:11 city to pay for.
19:03:12 I don't think that's necessarily appropriate while
19:03:14 they are making budget cuts elsewhere, that the
19:03:16 taxpayers are being asked to put that bill on such a
19:03:20 large project.
19:03:20 If we are going to waive it anywhere, I think it's
19:03:23 time we start waiving it for the small business
19:03:25 community and start getting the big guys to pay their
19:03:29 fair share.
19:03:29 Thank you.

19:03:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to see?
19:03:32 Mr. Bricklemyer, you may come back on rebuttal.
19:03:39 >>> Thank you, Madam Chair, council members.
19:03:44 This project is a very important project at MetLife.
19:03:49 And we think it's a very important project to the City
19:03:51 of Tampa.
19:03:52 And that's why they have assembled this team as early
19:03:57 in the process as it has, and I think they have done a
19:04:00 wonderful job of putting together a mixed use project
19:04:04 which everyone will be proud when it's developed.
19:04:10 The concerns with regard to reclaimed water, reclaimed
19:04:18 water is not currently available.
19:04:20 If the airport buys in it will be made available.
19:04:23 If it is made available we will certainly take
19:04:25 advantage of it.
19:04:26 But it's not currently there.
19:04:30 With respect to the neighborhood issues, particularly
19:04:33 with regard to pedestrian safety, I think Mrs.
19:04:37 Abernathy demonstrated and you we have done better
19:04:40 than anybody has thought about doing yet about
19:04:42 enhancing pedestrian safety in this neighborhood.
19:04:45 The crosswalks that we are proposing to put in and the

19:04:48 radar detection devices that we are proposing to put
19:04:51 in far exceed the benefits of any other systems that
19:04:55 have been designed or installed in this neighborhood.
19:04:58 We think it will truly be helpful.
19:05:00 St. Pete has demonstrated that they actually work to
19:05:03 stop traffic for a pedestrian, which doesn't generally
19:05:07 happen, maybe down at Channelside, but that's probably
19:05:10 the only place in Tampa that I'm familiar with.
19:05:16 The infrastructure concerns in general, infrastructure
19:05:20 has to work for this project.
19:05:22 For this project to work, the infrastructure
19:05:26 facilities have to be available.
19:05:27 They will also then work for the neighborhood.
19:05:31 This is a project that is in excess of $200 million.
19:05:36 It's going to contribute mightily to the City of
19:05:37 Tampa, and to the Westshore association in tax
19:05:43 revenues and fees to be spent in this area, to enhance
19:05:47 infrastructure, and mitigate the impacts of the
19:05:50 project.
19:05:50 So we are very, very proud to be here before you
19:05:53 tonight with this proposed development, and hope that
19:05:57 you're as excited about it as we are.

19:05:59 Thank you.
19:06:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
19:06:05 My concern is based on the testimony of the neighbors.
19:06:12 I don't know.
19:06:13 I haven't heard specifically what the issues are.
19:06:14 I just heard it as a concern.
19:06:16 So I am trying to find out specifically what are the
19:06:19 concerns, what are the issues?
19:06:21 That's number one.
19:06:21 Number two is, how many -- Mr. Bricklemyer, have you
19:06:27 met with the neighborhood on this particular project?
19:06:30 Then I guess my next question is, so the neighborhood
19:06:32 can understand it is, that this project can be done
19:06:39 without council's approval tonight.
19:06:40 I want to make sure they understand that.
19:06:42 I mean, as I understand, they can be rearranged and
19:06:47 that sort of thing but it can be pretty much done.
19:06:50 So you may want to speak to that so we can help
19:06:52 everybody.
19:06:54 I guess I want to find out first all, how many times
19:06:56 have you met with the community, the neighbors in that
19:06:58 area?

19:07:00 Specifically, what are the concerns?
19:07:02 Because that has not been clear to me tonight.
19:07:06 >>: I went to two meetings in the neighborhood
19:07:09 association.
19:07:10 Mrs. Abernathy met --
19:07:13 >>> Abernathy: We presented twice to the board that
19:07:16 we had our meeting in the field in St. Petersburg,
19:07:19 once with the board, and then I presented to the
19:07:23 larger association once.
19:07:24 So we had four specific meetings, as well as some
19:07:28 other additional meetings with the board members
19:07:31 specifically on the crosswalk.
19:07:36 >>> The only usual you that was raised in the other
19:07:40 meetings that we had was pedestrian safety.
19:07:41 And that's why Mrs. Abernathy dug deep on that issue
19:07:45 and came up with what we think is a very creative
19:07:48 solution that will actually benefit that particular
19:07:49 issue.
19:07:50 With regard to the status of the current zoning, this
19:07:54 property is currently zoned CI.
19:07:56 We are proposing square footage that is consistent
19:07:58 with the current zoning.

19:07:59 The only reason we are here for a PD rezoning is
19:08:02 because we want to exceed the height that would be
19:08:06 permitted under the CI zoning.
19:08:08 That's the only reason we are here.
19:08:09 Otherwise, we could develop the property under its
19:08:12 current zoning.
19:08:14 The residential obviously is another use that would
19:08:16 not be permitted under the CI.
19:08:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Again, someone from the neighborhood
19:08:24 association, I'm trying to find specifically what the
19:08:26 concern is.
19:08:28 In the report I have here, in section 7, it speaks
19:08:33 specifically of the issue of crosswalk, and crosswalk
19:08:38 enhancement.
19:08:40 So I'm trying to find specifically what other issues.
19:08:46 Because, again, I have driven the site.
19:08:53 I'll go out and la at the site, drive around, spend
19:08:55 some time taking a look at it.
19:08:57 And as I said, a couple weeks ago, you were in a major
19:09:02 area where development is taking place, and
19:09:05 particularly with the international mall, it's not
19:09:08 going to -- well, traffic is going to come down spruce

19:09:15 or the whole area, because they are going to the mall.
19:09:19 To the international mall or to development.
19:09:21 So I guess my issue here is, public safety in terms of
19:09:23 the crosswalk, that sort of thing.
19:09:27 So I need to know specifically what are the issues
19:09:31 that the association wants to be addressed.
19:09:36 >> When you say issues or what we need to be
19:09:38 resolutions? Are you looking at issues?
19:09:41 >> Well, what are your concerns?
19:09:42 >> I'll just speak from a personal point of view.
19:09:46 I personally was driving down Grady on my way to a
19:09:48 meeting with someone, and personally was almost hit by
19:09:52 a person that was trying to alleviate the gridlock
19:09:57 traffic on Spruce Street on its way to Dale Mabry and
19:10:00 was going through the neighborhood about 40 miles an
19:10:02 hour, and came very close to my truck.
19:10:04 So not just Lois.
19:10:07 Lois is a major intersection.
19:10:08 I mean Lois is a major street without a doubt.
19:10:11 There are other streets that we think should be paid
19:10:13 attention to when it comes to streets, to speed,
19:10:15 whether or not there will be any signs, or the signs

19:10:19 that detect how fast you're going when you're on your
19:10:22 way.
19:10:22 Anything like that.
19:10:23 But those are things that we are discussing with Mrs.
19:10:26 Abernathy.
19:10:28 About the ditches, Spruce Street has exposed ditches.
19:10:32 I think someone on the council even mentioned in
19:10:34 looking at the pictures, what are those?
19:10:36 What are those?
19:10:36 Well, what they are is an eyesore, number one.
19:10:40 Number two, they present a danger for anyone.
19:10:42 If you increase the traffic the way we expect it to be
19:10:46 increasing, a danger to anyone walking or driving on
19:10:51 that street.
19:10:52 From our last meeting we discovered that the crossland
19:10:55 is going to increase traffic 35%.
19:10:57 Crossland is only about seven acres.
19:11:00 This is 31.
19:11:01 And that's not just MetLife.
19:11:03 Everyone.
19:11:03 It's not just MetLife.
19:11:04 So we have a lot of concerns, not to mention the fact

19:11:07 that the children are the main concern.
19:11:09 We have a daycare center.
19:11:10 It's actually a community center, recreation center.
19:11:13 Beautiful.
19:11:13 Brand new.
19:11:14 Well used.
19:11:15 And the children walk to it from school.
19:11:17 The people that live in the neighborhood walk to it
19:11:19 from school.
19:11:21 Those same streets they walk down are being sped down,
19:11:25 on Lois Avenue when they are trying to get to 275.
19:11:29 They cut through my neighborhood.
19:11:31 I can even say me myself, I cut through Grady to get
19:11:34 here tonight because I couldn't get to Cyprus.
19:11:38 I did it carefully, however, but I did it.
19:11:41 And that's the kind of concerns we have as far as
19:11:43 traffic is concerned.
19:11:44 And the Spruce Street ditches we are concerned with.
19:11:48 There's flooding.
19:11:49 So there's some drainage issues.
19:11:51 But I'm sure this development may not affect us.
19:11:59 We are trying to find out.

19:12:00 We are in the process of talking about that, what can
19:12:02 be done with B that.
19:12:03 Those are the kind of things we are discussing, trying
19:12:05 to make better.
19:12:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
19:12:09 So my question to staff at this particular point are
19:12:15 those issues, someone from staff, have these issues
19:12:21 been raised, have they been addressed by the
19:12:23 developer?
19:12:24 And they may not be issues that fall in their purview,
19:12:29 I'm not sure.
19:12:33 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
19:12:35 I have been sworn.
19:12:38 As far as traffic and things that are going on around
19:12:40 there, we recently did improvements on Lois.
19:12:43 But as in other things such as the parking lot
19:12:48 speeding and stuff, our traffic calming session can be
19:12:51 those types of studies.
19:12:52 But also, I want you to also remember that through the
19:12:54 Westshore DRI, they do have a mitigation for the
19:12:59 residential communities that may be impacted by these
19:13:02 type of big developments, and -- I have stormwater to

19:13:13 address --
19:13:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So there's a mitigation fund that can
19:13:19 address the issues and other issues?
19:13:21 >>> Well, there is a fund for the residential but it's
19:13:23 not just Culver city, Lincoln City gardens.
19:13:27 There is a panel made up of the of the surrounding
19:13:29 neighborhoods like Beach Park and they do have a plan
19:13:31 but they have to agree on what too do.
19:13:33 And I'm not sure if they even agreed at this point
19:13:36 what to do with those funds that they currently do
19:13:38 have.
19:13:38 >> Well, I guess here again, the issue, though, is
19:13:41 that the only issue why they are here tonight in terms
19:13:46 of height.
19:13:50 That's the only issue.
19:13:51 Height.
19:13:52 In terms of the developer.
19:13:53 So there's a walkway.
19:14:01 >> The bay center?
19:14:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The developer is saying, the only
19:14:05 issue is height.
19:14:07 >>> The height and the mixed use portion as well which

19:14:10 residential can be used with a special use.
19:14:13 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:14:15 If I can make one statement, just because I think
19:14:17 there may be some confusion especially amongst some of
19:14:19 the new members. This project is located in the
19:14:21 Westshore DRI.
19:14:22 The Westshore DRI specifies certain aspects as part of
19:14:27 it.
19:14:27 One of it relates to transportation.
19:14:30 Transportation mitigation payments, transportation.
19:14:35 Also as it relates to neighborhood improvements.
19:14:37 So that is also not just part of my development, you
19:14:41 know, individual development, because in the Westshore
19:14:45 DRI, there is mitigation required by developers over
19:14:48 and above what you require as part of this process.
19:14:50 But because it's a DRI, that has to be governed by the
19:14:55 DRI.
19:14:56 All of that said, I do know somebody from stormwater
19:15:01 is here and he can request the review as relates to
19:15:06 stormwater.
19:15:10 >>> Stormwater development.
19:15:11 This commercial site -- I have been sworn -- as with

19:15:15 any commercial site is required to mitigate for any
19:15:17 impact it would have from the stormwater point of
19:15:20 view.
19:15:20 In other words, any additional run-off would need to
19:15:23 be attenuated on-site, so that post-development
19:15:29 condition would have less run-off than the existing
19:15:31 condition.
19:15:32 That's normal for any type of commercial development
19:15:34 whether it's rezoned or not.
19:15:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of questions.
19:15:44 Ms. Calloway, somebody might have said this earlier,
19:15:47 but how many additional trips will be on Lois?
19:15:55 Somebody has done a traffic study on this.
19:16:05 >>> Calloway: My file is back in the rear.
19:16:08 Do you want trips daily?
19:16:09 Or would you like p.m. pique peak?
19:16:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Whichever.
19:16:15 I think Lois is a big focus.
19:16:17 Okay, there's an exit off the interstate at Lois.
19:16:22 Does Lois cut through this neighborhood?
19:16:24 I want to know how many additional new trips this
19:16:27 project is going to be -- I want to say daily trips.

