Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
5:01 p.m. session
Thursday, November 29, 2007

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 file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.

17:08:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
17:08:40 Roll call.
17:08:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
17:08