19:16:54 As far as I can read, 110 additional trips.
19:17:00 The p.m. peak hour for this project.
19:17:05 >> 110 trips?
19:17:07 >>> That's just on Lois.
19:17:08 They do have more, of course, that are on Boy Scout.
19:17:15 >> How many total daily trips?
19:17:17 >>> The daily would be 1100.
19:17:20 It's usually 10%.
19:17:22 >> 1100 new trips on Lois?
19:17:25 >>> That's correct, in a day. And Lois is a
19:17:28 classified roadway, at least 20,000 trips.
19:17:31 20,000 for a four-lane roadway.
19:17:38 >> And speed bumps.
19:17:41 We do a lot of -- the neighborhood calls up, says we
19:17:44 need speed bumps.
19:17:46 You guys go out there and put the rub area cross and
19:17:48 you study it and then you rank them number, you know,
19:17:52 375, and they don't get speed bumps, because we don't
19:17:55 have the money to do it.
19:17:56 This might be an opportunity to find some money to do
19:17:58 it.
19:17:59 Have we studied any these significant streets like

19:18:03 Laurel or Cyprus or spruce or whatever to see about
19:18:07 the viability of speed bumps, in regard to the cut
19:18:10 through issue? Because we all know that cut-through
19:18:14 is a reality when the traffic starts snarling up.
19:18:19 >>> Yes.
19:18:19 And our traffic calming department has used the radar
19:18:25 in speed studies in the area.
19:18:26 As you know when they did the Lois project the reason
19:18:29 why they did the medians and they reduced the lane
19:18:32 width to help slow down the traffic more and put in
19:18:36 those crosswalks, and for the recreation that is used
19:18:46 quite often.
19:18:46 So they have studies out there.
19:18:48 I can't tell you the ranking at this point, because it
19:18:50 is a different section.
19:18:59 >> So the bottom line, there might be some
19:19:00 opportunities on some of these cut-through streets in
19:19:03 these affected neighborhoods to incorporate some speed
19:19:05 bumps?
19:19:07 >>> Yeah.
19:19:08 When they did their traffic analysis, also, they will
19:19:10 have to address it in their mitigation issues and

19:19:13 during commercial site plan review as they have stated
19:19:16 on their site plan.
19:19:17 >> But the problem is there's a limitation on money.
19:19:21 Condition number 32 says that they are going to
19:19:24 contribute into this Westshore residential
19:19:25 neighborhood improvement fee, $146,000 which is fine
19:19:29 and commendable, but that could go who knows where to
19:19:32 do who knows what?
19:19:35 >>> But that's a different theme.
19:19:38 Their transportation mitigation issues will have to be
19:19:40 addressed.
19:19:41 It's a separate fee.
19:19:43 That's --
19:19:56 What's that, 3.6 million?
19:19:59 >>> That is a mitigation fee that will have to be
19:20:04 addressed during the commercial site plan.
19:20:06 That's mitigation, that's traffic -- increased
19:20:08 traffic.
19:20:09 We have to look at it --
19:20:11 >> You can use that for lane width, and aren't there
19:20:15 specific limitations?
19:20:16 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

19:20:17 Because this is a Westshore DRI they are obligated to
19:20:20 pay a fee to deal with transportation mitigation
19:20:24 impact, and neighborhood improvement, and that's
19:20:28 different than the rest of the city.
19:20:30 So if that fee goes toward improvements of
19:20:37 neighborhoods, including, I understand, correct me if
19:20:41 I am wrong, speed bumps and those kinds of things,
19:20:43 which collected as a pool, and then there's a
19:20:45 neighborhood.
19:20:47 There's a committee of neighborhood associations that
19:20:49 makes recommendations, how that money should be spent
19:20:53 throughout the neighborhood, in order to deal with the
19:20:55 impacts of all of the commercial development.
19:21:00 >> That's good news.
19:21:00 I'm glad to hear that.
19:21:02 >> The 3.6 million, that's.
19:21:05 It does not have to be capacity related.
19:21:08 They can be turn lanes that are needed for the project
19:21:10 suggest naturalization, additional suggest
19:21:12 naturalization.
19:21:13 >> Speed bumps?
19:21:16 I mean, off-site speed bumps?

19:21:19 >>> Of course, they have to have a speeding table. We
19:21:26 have to have that documented, and we can take a look
19:21:29 at that.
19:21:30 >> I think it's important.
19:21:31 That's a good chunk of money.
19:21:32 Originally, I was sitting here read being 150,000, or
19:21:35 50,000, which really amounts to, by the way, .1 of a
19:21:40 percent.
19:21:41 But now that you have a couple million dollar that's
19:21:45 real money that can be used for a good purpose.
19:21:48 But these folks need to know, they need to be assured
19:21:50 that that money is going to stay within their
19:21:52 immediate neighborhood.
19:21:53 With all duo respect to Beach Park, it is not going to
19:21:57 be going over to Beach Park, et cetera, et cetera,
19:21:59 because of the real impact of this project is right
19:22:02 there in Lincoln and Carver City. Anyway, I just
19:22:07 think that we need to figure that out.
19:22:09 We need to work on that a little bit and come up with
19:22:13 solutions before we walk away proud of ourselves that
19:22:16 we have done something.
19:22:18 >>> I just want to you know that mitigation is within

19:22:20 the impact fee district that we spend it.
19:22:24 >> I understand. That but that's a big district.
19:22:26 >>> I understand.
19:22:26 And we still are trying to -- we have commercial site
19:22:31 plans, need to figure out where we are going to give
19:22:37 this money away, I guess.
19:22:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: See if I have anything else before
19:22:42 I yield.
19:22:45 Okay.
19:22:46 The other thing I just wanted to mention before we
19:22:49 forget about it is somewhere in the site plan, at some
19:22:56 point in time it would be good to put that silver
19:22:59 LEED, the silver LEED of the gold, so make sure that
19:23:04 somebody is making note of that, and we'll include
19:23:06 that as part of the motion.
19:23:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: May I ask Mr. Ron Rotella, the
19:23:18 Westshore DRI, I believe, has a ten cents a square
19:23:21 foot, if I remember, 10 or 11.
19:23:29 >>RON ROTELLA: That has now been increased.
19:23:31 I was just talking to Julia Cole about that.
19:23:34 Actually the mayor and City Council appoint that is
19:23:36 neighborhood advisory committee.

19:23:39 And the last meeting I attended, because I meet with
19:23:41 them on a regular basis, Lorraine Wiley, who is on the
19:23:45 Board of Directors of the Carver City Lincoln Gardens
19:23:49 association, has been appointed to that neighborhood
19:23:51 advisory committee.
19:23:52 So collectively, they make recommendations to the city
19:23:58 on how that money is spent.
19:24:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Is there another fee or just that
19:24:07 square foot fee in the Westshore district?
19:24:09 >>> It's a square footage fee.
19:24:11 And then of course in this case they are paying the
19:24:14 transportation impact fee as their projects are
19:24:17 developed, they will be part of the special assessment
19:24:21 that's collected within Westshore that goes towards
19:24:24 pedestrian improvements.
19:24:27 It's a special assessment.
19:24:30 >> That's the one I was thinking about.
19:24:31 >>> Yes, they will pay that special assessment.
19:24:33 >> So that one is earmarked for transportation.
19:24:36 Am I correct?
19:24:37 >>> That's correct.
19:24:39 And I will tell you, because I had discussions with

19:24:41 the representatives of metropolitan here this evening,
19:24:46 as council knows, we are trying to do a notice
19:24:50 proposed change with our DRI that allows transit and
19:24:58 pedestrian improvements as mitigation.
19:24:59 They have agreed and wholeheartedly support that
19:25:03 change to our DRI, and hopefully that will happen.
19:25:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
19:25:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Staff, Julia, perhaps you're the
19:25:13 person to start with.
19:25:14 First of all, I looked in my material.
19:25:17 I did not see a new written report from staff.
19:25:21 Did we receive one?
19:25:23 Because the one that I have has a number of
19:25:26 rejections, and she said there were no staff
19:25:31 objections so I want to know if we have a new written
19:25:33 staff report to that effect.
19:25:41 >>> We are sort of at a little advantage because Jill
19:25:44 Finney wasn't the one operating this through the
19:25:48 proceeding.
19:25:49 I understand there was a report submitted, and it was
19:25:52 just put in front of me, which I don't know why you
19:25:55 wouldn't have received it, but there is no longer any

19:25:57 objection.
19:26:00 >> You won't get the new improved --
19:26:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is why it's important to be
19:26:03 able to talk to staff prior to council meeting, prior
19:26:06 to zoning meetings.
19:26:07 Okay.
19:26:08 So there is a new report.
19:26:10 Maybe you can giver to the somebody who can make
19:26:12 copies.
19:26:12 >>JULIA COLE: I will.
19:26:13 I absolutely will.
19:26:15 >> Thank you.
19:26:16 My second question is about the lift station that the
19:26:18 gentleman in the neighborhood mentioned.
19:26:20 That's like really important and I wonder if there's a
19:26:23 staff person who can address it.
19:26:25 Because if this is going to be such a significant
19:26:27 project we need to know that we have the capacity to
19:26:30 address it in terms of a lift station do. We have a
19:26:33 staff person who can address that?
19:26:35 >>JULIA COLE: I'm not sure there is anybody from staff
19:26:37 to deal with that that issue but perhaps after the --

19:26:43 after the zoning, could you request somebody to come
19:26:45 back and provide you information.
19:26:48 >> Then thirdly, this is a Melanie question.
19:26:54 Do we use the petitioner -- come on, staff, we are all
19:27:01 here now.
19:27:03 Do we use the petitioner's traffic analysis as a basis
19:27:07 of our scrutiny?
19:27:12 Or do we the city do an independent analysis, or do we
19:27:17 use what Mr. Cohen or whoever presents as the basis of
19:27:23 our analysis?
19:27:24 >>> Calloway.
19:27:25 The actual petitioner is required to submit a
19:27:28 traffic analysis.
19:27:29 He has to get his own traffic person.
19:27:30 He has to provide analysis to the transportation
19:27:33 division and weep do review it and then at that point
19:27:36 decide mitigation or whatever needs to be done.
19:27:40 There's nothing to be done in that way.
19:27:42 As far as transportation, you look at -- we do not
19:27:48 approve or deny on traffic because they can mitigate
19:27:53 for their traffic impact.
19:27:54 They can either add turn lanes at capacity, or they

19:27:58 can pay to proceed on with their project.
19:28:05 >> Council members, this gives me real heartburn.
19:28:07 I just want to share with you.
19:28:09 There's a point in which a road just won't accept any
19:28:11 more traffic.
19:28:12 Of course, we need to do transit.
19:28:14 But the point is, we need to have real independent
19:28:18 look at this.
19:28:19 And at a certain point, I'm not saying in terms of
19:28:22 this specific project, but our staff just told us is
19:28:26 we never say no.
19:28:27 We never say no to something.
19:28:29 We never say, our system can't handle this.
19:28:32 I think this is a conversation for another day.
19:28:34 But this is to me a really significant question.
19:28:37 Because, for example, we are looking -- and I was not
19:28:41 provided.
19:28:41 Maybe you all were.
19:28:42 I didn't see a big picture map, bigger than this, that
19:28:45 shows all of the neighborhood.
19:28:47 I didn't see an aerial that shows all the little
19:28:50 neighborhood streets.

19:28:50 I can't find Laurel on here to figure out where Laurel
19:28:53 is for the speed bumps.
19:28:55 But I think before we approve anything like this, we
19:28:58 need to have a really quick understanding of what the
19:29:01 impact is going to be on all these neighborhood
19:29:03 streets, what it's going to be on the neighborhood,
19:29:06 and mach sure that before we approve this, we know
19:29:09 what it's going to be and that we can protect this
19:29:12 neighborhood.
19:29:15 And finance we can't, we shouldn't accept it.
19:29:17 And I don't know at this point we have enough
19:29:20 information to move ahead.
19:29:21 Because today, Mr. Shelby told me that between first
19:29:24 and second reading, if we don't raise an issue at
19:29:27 first reading, then we have no basis to do anything at
19:29:31 second reading if we don't raise it at first reading.
19:29:36 >> We are at second reading.
19:29:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You told me today if we have a
19:29:39 problem we need to say it right now on first reading
19:29:42 because we can't ask for additional material at second
19:29:44 reading.
19:29:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To clarify -- no, to be clear,

19:29:49 council cannot -- a council member or council as a
19:29:51 body cannot change its position from first to second
19:29:56 reading on the basis of information that's received
19:29:59 outside the public hearing.
19:30:01 So if there is an issue -- and maybe I'm missing what
19:30:04 your point was exactly, but if there's an issue that
19:30:07 you have, the point to raise it is during the public
19:30:11 hearing so you can get the testimony, the competent,
19:30:14 substantial evidence upon which you can base your
19:30:17 decision.
19:30:17 The time to do that is during the period of the public
19:30:20 hearing.
19:30:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to ask a quick question.
19:30:25 Mr. Wilson Stair, could you please come up and comment
19:30:28 upon the residential building that we have seen no
19:30:30 pictures of?
19:30:41 >>> Wilson Stair, urban design manager.
19:30:42 I have been sworn.
19:30:43 We did look at conceptually just those sketches.
19:30:47 But incrementally, they will come in with residential
19:30:52 elevations to show us what the final product is.
19:30:56 Also, we review these huge projects incrementally

19:31:01 anyway.
19:31:02 So what we were concentrating on, because of the size
19:31:10 of 30 acres, with so many different uses, was, number
19:31:15 one, the detailing on the parking garage, which they
19:31:20 have done, and they are supplying us more detail, we
19:31:24 looked at the layout, the pedestrian connections, how
19:31:28 the project worked all together.
19:31:31 In terms of residential, the residential and the
19:31:35 hotel, they still are in the process of supplying us
19:31:45 the detailing of the buildings themselves.
19:31:48 >> Can you speak to us to the request for reduction of
19:31:51 the sign separation from 150 feet to 40 feet?
19:31:55 Do you know what that's about?
19:31:57 >>> No, I sure don't.
19:31:58 >> It was an objection that staff made initially and I
19:32:01 haven't seen the new report so I don't know if you
19:32:03 changed it.
19:32:05 It's one of the waivers --
19:32:08 >>> You are dealing with the old staff report. That
19:32:10 request is removed.
19:32:11 >> Okay, great.
19:32:12 I can't wait to see the new staff report.

19:32:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Any more questions by council members?
19:32:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Quickly.
19:32:23 >>GWEN MILLER: All right, quickly.
19:32:25 >> Condition 32 has a strange clause in it.
19:32:28 At the end of the condition, it says that the
19:32:31 developer shall submit for the right-of-way permit for
19:32:33 the second crosswalk enhancement within 60 days a
19:32:36 request by the association.
19:32:42 Why?
19:32:44 Mrs. Abernathy?
19:32:46 >>> The neighborhood association has some concern
19:32:47 about whether the crosswalks were going to work at
19:32:50 Lois.
19:32:50 So we structured the conditions to say that we would
19:32:53 put the first crosswalk in.
19:32:55 We would study it, see if it worked, and then once we
19:32:59 established that it was working, then we would go
19:33:02 ahead and do the second crosswalk.
19:33:04 >> What if it didn't work?
19:33:06 >> Then we would look for some other type of crosswalk
19:33:09 enhancement
19:33:23 I also like Mr. Miranda have a little problem with too

19:33:25 much control directly from a neighborhood association
19:33:28 as related to a PD condition.
19:33:34 I'm sorry, I spoke for you.
19:33:44 >> We get a new report.
19:34:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this.
19:34:12 Living in a neighborhood that mirrors this
19:34:15 neighborhood as ours, traffic, income, so forth, so
19:34:20 on, in 1974, a company came to terms with what was
19:34:29 then called Tampa Bay mall.
19:34:30 If I was to tell you that I had more traffic now
19:34:33 without Tampa Bay mall, you are going to think I'm
19:34:36 crazy.
19:34:37 I challenge anybody in the city to do a traffic study
19:34:41 of MacDill Avenue, of Gomez Avenue, of Havana
19:34:48 Avenue, as to the backup that we have there now
19:34:51 without the mall.
19:34:56 And it ain't the tenant to the mall that bought the
19:34:59 property.
19:35:02 You're right, Mr. Dingfelder, you're thinking like
19:35:04 Charlie now.
19:35:07 But when you start looking at those things, and you
19:35:10 look at the expansion of the hospital, like an

19:35:13 expansion of property there, you look at the expansion
19:35:15 of another hospital, more traffic, you look at maybe 4
19:35:19 or 500 doctors that work there, I think one of them
19:35:22 lives there.
19:35:23 There's nothing wrong with that.
19:35:25 When you look at the traffic patterns of that
19:35:27 neighborhood, you look at the Highlands development,
19:35:29 another one or two buildings added since 1974, all
19:35:33 those things add to traffic.
19:35:36 When you say I don't need any more parking, and all of
19:35:40 a sudden one individual hospital builds a 10 or
19:35:43 11-story parking garage, they don't park airplanes
19:35:47 there.
19:35:47 When you look at these things, it's incumbent to say
19:35:51 that I'm better off living where I'm at when I had the
19:35:56 mall than I am where I'm at now without the mall.
19:35:58 This may or may not be the same thing happening in
19:36:02 this neighborhood.
19:36:04 But I didn't have the traffic that I have now.
19:36:06 Traffic on MacDill between MLK and Tampa Bay backs
19:36:12 up at least two to three blocks in the afternoons.
19:36:16 Same thing happens, you can't cross Lake and Habana

19:36:20 between 430 and 5:30. It's impossible.
19:36:27 There is no traffic calming there. So I agree with
19:36:29 Reverend Scott, this development can go on right now
19:36:33 without any vote of this council other than if it
19:36:36 wasn't for height and a special use on residential.
19:36:41 Whether the crosswalks are going to work or whether
19:36:43 they are done electronically, on a new venue that St.
19:36:48 Pete already has is unknown.
19:36:49 I can't speak for that.
19:36:54 We mentioned reclaimed water.
19:36:55 I would imagine and say to you that this project would
19:36:58 use it.
19:36:59 It's accessible to them to use, if the airport and
19:37:03 other large venues like Westshore mall and
19:37:06 international mall would sign up for it.
19:37:09 That would bring in then three or four other large
19:37:13 developers like hospitals and sporting events and so
19:37:16 forth that would also use reclaimed water.
19:37:20 It's frustrating to sit here, and like Mr. Scott and
19:37:23 Mr. Dingfelder and the rest us, with the information
19:37:27 you have on here to review.
19:37:31 Is that correct?

19:37:31 And this is not the first time.
19:37:33 This is an ongoing event that somehow, whether they
19:37:37 transmit it over and we don't get it is another
19:37:40 question.
19:37:40 And I can't blame the developer.
19:37:42 There's something in the system that doesn't work.
19:37:44 So these things are given to us today at a moment's
19:37:49 notice.
19:37:51 The objections, from what I understand, were elicited
19:37:54 from the original document that was sent over by
19:37:57 transportation, sewer, whatever we have there,
19:38:02 developed from the statement that I heard from the
19:38:04 city person, was that been settled.
19:38:10 And it's a difficult thing to do but they can Bill
19:38:14 build what they want to build now.
19:38:15 Maybe one or two stories, not as high.
19:38:17 And I don't know what that height is.
19:38:21 So I remember in the old days, you couldn't build
19:38:24 anything around the airport.
19:38:25 Because everything couldn't be built because of
19:38:27 airline.
19:38:31 That's changed.

19:38:32 Now you can build the mall.
19:38:33 You can build this.
19:38:34 You can build across the street.
19:38:35 You can build next to an airplane hangar.
19:38:37 Because it's becoming a metropolitan city.
19:38:39 A city that is going to have a lot more density, and
19:38:44 the only way we can solve these density problems in a
19:38:48 major run is to have different forms ever
19:38:50 transportation.
19:38:53 Although it's not specific on that because other than
19:38:56 subways, which you can't build unless they float on
19:39:00 the ground, there's other avenues you can do.
19:39:03 People move here from Philadelphia and New York and
19:39:04 Chicago because they don't want to see the train.
19:39:07 I got news for you.
19:39:08 In a very few years you are going to have to move back
19:39:11 or you are going to see the train.
19:39:12 And that's the way it is.
19:39:14 That's the way it is.
19:39:17 I know a lot of people said I got tired of listening
19:39:19 to choo-choo-choo.
19:39:20 It's going to happen.

19:39:22 Whether I like it or not, whether we want it or not,
19:39:24 it's going to have to happen or you are going to have
19:39:26 to walk to work because you are not going to be
19:39:28 automobile to drive.
19:39:29 And it's not specific about this site.
19:39:32 It specific about the whole city.
19:39:33 We are becoming a large metropolitan city.
19:39:38 And that's all it is.
19:39:39 And there's a lot of land to be developed in certain
19:39:42 east part of town, north part of town.
19:39:45 And when those things are gone, the only way you can
19:39:47 go is high with a lot of people living in the
19:39:50 buildings.
19:39:50 And that's what you see happening now throughout the
19:39:52 city.
19:39:54 So Madam Chair, that's all I got to say.
19:39:56 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
19:39:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know if we should close.
19:40:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We should continue it for more
19:40:06 staff information.
19:40:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nobody had a chance to look at it.
19:40:16 >> We were continued for a month at the last hearing.

19:40:19 The same report that was distributed for the last
19:40:21 hearing, at which we were continued.
19:40:23 >> The staff report I was just looking at which is the
19:40:25 earlier staff report from March said reference a $3.6
19:40:28 million.
19:40:29 >> We were here in June.
19:40:33 >> Reference the 3.6 million and there was a staff
19:40:35 objection that said the 3.6 million would be on the
19:40:38 site plan.
19:40:39 I read through the site plan four times and I don't
19:40:42 see the reference to 3.6 million.
19:40:43 >> Because it's inconsistent with the DRI requirement
19:40:46 for impact fees and that's why it's not on there.
19:40:50 >> Explain that in some lay terms.
19:40:52 >>> Transportation mitigation in the Westshore area
19:40:53 DRI is required to pay impact fees.
19:40:57 That's the mitigation.
19:40:59 That $3.6 million was a calculation of a proportionate
19:41:03 share that is not the way you mitigate impacts in the
19:41:06 Westshore area wide DRI.
19:41:08 >> So in other words you are going to continue.
19:41:10 So $3.6 million is not a reality.

19:41:13 >>> We pay our impact fees.
19:41:15 Whatever those impact fees are that's going to again
19:41:17 on the ultimate development that we come and ask.
19:41:24 >> Isn't it in fact calculated here today --
19:41:27 >>> It could be calculated today.
19:41:28 Based on the presumed entitlements that we are
19:41:31 requesting.
19:41:32 >> Right.
19:41:32 Tough square footage.
19:41:33 Now what the deal is.
19:41:34 So why isn't it calculated and why isn't the number in
19:41:37 the site plan?
19:41:38 >>> It doesn't need to be.
19:41:40 It's in the Westshore area wide DRI development order
19:41:44 says you are obligated to pay your impact fees to
19:41:46 mitigate traffic, whatever you ask for a permit for,
19:41:49 you have to pay those fees.
19:41:50 Those fees can be used at the discretion of the city
19:41:53 in the impact fee zone.
19:41:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
19:42:05 >>> Melanie Calloway.
19:42:06 I just want to it rate that 3.6 million is not impact

19:42:10 fees.
19:42:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what I'm confused about.
19:42:14 Is there impact fees plus the mitigation fee?
19:42:23 >>> When you are within the Westshore DRI and
19:42:26 commercial site plan you are required to do a new
19:42:28 traffic analysis, and deal with your on-site
19:42:30 mitigation at that point in time.
19:42:33 Oftentimes what does happen is opposed to waiting for
19:42:36 commercial site plan review and mitigation can be
19:42:39 dealt with at that time.
19:42:40 What typically happens is it happens actually at the
19:42:43 rezoning level because people like to know and people
19:42:45 lake to have that on their site plan.
19:42:48 Understand that when this originally came through,
19:42:49 Melanie reviewed it in that man are and that's how she
19:42:53 came up with the 3.6.
19:42:56 Petitioner indicated that they did not want to place
19:42:57 it on the site plan with the provisions of Westshore
19:43:02 DRI and said we don't have to deal with this
19:43:05 commercial site plan, and that is in fact correct.
19:43:08 So regardless of whether or not you put it on the site
19:43:10 plan or don't put it on the site plan, because I

19:43:13 understand -- and please correct me if I am wrong --
19:43:15 80% is a DRI threshold of the Westshore DRI, they are
19:43:19 going to be obligated to provide another
19:43:22 transportation analysis, and that calculation will be
19:43:25 dealt with then.
19:43:28 Dunk.
19:43:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And now go back to my original
19:43:30 concern which I think we should have some mitigation,
19:43:33 specific mitigation provisions on how this
19:43:36 neighborhood, this immediate neighborhood, can expect
19:43:38 some of that mitigation money to be used.
19:43:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On traffic calming.
19:43:44 >> On various traffic calming and other traffic
19:43:46 related issues.
19:43:46 And that's my concern.
19:43:49 That's my concern with closing the public hearing and
19:43:52 being done with it.
19:43:55 I feel that the neighborhood is not adequately
19:43:57 protected at this point with the details that were
19:44:01 given assurances. That way they can walk home with
19:44:03 the site plan that says that the city agrees to do --
19:44:07 the city and the developer agree to do XY and Z and

19:44:10 they can keep this for the next five years when the
19:44:13 project is build in the next five years and the
19:44:15 mitigation doesn't happen.
19:44:16 They can walk into City Hall with this document and
19:44:18 not have to worry about trying to figure out what
19:44:20 calculating, you know, the mitigation fee impact and
19:44:23 everything else is about.
19:44:24 So that's the part that disturbs me.
19:44:30 >>> Council members, that's simply not the way the DRI
19:44:33 development order is structured.
19:44:35 And the city has the discretion to take the money that
19:44:39 the developer is obligated to pay and spend it where
19:44:41 the city chooses to spend it.
19:44:43 It's not our responsibility.
19:44:44 It's not in the discretion of the neighborhood.
19:44:47 It's up to the city to decide where to spend the
19:44:50 money.
19:44:50 You cannot calculate those costs today, because we
19:44:54 don't know exactly whether we are going to ask for
19:44:57 permits, or exactly what's on the site plan.
19:45:00 It would be in a calculation.
19:45:03 You don't know what the time frame is. When the time

19:45:05 comes, that's when we are obligated to make the
19:45:07 calculation.
19:45:08 Give the city the money and the city decides how to
19:45:11 spend it.
19:45:11 What you're suggest has never been done in the
19:45:14 Westshore area DRI.
19:45:15 And we don't want to be anything.
19:45:20 >> Not asking to be a guinea pig but you are asking
19:45:22 the neighborhood to be the guinea pig because you are
19:45:24 the ones that have the impact.
19:45:29 If you want my support anyway, which maybe you don't
19:45:32 care, about but I would suggest that we work together
19:45:34 to come up with the specific language about what these
19:45:38 folks can expect.
19:45:39 Whether or not there's a price tag attached to it, you
19:45:41 know, maybe, maybe not.
19:45:43 I'll talk to legal about that.
19:45:45 But I think that they deserve better.
19:45:48 They deserve more, okay?
19:45:50 And it's more than weak do tonight.
19:45:58 >>> We have spent six months in this process, Mr.
19:46:01 Dingfelder, and the only request made by us was to

19:46:03 address pedestrian safety, which we think we have
19:46:05 done.
19:46:07 I think it is totally unfair after continuing us for a
19:46:10 month at the last hearing to ask for a further
19:46:12 continuance, when we have been in the process this
19:46:16 long.
19:46:16 The decisions about what needs to be done or the city
19:46:20 decisions, not our decisions, not the neighborhood's
19:46:23 decisions.
19:46:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In an attempt to move things ahead,
19:46:28 because I think everybody wants us to move ahead, I
19:46:31 have a question of Julia, which is, if City Council
19:46:35 wants to be able to reassure the neighborhood that we
19:46:38 are not setting a specific dollar to it but we know
19:46:41 there's going to be several million dollars in
19:46:43 transportation impact fees which would be a enough to
19:46:46 address traffic calming on the residential streets
19:46:49 adjacent to this development, can you figure out a way
19:46:52 to craft language that could be part of the record of
19:46:55 this, that would indicate that this money will be
19:46:59 spent to accomplish that for the neighborhood, and
19:47:03 that the city will insure that the lift station issue

19:47:06 is addressed, and that they are going to do a LEED
19:47:10 building?
19:47:13 >>JULIA COLE: I'll take the last one first because I
19:47:15 can answer that clearly. The last one, the LEED
19:47:18 certification, spoke to the petitioner about, we can
19:47:20 add a note on the site plan for the lift station.
19:47:24 That is really something that you need to ask city
19:47:27 staff after this hearing to take a look at.
19:47:29 It is really not relevant to this zoning hearing.
19:47:31 As relates to the zoning issue, that is a very
19:47:34 complicated question.
19:47:35 As I explained, this is a petition that is within the
19:47:38 Westshore DRI, and what I did explain because I didn't
19:47:41 get involved in this, we are in a transportation
19:47:44 concurrency area, we are in the Westshore DRI, and we
19:47:48 had a lot of limitations per code and per the
19:47:53 Westshore DRI, how transportation moneys that are
19:47:55 coming in as it relates to mitigation can be spent.
19:47:59 You also have the initial requirement in the Westshore
19:48:01 DRI for a certain amount of money is paid by a
19:48:05 developer for those types of neighborhood
19:48:07 improvements, which, yes, includes potentially -- and

19:48:15 as a result of that, because the petitioner is in the
19:48:17 position of having to pay under the Westshore DRI, any
19:48:20 kind of extra requirement, would really be a violation
19:48:23 of the Westshore DRI, and that's my legal opinion, and
19:48:28 I have actually given the same legal opinion to city
19:48:30 transportation staff.
19:48:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was never the intent, it
19:48:35 wasn't extra.
19:48:36 Not over and above.
19:48:37 It's specifically to try and target the money that is
19:48:39 being committed and try to target it so it stays
19:48:43 within that community for specific transportation
19:48:46 mitigation.
19:48:48 That's what it's about.
19:48:49 So I think we need to put on our creative hat.
19:48:54 >>> I think your question is really in the Westshore
19:48:56 DRI and to allow moneys to be spent because the
19:48:59 Westshore DRI is very specific.
19:49:03 How moneys -- for what moneys can be collected, and
19:49:07 how the moneys are ultimately spent.
19:49:10 And, in fact, as it relates to the neighborhood
19:49:13 improvement fund, there is a committee that was

19:49:15 created specifically to make those decisions.
19:49:18 So I'm not really sure that we using this process can
19:49:22 bind that committee.
19:49:22 So that's what my concern is.
19:49:24 I will be happy to take a look at that issue between
19:49:27 first and second reading, and report back to you at
19:49:30 second reading on that issue if that is the
19:49:32 inclination of council.
19:49:34 I think the petitioner has a right to have an up or
19:49:38 down vote on what they requested.
19:49:40 I do believe they agreed to the LEED certification
19:49:42 issues so we can go ahead, and I will ask the
19:49:44 petitioner to state on the record that they do agree,
19:49:47 and we can deal with that issue.
19:49:48 If there's a continuance that will be up to petitioner
19:49:52 to let now if they are willing to have that
19:49:55 continuance or not.
19:49:58 >>GWEN MILLER: You stated that the city can choose
19:50:01 where the money is being spent.
19:50:02 Can we make a separate motion after this one and state
19:50:07 that we want the city to use that money to help the
19:50:11 neighborhood with their traffic problem?

19:50:13 Can we do a separate motion for that?
19:50:16 >>JULIA COLE: Well, the problem is, and that is
19:50:18 something I can work out, but the problem is, because
19:50:21 this is a Westshore DRI area, the Westshore DRI in and
19:50:24 of itself specifically indicates how moneys are spent,
19:50:27 and for what types of improvements, either as part of
19:50:30 that neighborhood improvement fund, or once you get to
19:50:34 that 80% of that commercial site plan, and do you a
19:50:38 traffic analysis, it very specifically indicates what
19:50:41 type of improvements can be required as part of that
19:50:43 analysis.
19:50:46 I mean, I can look at it and quite frankly, we
19:50:51 probably need to take a look at the Westshore DRI.
19:50:53 It's very limiting.
19:50:54 And I know he has that frustration as well.
19:51:05 >> Just to reiterate, the petitioner does have the
19:51:10 right to ask council to either -- to vote either to
19:51:14 vote and to have it either voted up or down.
19:51:17 But I would just caution council based on what Ms.
19:51:20 Cole said that it sounds like the issue is outside the
19:51:24 scope of council's decision with regard to voting that
19:51:28 because it appears that it is actually an agreement

19:51:34 the city would have with whatever parameters the city
19:51:37 must work within, between them and the community.
19:51:39 So within the scope of the constraints of the DRI, I
19:51:43 don't believe would be appropriate for council to base
19:51:45 its decision on a linkage of the spending of that
19:51:50 money, specificity with regard to this particular site
19:51:53 plan with regard to this particular zoning.
19:51:55 And I believe Ms. Cole stated that in different terms.
19:52:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we have to close the public
19:52:02 hearing.
19:52:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
19:52:03 >>GWEN MILLER: It's a long time.
19:52:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask a question of
19:52:08 Mr. Rotella.
19:52:10 That is would he be willing to work with council and
19:52:12 staff to revisit the DRI not in terms of this but
19:52:16 generally, so that we can better protect the
19:52:18 neighborhood?
19:52:21 >>RON ROTELLA: You know, I'm sitting here as
19:52:23 frustrated as everybody else.
19:52:25 Mrs. Saul-Sena, I talked to you two years ago at a
19:52:28 public hearing at the convention center the necessity,

19:52:33 I thought, to change the transportation impact fee to
19:52:38 allow pedestrian improvements to be an eligible
19:52:41 expenditure.
19:52:43 Other cities do it.
19:52:44 I understand the transportation division sometime back
19:52:47 did not want to see the money go to improvements and I
19:52:53 understand why, like FDOT they want to look at roads,
19:52:55 and signals, and intersection improvements, so they do
19:52:58 not look at pedestrian improvements as capacity
19:53:03 improvements.
19:53:03 To me, if you live two blocks from International
19:53:08 Plaza, and you are in Carver City and Lincoln Gardens,
19:53:13 and you leave your car at home, and because there are
19:53:16 pedestrian improvements that encourage you to walk
19:53:19 rather than take your car, then why isn't that a
19:53:21 capacity improvement?
19:53:22 So I'm as frustrated as you folks are in that regard.
19:53:26 They have agreed, every major developer in Westshore
19:53:30 has agreed to amend our DRI to allow transit to be a
19:53:34 specific mitigation for traffic and pedestrian
19:53:40 improvements.
19:53:40 What we need to do is get it done.

19:53:43 I mean, we agree with you.
19:53:47 And if that change was made, then you can make those
19:53:49 expenditures to the pedestrian improvements.
19:53:51 The MPO did a study for you and us.
19:53:54 It's the pedestrian plan.
19:53:56 So there's a plan there that can be implemented.
19:54:00 And the mitigation dollars that they will pay under
19:54:04 the DRI, not just them but every other developer, can
19:54:07 be used to implement the pedestrian plan that's
19:54:12 approved.
19:54:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:54:15 We need to close the public hearing.
19:54:16 >> So moved.
19:54:17 >> Second.
19:54:17 (Motion carried)
19:54:20 79 what is the pleasure of the council?
19:54:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to support this with the
19:54:26 inclusion.
19:54:30 >> Second.
19:54:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
19:54:31 Question on the motion.
19:54:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not going to support it for the

19:54:34 reason I stated before.
19:54:35 I think we are not being creative.
19:54:37 I think we are not being the least bit of creative to
19:54:40 protect this neighborhood.
19:54:41 I think we are just turning the other cheek, we are
19:54:43 behind a lot of bureaucracy and a lot of legal mumbo
19:54:47 jumbo.
19:54:47 And this neighborhood is going to walk away
19:54:49 disappointed.
19:54:50 I'm seeing it in their faces.
19:54:52 I'm seeing it in their head shaking and that sort of
19:54:56 thing.
19:54:56 And I just don't think it's right.
19:54:58 And this neighborhood, if you think about it as being
19:55:00 surrounded piece by piece by piece on every single
19:55:04 side, and I think this city is under a -- we are
19:55:10 rushing to judgment.
19:55:11 They have waited an extra couple of months, an extra
19:55:13 month.
19:55:14 Big deal.
19:55:15 This is a $200 million project that's not going to get
19:55:19 built for how many years or whatever?

19:55:21 Big deal.
19:55:22 This neighborhood has been here for how many years, 50
19:55:25 or more?
19:55:28 50, 60 years.
19:55:29 Another month.
19:55:31 Shame on us.
19:55:34 Are we rushing to judgment on this?
19:55:36 Slow down a little bit and protect this neighborhood.
19:55:38 I'm not going to support this today.
19:55:40 We should leave it open.
19:55:41 We should continue it.
19:55:42 We should be creative.
19:55:45 Do whatever we have to do to protect this neighborhood
19:55:47 and include specifically mitigation so they can walk
19:55:51 away and know they have been protected.
19:55:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm for Lincoln Gardens.
19:56:03 I'm for the protection.
19:56:04 But you have to keep in mind what our attorney said to
19:56:06 us.
19:56:11 To change the process creates legal problems for this
19:56:15 government.
19:56:15 The issue is that they are willing to work with the

19:56:19 community, they are willing to work with the whole DRI
19:56:24 process, I heard Mr. Ron Rotella, to try to change
19:56:28 that and correct that.
19:56:28 I think and I believe that they are going to do that.
19:56:32 And I think that this community ultimately will be
19:56:36 protected.
19:56:37 I think they are showing good faith to try to work
19:56:39 with the community, and to try to enhance or improve
19:56:43 the whole pedestrian right-of-way.
19:56:46 I think that's the issue.
19:56:48 It's unfortunate we have to come tonight, this point
19:56:53 tonight, all frustrated.
19:56:55 But, Mr. Dingfelder, what I believe is right and what
19:56:58 I believe is fair for everybody, at the end of the
19:57:01 day, that's the issue for me, what is right, what is
19:57:04 fair for the community, what is right and what is fair
19:57:08 for the developer.
19:57:09 And so I'm going to support it.
19:57:12 And I am going to trust Mr. Bricklemyer and you and
19:57:16 these folks are going to do us right about this
19:57:19 community. Otherwise...
19:57:26 >>GWEN MILLER: The city said they were going to see if

19:57:30 they can do some traffic calming on the side streets,
19:57:32 too.
19:57:36 We are going to hold the city to their promise that
19:57:38 they are going to go to the side streets.
19:57:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move the motion for approval.
19:57:47 Can I state my motion now?
19:57:48 Thank you.
19:57:48 I'm not a lawyer.
19:57:50 I'm not the smartest guy in the room.
19:57:53 I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
19:57:56 But I'll tell you one thing.
19:57:57 We are dickering these folks for contract zoning.
19:58:01 Either you have good zoning, or you have bad zoning.
19:58:04 I've said that before many times.
19:58:06 But you don't make good zoning out of bad zoning by
19:58:09 doing other things till everybody is happy.
19:58:14 I wasn't happy with Tampa Bay mall moved in.
19:58:17 I was thrilled when it was finished.
19:58:20 They didn't impact me one iota.
19:58:24 What impacts the other sports venues with traffic, you
19:58:27 talk about drunks, not all of them, let me say that.
19:58:32 Talk about speeding.

19:58:33 Talk about being uncourteous.
19:58:35 And not only in sporting events.
19:58:37 Don't get Mr. Me wrong.
19:58:39 It's a mentality that we have as human beings today
19:58:41 about not caring.
19:58:44 I was going to say another word but in respect to my
19:58:47 mother I won't do that.
19:58:48 Don't care about anything.
19:58:49 When these things are done, how do I know that traffic
19:58:56 calming is going to work?
19:58:57 I don't.
19:58:58 How do I know that what's been proposed is going to be
19:59:00 successful?
19:59:01 I don't think I oh know but they are putting 200
19:59:03 million up.
19:59:04 200 million sounds like a lot of money.
19:59:06 It's less than one F 35 jet fighter and that jet
19:59:14 fighter isn't bigger than this room.
19:59:16 So what I'm saying is perspective.
19:59:19 Looking at moving traffic.
19:59:23 I said it earlier, that they are going to try to work
19:59:25 it out, whatever traffic may come into the area will

19:59:31 be part of the component and they will be willing to
19:59:33 address that.
19:59:36 Do we have everything that we want?
19:59:37 I don't think so.
19:59:41 But I also think -- and I wasn't here when this
19:59:44 started, but this started when Santa Claus came to
19:59:46 town the year 2006, and he didn't leave many gifts
19:59:51 behind.
19:59:52 I can understand why.
19:59:56 It's a situation where don't matter -- I said this
20:00:02 before, and I lover everybody here.
20:00:05 I wish you the best of everything.
20:00:06 But I said I'll stand alone, if I want to vote against
20:00:12 something, or for something.
20:00:14 I'm not a potted plat.
20:00:15 Downtown think any one of us seven are.
20:00:18 But somehow or other, we are getting that mentality
20:00:21 that we are potted plants.
20:00:23 At least I am.
20:00:30 The green grass doesn't grow and it turns a little
20:00:33 brown if you overwater it.
20:00:35 But what I am proud to say, because I am going to go

20:00:37 into reclaim, and get the reclaimed in.
20:00:41 You will if you get the components that use reclaim.
20:00:44 You can't have reclaimed if you have to go 200 miles,
20:00:51 If you have this component in international mall,
20:00:53 Westshore mall, airport, golf course, the sporting
20:00:57 event, the hospital, things of that nature, you will
20:01:01 get reclaimed.
20:01:02 And you know what, the old saying, you are either
20:01:05 going to use it or you are going to lose it.
20:01:07 And I'm talking about reclaimed. If this city doesn't
20:01:09 do something in the near future about reclaimed, the
20:01:12 vultures of the water world are going to come get us
20:01:15 because they want it real, real bad.
20:01:31 The first mistake we make, we won.
20:01:33 So it's not specifically about this plan.
20:01:34 This plan can be concluded like Reverend Scott said,
20:01:38 other than height restrictions and a special use for
20:01:40 residential.
20:01:40 Who doesn't want residential in their neighborhood?
20:01:43 I'll tell you what.
20:01:44 If this seat wasn't here and if I didn't have what I
20:01:47 have over there now I would welcome this right now

20:01:49 where the old Tampa Bay mall was, because this is an
20:01:52 asset to the community.
20:01:58 That's how I look at.
20:02:00 Looking at lift stations.
20:02:02 You mean I'm sitting here as an elected officials and
20:02:04 say we are going to build this, but not going to move?
20:02:14 If I'm thinking the people in those apartments are not
20:02:16 capable of doing their job, either belong here or
20:02:21 don't belong there.
20:02:22 One or the other.
20:02:23 Is everything perfect in life?
20:02:24 Absolutely not.
20:02:25 Are we perfect?
20:02:26 I know I'm not.
20:02:27 I make mistakes today, hopefully not.
20:02:31 But who knows what I'll do tomorrow.
20:02:34 And these are the things that guide me when I make a
20:02:36 decision on the project.
20:02:37 I don't look at it and say, oh, what a beautiful
20:02:40 looking -- look at the water, it's blue.
20:02:42 Oh, look, green grass.
20:02:44 Huh-uh

20:02:45 I don't look at it that way.
20:02:46 I look at it, is it right?
20:02:49 Or is it wrong?
20:02:51 And that's the only judgment I use.
20:02:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Call for the question.
20:02:54 All in favor --
20:02:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It requires it to be read.
20:02:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have one?
20:03:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: See wherein this goes.
20:03:06 Madam Chair, members of the City Council, all
20:03:09 individuals in the audience, an audience rezoning
20:03:11 property in the general vicinity of 4010 and 4100 Boy
20:03:15 Scout Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida more
20:03:16 particularly described from zoning district
20:03:19 classification C 1 PD development mixed use office,
20:03:24 retail, hotel, residential, providing an effective
20:03:25 date.
20:03:26 >> We have a motion and second.
20:03:27 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:03:30 Opposes, Nay.
20:03:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and
20:03:37 Dingfelder voting no.

20:03:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Those changes that we specified with
20:03:44 the LEED building, all that is part of this?
20:03:47 >>JULIA COLE: That was part of the motion?
20:03:50 >> Yes.
20:03:50 May I say another thing?
20:03:52 I want to speak directly to the neighborhoods.
20:03:56 I plan to be here, unless God gives me another call,
20:03:59 called me twice and I fooled have been, came back.
20:04:05 For three years and few months, if this project is
20:04:08 completed by then, and if the lift station is not
20:04:11 there, and if those things don't work come see me, I
20:04:15 guarantee we'll work it out.
20:04:17 I'm not a developer.
20:04:18 I don't work for them, I work for you.
20:04:20 >>GWEN MILLER: And I'm going to make sure that the
20:04:22 transportation department goes out on those side
20:04:24 streets and see can we put the kind of traffic calming
20:04:28 down there.
20:04:31 Calvin, Mel Melanie, I'm going to hold you to that.
20:04:42 >> I'd like to ask legal to immediately work with Mr.
20:04:45 Rotella to incorporate the changes in the DRI which
20:04:47 will allow money to be spent on transit and pedestrian

20:04:52 improvements.
20:04:52 We have been talking about this for two years.
20:04:55 And it's way overdue.
20:04:58 That's my motion.
20:04:58 And report back in 30 days.
20:05:00 >> I have a motion and second.
20:05:03 >> Traffic calming.
20:05:05 Same thing.
20:05:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, I would also like
20:05:26 to request that when staff has a previous
20:05:29 recommendation, has a new recommendation, that they
20:05:31 give to the council before the zoning meeting.
20:05:33 I don't know what we have to do to accomplish that.
20:05:35 But that's like a basic necessity for us to
20:05:39 competently --
20:05:42 >>> That was given to you guys prior to the previous
20:05:44 hearing.
20:05:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe there was a
20:05:47 misunderstanding and a miscommunication.
20:05:49 I took a look at the background material and was
20:05:51 referred to as a new report, actually was the report
20:05:54 that was given at a previous time.

20:05:56 And nothing had changed since the last time.
20:05:59 I believe it was the report ---oh-the day was June
20:06:05 6th.
20:06:05 So I apologize to council.
20:06:07 >>> I'm sorry, I had the March one.
20:06:10 >> There was one after that that was given.
20:06:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No matter what, when we get a new
20:06:16 agenda the update should have been included and it was
20:06:19 not.
20:06:19 >>> There were no updates. The site plan was the same
20:06:22 from the previous hearing.
20:06:25 >> We get a new agenda from week to week.
20:06:27 Whatever that agenda is, whatever is on there, we
20:06:29 should get that.
20:06:32 Like it's a new agenda.
20:06:38 >>GWEN MILLER: You mean the petition.
20:06:41 You mean they would like to pass out the new ones
20:06:44 tonight.
20:06:47 >> JILL FINNEY: Land Development Coordination.
20:07:10 I have been sworn.
20:07:12 I notice a lot of people still in the audience.
20:07:14 I just want them to know this is the last petition.

20:07:17 We were clearing the agenda.
20:07:21 So that they are not here waiting for anything.
20:07:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 6.
20:07:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe the usual with you regard
20:07:29 to number 8, if you want to just state it again, the
20:07:32 petitioner, that will be withdrawn but I want people
20:07:39 to know if they are here for number 8 there was a
20:07:41 request for withdrawal.
20:07:48 >> On number 6, looking at your staff report, dated
20:07:51 July 19th, and I just want to make sure when you
20:07:56 go over that, that you include the history on it.
20:08:07 As I recall, in looking at my notes.
20:08:11 >>> I'll go through and read it and then read what the
20:08:13 updates were to it.
20:08:14 Okay.
20:08:15 We are here on petition Z 06-146 located at 411 south
20:08:21 Albany Avenue going from RM-16 to PD planned
20:08:24 development for multifamily townhouse style
20:08:28 residential units.
20:08:29 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property to
20:08:31 allow for the development of four 2-story units.
20:08:37 The 8,142 square foot site is located in an RM-16

20:08:42 zoning district and surrounded by a mix of multifamily
20:08:45 residential units, single family townhouses, and
20:08:48 single family detached homes.
20:08:51 At the request of City Council, on February 22nd,
20:08:55 2007, petitioner has made several revisions to the
20:08:57 site plan, in an effort to satisfy some of council's
20:09:01 concerns.
20:09:03 >> All right.
20:09:04 Stop right there.
20:09:04 Some of council's concerns.
20:09:05 I think we need to be extremely clear what council's
20:09:08 motion was and what our concerns were four months,
20:09:12 five months.
20:09:13 We forget exactly what it was.
20:09:16 But I have some notes in here to indicate I thought we
20:09:19 had some problems with four units.
20:09:22 >>> Yes, that was one of the primary concerns was to
20:09:24 reduce it from four to three.
20:09:28 They are allowed to have three units on the site as it
20:09:30 is.
20:09:32 So they asked to reduce the mass and scale of the
20:09:36 project.

20:09:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Don't be vague when you are talking
20:09:42 about what council's motions were and that sort of
20:09:45 thing because we rely on you to -- so February
20:09:50 22nd, council said reduce this to three.
20:09:53 Okay.
20:09:53 The petitioner chose obviously that they chose not to
20:09:57 do that for whatever reason, that I am sure they are
20:09:59 going to tell us about, and they are back here again
20:10:01 with four.
20:10:02 So we need to hear that.
20:10:05 >>> Yes.
20:10:05 I am getting to all of that.
20:10:08 >> Is that in the report?
20:10:09 >>> That they are maintaining four units is in here,
20:10:12 and -- yes, okay.
20:10:14 The petitioner has reduced the building square footage
20:10:17 from 9,360 square feet to 7,954 square feet, a
20:10:23 reduction of 1,406 square feet, maintaining four
20:10:27 residential units, which had been requested to lower
20:10:30 it to three.
20:10:31 Due to the reduction and building size, the petitioner
20:10:34 now set aside green space requirements and is in

20:10:40 excess of 142 square feet, and therefore the green
20:10:43 space waiver that was previously requested is no
20:10:45 longer required.
20:10:47 The building facade has been redesigned with the two 2
20:10:51 car garage, replacing with two single car garages in
20:10:54 the front of the structure, plus the appearance of the
20:10:57 garage doors which was a concern that had been brought
20:10:59 up by the neighborhood.
20:11:00 The maximum building height is 33.5 feet.
20:11:05 The building elevations also showed the front portion
20:11:08 of the building has been reduced in mass and scale
20:11:10 allowing for more appropriate transition between the
20:11:14 bungalows to the north and the massive quadplex to the
20:11:18 east, south and west.
20:11:21 If you remember the rooftop garden area, they have
20:11:24 removed that as well.
20:11:33 Elmo?
20:11:36 Here is the zoning man of the area.
20:11:39 You can see the approved area.
20:12:00 Albany street.
20:12:00 This is looking -- this is a picture of the subject
20:12:04 property.

20:12:06 And as you can see from this photo, there's five
20:12:11 mailboxes and five units on the site currently.
20:12:21 This is the bungalow to the north.
20:12:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The house next door where council
20:12:40 said it was going to maintain it, it's being restored.
20:12:45 [ Applause ]
20:12:47 Did you know that?
20:12:50 >>> Excellent.
20:12:54 Fun fin this is located directly across the street to
20:12:56 the east.
20:12:58 This is a bungalow.
20:13:06 It's not in the best of condition.
20:13:08 And this on the opposite side of that.
20:13:20 And this is directly south, abutting property to the
20:13:24 south.
20:13:34 Based on the revision, staff has removed their
20:13:38 objection to the site plan.
20:13:40 We have no objections at this point.
20:13:55 >> We don't have the report.
20:13:56 I still have the report with all the objections.
20:14:08 >>> 7-10-07.
20:14:29 >> Planning Commission okay?

20:14:31 >>> Yes.
20:14:31 They gave their report previously and they found it
20:14:33 consistent.
20:14:36 >>> Michael Horner.
20:14:37 I have been sworn.
20:14:40 14502 North Dale Mabry highway suite 200 Tampa
20:14:43 representing optimist development.
20:14:49 Do we know the status of the council members?
20:14:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have a quorum and they are
20:14:57 probably listening to the television.
20:14:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Eating.
20:15:01 >>> With me this evening is Ken Cower, project
20:15:04 architect, the Allen McFay, the developer, also Shaun
20:15:07 Hey of Optimist Development Corporation who is
20:15:09 proposing this project before you tonight.
20:15:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Everybody has been sworn in that's
20:15:13 going to speak on this?
20:15:14 >>> Everybody has been sworn in.
20:15:18 >> Why don't we get that out of the way?
20:15:20 Pleas rise if you plan on speaking and you haven't
20:15:26 been sworn in.
20:15:29 (Oath administered by Clerk).

20:15:35 >>> Horner: With the three of you, actually two of
20:15:38 you sitting here today but three of the full council,
20:15:40 about three months ago I believe the April hearing
20:15:42 before City Council, we continued this case for a
20:15:45 number of concerns.
20:15:47 You referenced a couple of those.
20:15:48 I'm going to go through a brief review and some of the
20:16:00 concerns that Jill touched on and I am going to go to
20:16:03 the design elevations, the city plan review items, and
20:16:06 then Mr. LaFave will close briefly.
20:16:09 First we are proud to be here because we worked
20:16:11 diligently with staff.
20:16:12 We also had numerous discussions with the property
20:16:15 owners.
20:16:16 We have also had discussions coordinated plan reviews,
20:16:21 PBS, design changes and try to keep them abreast as he
20:16:26 proceeded through this review process.
20:16:27 Our prior PD as you may recall --
20:16:33 >> The middle of the road sector, which permits 35 per
20:16:39 acre.
20:16:53 At the prior PD it was referenced in the report.
20:16:55 This was what was proposed back in April, still four

20:17:00 units, larger structure.
20:17:03 It had four sets of double car garages.
20:17:06 It had two sets of double garage doors on the Albany
20:17:09 frontage.
20:17:10 Two separate double garage doors on the alley side.
20:17:13 We have gone through a number of design changes.
20:17:16 What could we accomplish?
20:17:17 What were the major concerns on this request?
20:17:21 Obviously the garage door is in the architectural
20:17:24 frontage.
20:17:25 >> Wait a second.
20:17:26 I think our staff hasn't given us these new drawings.
20:17:29 >> These are the old drawings.
20:17:31 >>> Well, I want to see the new drawings.
20:17:35 >> Should be on page 2 of the site plan.
20:17:38 >> We don't have our site plan.
20:17:42 Everybody on page 2 of their site plan?
20:17:55 Our footprint, this is the building footprint, the
20:17:58 total square footage.
20:17:59 Jill referenced that reduction, been reduced from 4684
20:18:04 square feet to approximately 3950 square feet.
20:18:08 The green space in the prior PD plan was 2950 square

20:18:12 feet.
20:18:13 And as you will recall, there was a deficiency.
20:18:16 We needed to have waivers for the open space.
20:18:18 And Mary Bryson -- Mary Daniels Bryson indicated
20:18:24 objection and a waiver was noted, a technical
20:18:27 objection on the record.
20:18:28 We agreed to pay the city for the balance of that
20:18:30 based on the surcharge in lieu of fee but we were
20:18:34 still under the required footage of open space.
20:18:36 We also had some of the required waivers.
20:18:38 We also had to reference a rooftop garden you will see
20:18:43 on the overhead.
20:18:46 We thought it was a nice urban design element for the
20:18:51 rooftop, council expressed certain concerns about that
20:18:54 being a party deck, evening hours.
20:18:57 We eliminate that entirely.
20:18:59 It's important to know, council, that this current
20:19:02 property is developed with a five-unit rental rooming
20:19:05 house.
20:19:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How many square feet?
20:19:11 >>> Is it all right if we finish our presentation and
20:19:13 we receive council questions?

20:19:15 If that's reasonable?
20:19:18 I'm afraid to get two or three questions and then
20:19:20 stop.
20:19:21 About 2500 square feet is the answer.
20:19:25 No parking.
20:19:27 No handicapped parking space.
20:19:28 No retention.
20:19:38 Additionally this block went out for about a two oh
20:19:41 three block radius, council members, specifically
20:19:43 around the Horatio Albany intersection, went north a
20:19:47 couple blocks, south a couple blocks, out of that the
20:19:49 neighborhood perspective we have approximately 61
20:19:53 legal conforming multifamily apartments, town home,
20:19:57 quad type developments within that radius.
20:20:01 As Jill noted on the site plan as well as the
20:20:03 photographs, some of those are directly abutting two
20:20:11 lots directly to our south.
20:20:24 This quad development being catter-corner to the
20:20:28 southeast, and across the street to the east.
20:20:42 >> About 61 multifamily parcels in that 2 to 3 block
20:20:45 radius, north, south, east, west, those are two to
20:20:48 three story, 35 feet, 35 feet.

20:20:52 You saw the contemporary architect elements.
20:20:55 Saw the flat roofs, several garage doors.
20:20:58 Those have been there for quite some time, approved by
20:21:01 council.
20:21:01 We then had legal nonconforming uses where we actually
20:21:05 had converted single family residences.
20:21:07 They have been subdivided by their floor plan and also
20:21:11 had rental units within them.
20:21:12 One of those is directly east of us.
20:21:15 When you drive by the site you will see income
20:21:18 producing property and have been subdivided
20:21:21 internally.
20:21:22 It's also for sale.
20:21:23 We have listened to and gone back to the drawing board
20:21:26 several times.
20:21:27 We made numerous iterations.
20:21:29 I can't tell you how many design changes we have gone
20:21:31 through.
20:21:31 And my client will probably attest to what he's gone
20:21:34 through in terms of directing the architect and come
20:21:36 back and forth, with files no less than three or four
20:21:39 design plans and elevations to city staff as well.

20:21:42 We are not proposing a new site plan, new elevations,
20:21:49 but essentially, in our opinion, compatible
20:21:56 transitional structure that will directly relate to
20:21:59 the bungalow design, to the neighborhood as well as
20:22:03 interstates, with that large monstrosity to our south.
20:22:07 Very difficult to design, and market units surrounded
20:22:10 by those large scale quad developments.
20:22:13 What does this mean?
20:22:14 It means reduce impervious surface to 3950 square
20:22:20 feet.
20:22:21 It reduced -- impervious surface from 607.
20:22:27 The 3950 now a reduced building footprint size.
20:22:31 Reduce the garages from eight.
20:22:34 Four double garages, two on Albany, to the on the
20:22:42 island.
20:22:43 Alley.
20:22:43 To save the trees on the excite.
20:22:45 We exceeded all open space requirements.
20:22:47 We have no waivers, we have no objections.
20:22:49 This comes to you with full support from the Planning
20:22:52 Commission for consistency, staff support for the
20:22:55 architectural element in meeting all PD requirements

20:22:58 for compatibility.
20:22:59 Site plan review, transportation, stormwater which we
20:23:04 are doing under vault for stormwater retention
20:23:06 underneath the actual parking lot, in the front of the
20:23:08 spaces.
20:23:10 We asked ourselves, who is the most impacted lot on
20:23:13 this property, on this street?
20:23:15 It's probably the bungalow directly to the north.
20:23:17 That structure.
20:23:18 We actually went to that person and said, how do you
20:23:21 feel about our plans, our elevations, our site plan?
20:23:33 Let me read that letter for you and put it into the
20:23:35 record.
20:23:36 I'm not quite sure but still on the record, if not I
20:23:39 am going to read excerpts of it.
20:23:40 It's from Jane Liggett.
20:23:43 Since 1980 I have been refurbishing homes in the
20:23:46 corner block of south Albany.
20:23:49 I currently own 406, 407, and 409 south Albany.
20:23:54 This block in the whole neighborhood has come a long,
20:23:58 long way the past 27 years.
20:24:03 I'm very proud.

20:24:08 Over the years I have looked at that building 411
20:24:10 south Albany, with five apartments, it's actually a
20:24:14 rooming house and did not have the courage to purchase
20:24:16 it.
20:24:16 I saw nothing that could be done to really improve it.
20:24:19 Having seen development renderings, I am absolutely
20:24:23 delighted to say I hope City Council approves Mr.
20:24:26 LaFave's project.
20:24:27 This is a handsome building, will be a nice addition
20:24:30 to the neighborhood.
20:24:30 Signed, Jane Liggett.
20:24:33 We have touch as indicated earlier with Paul Thaley
20:24:38 through our PDF files, elevation designs, tried to do
20:24:42 follow-up phone calls.
20:24:43 I think quite honestly, and Paula is here to speak
20:24:48 forkers but I do believe she's quite impressed with
20:24:51 the changes.
20:24:52 In fact her comment was, this is really a nice
20:24:54 elevation, this is what we were hoping we could
20:24:56 achieve here.
20:24:59 Unfortunately she thought it was a three unit plan,
20:25:01 it's actually a four unit plan.

20:25:02 I think you will agree the staff gave a glowing
20:25:08 recommendation.
20:25:09 I think we have learned that opportunity because we
20:25:11 have gone back to the design board and just started
20:25:13 from scratch.
20:25:15 Last time comply with transportation design standards,
20:25:18 had to actually put in the double car garages.
20:25:21 Now those design standard features and transportation
20:25:23 conditions are not required.
20:25:25 We inverted back to our design and come up with
20:25:28 something that we think will fit into the
20:25:30 neighborhood, almost appears single family house with
20:25:33 two sting single garages in the front and two in the
20:25:37 babbling.
20:25:39 I am going to hold my presentation at this point,
20:25:42 allowing any time for rebuttal.
20:25:46 The architect will discuss the design plan and the
20:25:49 elevation that was proposed.
20:26:06 >>> 711 river Heights Avenue, Tampa.
20:26:09 Yes, I have been sworn.
20:26:12 As most of you know, Courier City does not benefit
20:26:15 from having an overlay guideline to protect the

20:26:20 development similar to Hyde Park, Seminole Heights,
20:26:24 Ybor City, West Tampa.
20:26:25 Because of that, it's created a very diverse
20:26:29 community, which I'll share a few examples of the
20:26:31 diversity in the neighborhood.
20:26:35 First, you have the obvious 1920s, 1940s bungalows
20:26:42 that dot the neighborhood.
20:26:48 Next you have an overwhelming amount of what were
20:26:50 designed as single family residence that is have been
20:26:55 convert.
20:26:57 There's nothing on any database, but however in fact
20:27:00 they are multifamily.
20:27:04 Next you have the development that's been occurring in
20:27:06 the area in the last, say, ten years.
20:27:10 These are all new town home developments.
20:27:13 This one, as Mr. Horner demonstrated before, is
20:27:18 immediately adjacent.
20:27:27 And I believe that we all agree that this property is
20:27:30 kind of the reason why we are here tonight, to prevent
20:27:34 this from happening, continuous on the neighborhood.
20:27:38 What we have here is the map that Mr. Horner
20:27:41 demonstrated earlier.

20:27:42 This is an informal survey in the neighborhood where W
20:27:46 Mr. LaFave.
20:27:47 You see the yellow parcel is our property.
20:27:50 Green are either multifamily, by design, with
20:27:53 individual plats, or multifamily, ad hoc, with five
20:27:58 units per single family residence.
20:28:04 And then in the light blue or dark blue, the dark blue
20:28:07 are bungalows with garages.
20:28:10 Parking is always an usual knew this neighborhood.
20:28:12 We are indicating very fung bungalows actually provide
20:28:16 adequate parking per City of Tampa, current zoning
20:28:19 guidelines.
20:28:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Quick question as long as this map
20:28:23 is up, Madam Chair?
20:28:25 >>GWEN MILLER: If he can fun usual his presentation.
20:28:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Would you mind if I asked?
20:28:37 >> You can ask whatever you like.
20:28:39 >>> This is our parcel.
20:28:40 >> On that immediate block today, okay, and I just
20:28:44 want to make sure you get my count right, we have one,
20:28:47 two, three, four, five, six out of two, four, six,
20:28:51 eight, ten, twelve.

20:28:53 Six out of ten parcels.
20:28:57 Bungalows.
20:28:58 And that doesn't include your yellow one.
20:29:00 >>> This is definitely not a bungalow.
20:29:02 The next photo is our parcel here.
20:29:06 The pink or supplemental structures 1980s, 1990s,
20:29:12 vacant lots, commercial building, ad hoc that don't go
20:29:18 --
20:29:18 >> My only point is I don't want us to be distract add
20:29:21 way from the immediate block.
20:29:24 Six out of the 12 as you describe, bungalows.
20:29:35 And this that is where the influence is designed.
20:29:39 This is our parcel.
20:29:40 It is anything but a bungalow design.
20:29:43 Current -- currently five units.
20:29:51 This is a pretty elaborate spreadsheet that I copied
20:29:54 for City Council if they would like to see.
20:29:55 Our counterzoning is RM-16.
20:29:58 With RM-16 zoning with the setbacks on our lot size,
20:30:01 we can build 35-foot high, which indicates three
20:30:04 stories.
20:30:05 With our own 16 zoning we can build approximately 1200

20:30:09 square foot building today without neighborhood
20:30:11 approval, without City Council approval. That is not
20:30:14 the intention of this building or this design.
20:30:18 We are in fact designing a building that is much
20:30:20 smaller than us.
20:30:21 12,000 square feet divided into three units is 4,000
20:30:24 square feet minus garages.
20:30:26 When you have a 3600 square foot unit it's ridiculous.
20:30:32 We are not doing that.
20:30:33 That is not our design intention.
20:30:35 Actually building quite lower than what is currently
20:30:38 allowed by code.
20:30:40 With that, I will discuss our current design.
20:30:44 Our current design is a 2 story structure, not a
20:30:48 three-story structure.
20:30:49 It is bungalow inspired and uses 1920s bungalow
20:30:53 influences.
20:30:53 We have the front porch that mimics the front porch to
20:30:57 the immediate north.
20:30:58 The columns are consistent with properties to the
20:31:01 north. The property is 18 inches above grade.
20:31:05 As I said before, there is no overlay guidelines to

20:31:08 this neighborhood.
20:31:09 So we defaulted to Hyde Park, Seminole Heights, Tampa
20:31:13 Heights, overlay guidelines because those are bungalow
20:31:17 inspired.
20:31:17 We use those guidelines to guide this development.
20:31:20 We have the front porch with the extended overhang.
20:31:25 We have bracketing that's been scaled to proportion to
20:31:28 the building.
20:31:29 We have proportion to the neighborhoodnd existing
20:31:34 style.
20:31:35 We have a quick gable which is reminiscent of
20:31:37 bungalows.
20:31:39 Around town and in that immediate neighborhood.
20:31:44 One other item to address is the site plan.
20:31:50 The site plan towards the front of the parcel, we have
20:31:52 increased the setbacks from 7 feet to 10 feet.
20:31:56 We have done that to allow more light to come into N
20:32:00 on the side yards, to not restrict the views so much,
20:32:05 that a 7-foot side setback is what we are allowed to
20:32:09 do.
20:32:09 We have made those ten feet.
20:32:11 We have put in the front porch, which is from City

20:32:15 Council's earlier recommendation to change zoning to
20:32:19 allow for encroachment for a front porch, and other
20:32:23 issues.
20:32:23 We are doing ribbon driveway and other architectural
20:32:26 features of the bungalow style
20:32:32 Next, this is a rather crude computer rendering
20:32:35 showing our existing building, and in yellow, that is
20:32:40 what our current buildout would be with RM-16 zoning.
20:32:45 We could build 13 feet high.
20:32:49 We are not encroaching other than the front and the
20:32:51 rear marginally, four to five feet in the rear and
20:32:54 only two feet on the front.
20:32:56 And finally, one other rather crude computer
20:32:59 rendering, showing the view of the building from the
20:33:02 street.
20:33:04 After the hearings we look at elevations and when
20:33:08 don't perceive a building, could actually perceive it
20:33:10 from the street and our sidewalk.
20:33:12 This is the view of our property with the buildout
20:33:14 from the street.
20:33:15 We can see how we are mitigating the scale from the
20:33:18 large blocks to the single-family bungalow, to the

20:33:22 north.
20:33:24 And one last final showing how we have reduced the
20:33:28 scale from the large to the south to the small to the
20:33:30 north.
20:33:31 Thank you.
20:33:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Everybody always comes in and says
20:33:38 this is what we could build with the existing zoning.
20:33:40 So why aren't you?
20:33:43 >>> Because to build out fully with three units, does
20:33:46 that make sense for the neighborhood?
20:33:48 We are here primarily for the four units.
20:33:51 Four units makes a more feasible unit size.
20:33:57 I have a sheet here showing each unit would roughly be
20:34:00 about, I think, 1700, 1400 square feet.
20:34:06 1750 square feet, which is more appropriate for the
20:34:09 neighborhood.
20:34:11 In order to do this design, we also included a more
20:34:14 studio, or one bedroom apartment that is roughly 900
20:34:19 square feet, which would be more affordable for the
20:34:21 neighborhood as well.
20:34:23 >> Is it an affordable neighborhood now?
20:34:28 >>> More affordable for the neighborhood.

20:34:32 >> How many vehicles are going to be accommodated
20:34:35 within the structure?
20:34:37 >>> Within the structure, we have three single-car
20:34:40 garages, and then we are allowing for a total of --
20:34:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't have a view of the rear so
20:34:57 I don't know how many you're parking.
20:34:59 It looks like you're parking two inside on the front.
20:35:02 And then in the rear, what are you parking?
20:35:06 >>> On the Elmo I have the site plan that I can show.
20:35:09 We have two single-car garages in the rear.
20:35:13 We have four surface parking in the rear.
20:35:17 We have two single-car garages on the front.
20:35:19 And then tandem parking on the driveway.
20:35:23 So we are allowing for ten parking spaces for three
20:35:29 units.
20:35:30 >> Four units?
20:35:31 >>> I'm sorry, four units, I'm sorry.
20:35:33 >> You have four inside and four outside and then two
20:35:36 more in tandem.
20:35:37 >>> Two more in tandem.
20:35:42 We are above the current.
20:35:43 >> Were you here at the last council meeting where

20:35:45 council gave specific direction to come back with
20:35:47 either a duplex or possibly a triplex?
20:35:52 >>> I unfortunately was not.
20:35:53 I was in Asheville on another project.
20:35:56 >> Have you seen the tape or read the transcript?
20:35:59 >>> I did see the tape.
20:36:02 >> Was there anything unclear about council's
20:36:05 direction?
20:36:05 I mean, taking multiple bites at the apple is
20:36:10 something that I don't know that council appreciates
20:36:12 after we have been in here since 9:00 in the morning.
20:36:15 I think council was very lenient that night and said
20:36:18 come back, but come back with two units, maybe at the
20:36:26 most three, but if you are going to do three, you
20:36:28 better really talk to the neighborhood.
20:36:33 >>> Mr. LaFave, I think, was here.
20:36:41 >>> I am the property owner along with my property.
20:36:47 And I will address that question.
20:36:55 Very briefly, I'm not a developer.
20:37:05 I'm a banker by trade.
20:37:07 It's my profession.
20:37:08 I never developed anything or built anything.

20:37:10 I'm not responsible for any.
20:37:12 Of the development in this neighborhood or in South
20:37:14 Tampa.
20:37:14 I'm a preservationist.
20:37:16 I sit on the board of Tampa Preservation.
20:37:18 I also own a home in Seminole Heights with my wife,
20:37:21 and my one-year-old child, and I'm restoring that
20:37:24 property personally, so I know it's done accurately,
20:37:30 and to a standard.
20:37:36 I bought this property over a year ago.
20:37:37 One of the reasons we came to the duplex or triplex is
20:37:42 simply the property values in the areas.
20:37:45 We paid a substantial amount of that property and you
20:37:47 know in the past and Mr. Crumbly noted and not asking
20:37:50 for any consideration of it not being a developer and
20:37:53 not being a home builder in order to get into the
20:37:56 market.
20:37:58 Otherwise no one would take us seriously.
20:38:03 Floored to get a concession or get the ear of the
20:38:05 existing property owner at the time to sell.
20:38:08 I'm not asking to be lenient for the price I paid.
20:38:15 Way did underestimate is it has taken over a year to

20:38:18 go through this process.
20:38:19 We dealt with the homeowners association.
20:38:21 We designed this multiple times.
20:38:22 We have looked at multiple different options, spent a
20:38:27 substantial amount of money, substantial amount of
20:38:29 time, and the association may well get their wish that
20:38:32 this may never get off the ground because of so much
20:38:35 money we put into the design and the thought, would it
20:38:38 actually fit in the neighborhood, the existing design
20:38:41 that we are proposing.
20:38:42 And out consistent where we are going from the three
20:38:50 story monstrosities down the street, the bungalows to
20:38:54 the north of us.
20:38:55 We found a property that made sense.
20:38:57 This isn't a bungalow. This isn't a contributing
20:39:00 structure to the neighborhood.
20:39:02 It's five units, only the four units.
20:39:08 We listen to City Council.
20:39:10 City Council and the association.
20:39:11 They don't want a three-story structure.
20:39:13 They didn't want Mediterranean.
20:39:15 They wanted bungalow.

20:39:16 They wanted ample parking.
20:39:17 We thought we provided that with our first drawing,
20:39:20 our first rendering and design that we did work with
20:39:22 the association with and we did make changes before we
20:39:26 presented it before you, and of course you wanted to
20:39:28 do three units.
20:39:29 Again, it's not economically feasible within the price
20:39:33 point for the entire neighborhood.
20:39:41 I would like to address the issue of traffic in the
20:39:44 neighborhood.
20:39:47 >> Would you perhaps answer my specific question
20:39:49 before you elaborate even further?
20:39:53 My specific question was, council's direction four
20:39:57 months ago, before the new council members came on,
20:40:00 was to go with two units or maybe three, okay?
20:40:05 And Mrs. Saul-Sena was very eloquent that evening in
20:40:07 explaining why, et cetera, et cetera.
20:40:11 And I'm not saying yea, Nay or anything else, but it's
20:40:21 hard for us, you know, like I say, another bite at the
20:40:26 apple, see if you can wear us down, see if there's new
20:40:28 council members that don't care about this issue.
20:40:30 There's lots of reasons to do it, none of which are

20:40:33 greatly appreciated, and that's why I am trying to
20:40:35 give you an opportunity to say why previously, it's a
20:40:39 matter of record you and you were there, have been was
20:40:42 here, but, you know, council gave that direction.
20:40:45 I don't understand why we are back here with four
20:40:47 units again.
20:40:48 >>> And I mean no disrespect to council and we are not
20:40:50 trying to pull anything over on anyone.
20:40:52 It's on record.
20:40:54 Obviously you have noted it and there's a trap script
20:40:56 here and did you ask for three units.
20:41:02 >> Just a matter of financial capability that you
20:41:04 can't do it.
20:41:05 >>> Can't do it.
20:41:06 >> That's a straight answer and I appreciate a
20:41:08 straight answer.
20:41:09 >>> We can't do it and we can do three units without
20:41:11 being here.
20:41:12 But the scale was -- it's large, in order to make the
20:41:16 project work, it doesn't fit in.
20:41:18 Given my background, I am not going to do that to the
20:41:21 neighborhood association.

20:41:23 You know, I'm a preservationist.
20:41:24 I want to the fitted in.
20:41:26 We used elements of the of a bungalow, form based
20:41:30 zoning.
20:41:30 We needed four units to make it work.
20:41:35 Briefly, one of the hot buttons, parking, traffic, and
20:41:38 I think part of the reason for the traffic in the area
20:41:44 as we all know, it's the restaurants, it's the bars.
20:41:49 Definitely there's oh S multifamily up the street that
20:41:51 is historical.
20:41:52 Does Vermont any mark parking?
20:41:54 What I want to propose to you is that some of the
20:41:56 issues of the parking as the result of the bungalow.
20:42:00 Mr. Cower showed the design, and some actually have
20:42:08 parking garages.
20:42:10 Those that have parking garages don't utilize those
20:42:12 garages.
20:42:14 They utilize them for storage.
20:42:15 Bungalows are small.
20:42:17 They have a lack of storage.
20:42:19 Very briefly, because I appreciate the time you spent
20:42:22 here, to run through some pictures of the

20:42:24 neighborhood.
20:42:24 I went out there at 9:30 on a Saturday morning, and
20:42:28 took pictures of almost the entire neighborhood,
20:42:30 figuring at 9:30 in the morning on a Saturday that
20:42:33 would be the opportunity for most of the people being
20:42:35 in the neighborhood without leaving for work, or for
20:42:39 recreation.
20:42:43 This is a picture of the multifamily with parking on
20:42:45 the street.
20:42:47 You can see there's multiple cars there.
20:42:50 This is also a picture of that same area.
20:42:53 A little further up the street, again with cars.
20:42:57 This is a picture of the property directly across the
20:43:00 street, bungalows converted into apartments with cars
20:43:04 on the street.
20:43:06 This is directly to the north of the property, with
20:43:08 bungalows, obviously those are all bungalows, about
20:43:12 you two cars on the garage, one on the street.
20:43:14 This is one that does not have a driveway.
20:43:18 This is one also that -- I believe it's a double
20:43:23 parking garage, and I'm using.
20:43:27 As a parking garage.

20:43:28 No drive way here.
20:43:29 Bungalow north of the property.
20:43:31 Parking on the street.
20:43:34 Also the same property.
20:43:36 This is an area, section of the area with bungalows,
20:43:40 cars on the street.
20:43:42 This is off of the same area.
20:43:44 Single-family homes.
20:43:47 Bungalow.
20:43:51 >> And the point?
20:43:53 >>> The point is FHP we want to get into issues
20:43:55 regarding parking, City Council's plan of requiring
20:43:57 parking garages actually worked.
20:44:00 I have a few more other pictures.
20:44:08 Actually using the garage.
20:44:12 Driveway.
20:44:13 Nothing on the street.
20:44:16 To give you a different perspective.
20:44:18 Nobody on the street.
20:44:21 I have more pictures.
20:44:22 I don't want to waste your time.
20:44:24 What I would like to ask you, this isn't about Tampa.

20:44:28 This isn't about South Tampa.
20:44:29 This isn't about Courier City.
20:44:31 This is about one property of five units, we are
20:44:34 taking to four units.
20:44:35 We tried to the best of our ability to take into
20:44:39 consideration council, the homeowner association, and
20:44:42 the scale and the design being a bungalow, providing
20:44:45 ample parking.
20:44:46 We are not asking for any waivers.
20:44:50 A substantial amount of time and money.
20:44:51 Like I said, this morning, it may not even get off the
20:44:54 ground.
20:44:56 We have done that in order at the request of council
20:45:00 as well as the homeowners association and I ask you to
20:45:03 take it into consideration.
20:45:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there anybody here that wants to
20:45:07 speak for it?
20:45:08 Do you have a question?
20:45:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question either for staff or
20:45:12 for the petitioner.
20:45:13 The house, because this is my first hearing of this,
20:45:16 the house that's there presently or was there, is it a

20:45:20 house that was a rooming house?
20:45:23 Or is it five separate units?
20:45:27 >>> It's actually four structures on the property.
20:45:33 >> Added on in the back.
20:45:35 >>> They are all kind of detached little houses, and
20:45:37 it's very transient.
20:45:40 It needs a substantial amount of work.
20:45:41 Very small.
20:45:42 Essentially studios.
20:45:43 The existing parking doesn't allow for the residents,
20:45:47 or adequate parking for the residents.
20:45:59 >> Mr. Crumbly, long day for all of us.
20:46:02 >>> I thought I would never get a chance to get up
20:46:04 here and again.
20:46:06 My name is Walter Crumbley, the president of the
20:46:08 Courier City, Oscawana homeowners association and I
20:46:12 have been sworn, four times today.
20:46:16 And it's nice to spend the day with you.
20:46:18 You all are great folks.
20:46:20 Let me start off my comment with the staff made a
20:46:24 glowing recommendation, and may I candidly say what
20:46:28 the hell does staff know?

20:46:29 They don't live over there.
20:46:31 We do.
20:46:32 And what they may think is cute and nice looking at it
20:46:36 on a drawing, in a nice air conditioned office, may be
20:46:40 entirely different from what we want.
20:46:41 So take staff's recommendation with a grain of salt.
20:46:48 I don't know how many times I've got to say it.
20:46:54 A four-unit bunker even if you dress it up and make it
20:46:57 look like a little bungalow, is still a bunker.
20:47:02 You know, we argued about this the last time I heard
20:47:07 from Mr. Horner, I frankly didn't reply because it was
20:47:11 again a four-unit, and we told him from the very
20:47:15 get-go, we will not support four units.
20:47:21 Period.
20:47:25 He did send a kick little sketch of a butt-ugly little
20:47:30 unit that he can build without anybody's permission.
20:47:32 And if that's the way it's going to be, then so be it
20:47:35 because the association says we are not going along
20:47:39 with four, period.
20:47:42 And I'm very sorry for the poor guy that's got all
20:47:45 this money tied up in it, but I have already given you
20:47:49 the supreme court case that says economics is not a

20:47:52 consideration.
20:47:53 Too bad.
20:47:53 He just paid too damn much money for a piece of
20:47:56 property, and the only way you can dig out of it is to
20:48:00 get four units.
20:48:04 He might break even with three.
20:48:06 And if you can get out and get your money back, then
20:48:08 you should be happy.
20:48:11 You all have previously told them hello of? Didn't
20:48:21 you hear me the last time I spoke?
20:48:25 It's time to get with it.
20:48:28 You know, we submitted pictures, and you have seen
20:48:30 pictures tonight of what the neighborhood looks like.
20:48:33 And this is not compatible with that neighborhood.
20:48:37 They do a pretty good job on the four units.
20:48:40 The three unit sketch was just atrocious.
20:48:44 So, you know, we have got to choose between a devil
20:48:47 and a witch.
20:48:48 And we chose the witch.
20:48:55 If they are going to build three units we can't stop
20:48:58 that but we aren't going to go along with four units.
20:49:00 We'll be drug kicking and scream down the primrose

20:49:04 path.
20:49:04 So that's basically it.
20:49:06 I've got a few of my usual suspects along tonight to
20:49:09 also give you their views.
20:49:11 And thank you for your time.
20:49:17 >>> My name is April Black.
20:49:19 I have been sworn in.
20:49:20 I live at 306 south Albany which is in the block one
20:49:24 block north of this property.
20:49:26 The pictures did not show you the driveways and the
20:49:29 parking that are behind some of the houses.
20:49:32 So that's part of the problem with the pictures that
20:49:35 you were just shown.
20:49:36 The other problem with it is that on Saturday morning
20:49:38 a lot of the people who partied in the neighborhood
20:49:41 have not returned to pick up their cars yet.
20:49:43 And some of those vehicles actually belong to some of
20:49:46 those, so they had nowhere to park except at the house
20:49:51 that's for sale and some of these other pieces of
20:49:53 property.
20:49:54 My duty tonight is to remind you of your meeting, your
20:50:00 recent meeting where you said this is a four-plex, it

20:50:04 not compatible on this street with the characteristics
20:50:07 of the single-family bungalows.
20:50:09 The density is too much.
20:50:11 We have heard that.
20:50:12 We have heard -- three units, maybe a duplex.
20:50:18 We have heard -- we think the message is loud and
20:50:21 clear, the community and from this council, that these
20:50:25 are no longer acceptable in this neighborhood.
20:50:26 They are no longer acceptable in this neighborhood.
20:50:29 There's too much density with this.
20:50:31 And if you look at the picture, the colored picture,
20:50:33 the pink thing was the fire station.
20:50:36 Okay.
20:50:37 The other houses, the houses north of this property on
20:50:41 the south side of the street are single family
20:50:44 duplexes.
20:50:45 The next block there's nothing but bungalows.
20:50:49 There's nothing but bungalows.
20:50:54 There are no multi-
20:50:55 And if we keep going south with these things, we are
20:50:58 just going to be more multiplexes.
20:51:00 We think that's that a multi-plex like this, even

20:51:03 though it has a parking garage for several of the
20:51:05 tenants, it's going to have two cars per person, or
20:51:08 two cars per family.
20:51:10 So you're looking at probably six, maybe eight
20:51:14 vehicles.
20:51:15 Maybe with the efficiency, it's only going to have one
20:51:20 car but still you're looking at a lot of cars.
20:51:22 And those cars are not going to park there.
20:51:24 They are going to park like all of us have to do when
20:51:26 we have company, we have to park on the street.
20:51:29 Please consider the duplex or the three-plex.
20:51:35 Thank you.
20:51:36 9 thank you.
20:51:39 >>> Hello.
20:51:40 I'm Paula Sizemore.
20:51:43 I have been sworn.
20:51:44 Since Michael Horner has done a good job of using my
20:51:47 words, I think I'll use my own.
20:51:51 It is true that when we were shown this rendering my
20:51:57 reaction was positive, because I did believe it was a
20:51:59 three-unit, that they had taken to heart, if they were
20:52:04 to come back with the three units.

20:52:05 And when it was pointed out to me, although there are
20:52:09 two more units behind it, no, this does not cut it.
20:52:17 I understand that Mr. LaFave has stated that he owns
20:52:19 this property, which leads me to question why the site
20:52:22 plan for the three-unit, which we have submitted for
20:52:27 our review, indicates Jane Bruce B. Downs Liggett,
20:52:36 trustee.
20:52:41 Then why is it on the site plan?
20:52:51 When four units were submitted the new rendering of
20:52:53 the four units, which went against council's
20:52:57 directions earlier this year.
20:52:59 It came along with messages that could only be
20:53:03 interpreted as veiled threats.
20:53:06 Either the association supports this, you come out in
20:53:10 favor of the four units, or we can build this
20:53:12 three-story within the present structure, we don't
20:53:17 have to go before City Council, and here is a picture
20:53:21 of what it will look like.
20:53:28 Well, I appreciate the fact that what we have been
20:53:30 shown as far as design for the four units is
20:53:34 compatible with the neighborhood, more so than
20:53:38 anything else that's gone up.

20:53:40 But we don't take kindly to pressure.
20:53:44 And if we have to live with the witch, we will.
20:53:51 I cannot support this.
20:53:53 If it were a three-unit with this particular design
20:53:56 that's been shown to you, I would be standing here
20:53:58 doing a happy dance.
20:54:00 But I cannot support a four-unit.
20:54:05 If we do, then the next person who comes in with a
20:54:08 four-unit design is going to say, well, they backed
20:54:11 off.
20:54:12 Now, we can have our two.
20:54:17 Thank you.
20:54:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to share at this morning's
20:54:20 council meeting which feels like a month ago, we had a
20:54:23 report from Cindy Miller, talking about doing an
20:54:28 overlay for this area to maintain the historic
20:54:32 character.
20:54:33 And we voted to have a report back to be completed by
20:54:37 November, a report back November 1st.
20:54:40 I just wanted to share that with everybody.
20:54:43 >>> Thank you.
20:54:52 >>> I'm Libby.

20:54:53 I have been sworn in.
20:54:54 I liver at 507 south Melville Avenue.
20:55:08 One was on Fremont and said this is as large as it can
20:55:16 go.
20:55:16 The next one was an Albany and you said, no, it's in
20:55:19 the middle of the neighborhood, on a perimeter, too
20:55:22 big, can't do anymore.
20:55:24 This is like next door.
20:55:27 So I really hope that you will deny this as well.
20:55:33 A small house.
20:55:34 I don't know if it's a contributing structure but it's
20:55:36 old and it probably is contributing.
20:55:38 It's probably 50 years old which probably means in a
20:55:40 conservation district it would be protected in some
20:55:43 way, and used to be a crack house.
20:55:48 I would rather have a house that used to be a crack
20:55:51 house than a big ugly bunker because somebody would
20:55:54 come along and fix up the crack house and make it
20:55:57 nice.
20:55:57 So I'm willing to take my chances with that.
20:55:59 And finally looking at the conservation district, not
20:56:02 continue to tear down smaller buildings, and build

20:56:06 these big ones.
20:56:07 So I would ask that you reject this proposal and I
20:56:12 thank you for the support you have given our
20:56:14 neighborhood in the past.
20:56:21 >> I'm Al Sizemore, 308 south Albany Avenue.
20:56:27 Yes, I have been sworn.
20:56:28 Something the developer mention add while ago that he
20:56:31 spent all this money and then needs to kind of get it
20:56:33 back.
20:56:34 But if people buy property, I'll buy it and I'm sure
20:56:42 you can persuade somebody, maybe City Council, to
20:56:46 approve something that they told me, has been proven
20:56:50 in the past, that may not work, and just like, don't
20:56:53 worry, we'll go ahead and buy this property and get it
20:56:55 rezoned.
20:56:56 I think that's kind of bad that people come before you
20:57:00 requesting to help them, and the fact that they know
20:57:04 that they can pretty much always get it.
20:57:07 And again I want to remind you that we did say, no
20:57:13 more.
20:57:14 And it looks to me like they are just saying, to heck
20:57:17 with you, we are just going to do what we want top do.

20:57:20 You know, thank you.
20:57:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:57:26 >> I'm Don Amore, 405 south Albany.
20:57:29 I have lived on the street for 15 years.
20:57:32 And several observations, just to add to the things I
20:57:36 think that have already been covered.
20:57:37 One, parking.
20:57:38 It was an assertion made here that parking, that the
20:57:42 bungalows are somehow contributing to some of the
20:57:44 parking problems in the street.
20:57:45 That's patently absurd.
20:57:49 Need a 500-foot lot at 407 and you can park a lot of
20:57:54 cars in there. So it's other sources for problems
20:57:58 with the parking.
20:58:00 Point number 2.
20:58:01 I'm sure that Ms. Liggett is happy to see the
20:58:04 construction next to one of her properties.
20:58:06 But she doesn't live there.
20:58:08 She's never lived there.
20:58:09 So there's also that.
20:58:11 You have four units there.
20:58:13 They are very small, 2500 square foot total with those

20:58:18 four units, so they are small.
20:58:20 They are little apartments.
20:58:21 They are little efficiency apartments, section
20:58:23 essentially.
20:58:24 And what's been proposed here is that they are being
20:58:26 replaced by four apartments that are twice the size of
20:58:32 each of them.
20:58:33 And, you know, if we are talking about being creative
20:58:37 with designs, there's certainly other ways that this
20:58:39 can be done without maximizing the number of units,
20:58:44 simply to maximize the number of units.
20:58:46 And there was one other thing about the design that I
20:58:49 found fascinating.
20:58:51 That particular lot had the old wall, that comes out
20:58:56 to the sidewalk, that runs all the way down to the
20:58:59 corner, around the fire station, all the bungalows
20:59:03 have that masonry wall in the design that's gone.
20:59:08 What they have done is opted for the flat-out yard
20:59:12 with the two strips, which is what the place next door
20:59:16 had, too.
20:59:17 So, yes, maybe that's somewhat transitional but what
20:59:22 it also does is alleviate something nice and

20:59:26 consistent on that block.
20:59:27 And this is, this property is an interesting one
20:59:30 because there is this real balance right now between
20:59:33 those, the big structures that have been built and
20:59:36 still bungalows, and kind of a tipping point in that
20:59:40 as well.
20:59:41 So I would urge you to vote against this.
20:59:43 Thank you.
20:59:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
20:59:46 Petitioner?
21:00:00 >>> Thank you, Madam Chairman.
21:00:04 Well, my mother told me years ago at the end of the
21:00:07 day your reputation is all you have.
21:00:09 I'm a little surprised at some of the comments I
21:00:12 heard, almost of a personal nature.
21:00:14 But I tried to bring in those property owners,
21:00:22 specifically Myer who I talked to many times and said
21:00:26 these are what we are proposing, these are the
21:00:27 elevation.
21:00:28 I have my e-mail.
21:00:30 She has an e-mail to me that indicates there's a
21:00:32 threat, I'd like to see it.

21:00:35 We have bent over backwards to look at design
21:00:37 opportunities.
21:00:38 If you think these four units are contributing
21:00:40 structures, you need to go back and reassess
21:00:44 historical preservation elements.
21:00:46 We had the discussion was the city.
21:00:47 We had the discussions of historic preservation,
21:00:50 absolutely no way.
21:00:51 No one wants them.
21:00:52 They don't contribute.
21:00:53 They have been a menace.
21:00:55 They don't meet code.
21:00:56 They need to go one way or the other.
21:00:58 That being said, we are maintaining that retaining
21:01:03 wall.
21:01:03 It's on the site plan.
21:01:04 It's committed.
21:01:06 Staff has seen it.
21:01:08 The agency commented on it.
21:01:10 Architectural review commented on it.
21:01:12 We want to maintain that continuity of the design
21:01:14 element.

21:01:15 We certainly are incorporated along with the ribbon
21:01:18 driveway.
21:01:24 We didn't choose to be in the position of council in a
21:01:33 prior decision.
21:01:34 Let's go back some years.
21:01:36 RM-16 was adopted by this council to allow
21:01:39 multifamily.
21:01:41 Res 35 was adopted by this council to allow
21:01:44 multifamily.
21:01:47 When you indicate by zoning, and by comp plan, that
21:01:52 developers go to, don't go outside the plan, look at
21:01:55 those guidelines and guide your decisions accordingly.
21:01:58 We did that.
21:01:59 That is why those developers that came forward, all 68
21:02:04 of them, one by one, year after year, and built,
21:02:08 received approval, filed the plans, and you acted on
21:02:11 them, not you personally perhaps, but prior City
21:02:13 Council, that reliance is acted on and those
21:02:17 structures were built.
21:02:18 We are in a position where we look at that, not two or
21:02:23 three, not four or five, but 68 in the immediate
21:02:26 neighborhood, three directly across, one directly next

21:02:29 to us, several more directly impacting this
21:02:31 neighborhood, and said, what can we do to transition
21:02:35 away from a 35-foot tall, two-story structure,
21:02:39 directly next to this track?
21:02:43 As I recall the public hearing in April, strong
21:02:45 comments about those garage doors.
21:02:49 Paula called me and said, I just don't want top see
21:02:52 those shining garage doors.
21:02:54 You have four of them.
21:02:56 Two in the front, two in the back.
21:02:57 We have gone back and assessed and reviewed and looked
21:03:00 at every opportunity that we can in order to
21:03:04 accommodate those changes.
21:03:07 Now, I wish that there were other options for us.
21:03:13 The options that Mr. LaFave, I think, pointedly
21:03:16 responded to, a duplex, and a triplex, we looked at
21:03:21 those three unit.
21:03:22 In fact said we'll come back on the three units, take
21:03:24 a look at it last time and Mr. Shelby, the transcript
21:03:27 said, they don't really need to come back.
21:03:29 And I said we are willing to work.
21:03:31 We don't have all the answers. We need to fill in

21:03:33 these blanks.
21:03:34 And, yes, I shared all of that information with the
21:03:36 neighborhood.
21:03:38 The design when came up with specifically responded to
21:03:42 those concerns.
21:03:44 And we realized the three-unit plan is going to be
21:03:47 questionable, the two-unit plan was not in the mix, in
21:03:51 order for to us get the square footage in the three
21:03:53 unit plan the building unit sizes would be rather
21:03:56 large.
21:03:56 What does that mean?
21:03:57 It bumps the roof up, it's a rather contemporary
21:04:00 structure.
21:04:01 That's why I think it is so important.
21:04:04 But the immediate option from Paula was, she called me
21:04:08 20 minutes after I sent the e-mail and said, Michael,
21:04:11 thank goodness, you got it, this is what we were
21:04:14 looking for.
21:04:15 And I was excited.
21:04:16 And I talked to her and it what was a good discussion.
21:04:19 And I said, I'm pleased.
21:04:20 We spent a lot of time and money on this.

21:04:23 And then I said you're okay with the four units?
21:04:26 And she said, wait a minute, four units?
21:04:28 I must not have looked closely.
21:04:30 And then of course she was immediately opposed to it.
21:04:33 My point being, we don't want to play a numbers game
21:04:36 so much, although we need the four units from the
21:04:39 economic P perspective but more importantly the
21:04:42 design.
21:04:44 Her first response was the design works, it looks
21:04:46 good.
21:04:47 Whether you walk-in side and take a left instead of
21:04:50 right, whether you go straight and upstairs instead of
21:04:52 a left or right turn, it didn't matter because the
21:04:55 design that she would walk by every day was one that
21:04:59 she felt was a reasonable design.
21:05:02 And you got the duplex, two units of a reasonable
21:05:05 design, incorporating some of the characteristics.
21:05:10 We have done everything possible to go from this, with
21:05:16 perhaps the party deck that Mr. Dingfelder spoke
21:05:20 about, large massive structure, all these comments
21:05:25 were I thought fair and reasonable.
21:05:28 Went back and looked through every single one of them

21:05:31 and we came up with that elevation.
21:05:33 And I think Mr. Howard did a fine job of showing how
21:05:38 it transitioned.
21:05:40 Sure, RM-16, construction service center, meets the
21:05:46 requirements, meets the costs and we are permitted.
21:05:49 My client has committed himself to a bungalow style
21:05:52 architectural design.
21:05:54 That's why they bought it.
21:05:55 That's why they retained one of the top architects in
21:05:58 the area.
21:05:58 That's why it gone through numerous iterations.
21:06:01 We really have earned the recommendations.
21:06:04 And from Mr. Crumbly, I understand he's frustrated,
21:06:07 simply writing off the competency of staff, you know,
21:06:10 I think that's a personal issue perhaps.
21:06:12 Yes, he lives in the neighborhood.
21:06:15 He's been to the house.
21:06:16 He sat at the kitchen table.
21:06:17 He's done a marvelous job rehabbing.
21:06:20 He doesn't live on that lot next to it.
21:06:22 And that Jane Liggett reference, she owns the house.
21:06:25 We had to put her name on the ownership for the site

21:06:27 plan requirements.
21:06:29 Bottom line, council, the comp plan stated res 35.
21:06:35 The zoning states RM-16.
21:06:37 You all approved as a former council 68 PDs, large
21:06:42 scale, some of which we look at and go, what was
21:06:44 hatching back then?
21:06:45 Some of those were not pleased at all.
21:06:47 But they are there.
21:06:48 We have to respond.
21:06:50 They exist and therefore the burden becomes greater
21:06:52 for us to do a marketable project to come up with a
21:06:55 design that we think is in transition to that large
21:06:57 quad to the south but also transition the bungalows to
21:07:00 the north.
21:07:03 My client will make a brief closing comment and then
21:07:06 we'll be finished.
21:07:07 Thank you.
21:07:12 >>> Thank you, council.
21:07:13 I appreciate your time.
21:07:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Any question by council members?
21:07:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to make sure the clerk has a
21:07:18 copy of my comments, a transcript of my comments from

21:07:21 the previous meeting.
21:07:25 They were part of the record and I reenter them.
21:07:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They have been referenced about
21:07:31 four times.
21:07:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And I have provided a copy of that
21:07:34 transcript to Mr. Horner, and the transcript of a
21:07:40 previous continued public hearing of February
21:07:44 22nd, if I believe the date is correct.
21:07:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
21:07:50 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
21:07:51 (Motion carried).
21:07:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have an ordinance?
21:07:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move for
21:08:00 disapproval but I feel like Mr. Dingfelder will
21:08:02 probably be more articulate in explaining why.
21:08:06 My motion is to move for disapproval.
21:08:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second it with the following
21:08:15 friendly suggestions to the maker.
21:08:18 I don't believe that the petition -- the petition is
21:08:23 asking for a PD, a planned development.
21:08:25 And under our code that falls under chapter 27-326,
21:08:29 which says that any petition for a PD must be found to

21:08:35 be arranged to ensure complete compatibility with
21:08:39 adjacent existing or future land uses, and within
21:08:43 existing or public uses, services or utilities.
21:08:47 I think that's probably one of the key issues.
21:08:49 I think we have heard competent, substantial evidence
21:08:53 to the effect that this project does not meet that
21:08:59 criteria.
21:09:00 In addition, that's subsection B.
21:09:05 In addition, subsection D says there's no impact on
21:09:09 surrounding property, and I would also reiterate that
21:09:14 that competent substantial evidence that we heard
21:09:16 tonight does not indicate that they met that criteria.
21:09:24 And, also, I don't know, if legal has any other
21:09:31 provision of the code that I might reference?
21:09:37 >>JULIA COLE: I think pretty much what you have
21:09:38 expressed pretty much encompasses where I feel council
21:09:42 is trying to go.
21:09:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion.
21:09:45 Did we get a second?
21:09:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
21:09:46 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
21:09:49 Opposed, Nay.

21:09:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carries unanimously.
21:09:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anything else to come before
21:09:57 council?
21:10:00 Receive and file.
21:10:01 >>: So moved.
21:10:02 >> Second.
21:10:02 (Motion carried)
21:10:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion was to receive and file.
21:10:11 Now you still have item 8.
21:10:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Need a motion to withdraw.
21:10:15 >> So moved.
21:10:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually move to --
21:10:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to withdraw item 8.
21:10:21 (Motion carried)
21:10:23 Anything else to come before council?
21:10:25 We stand adjourned.
21:10:29 (Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.)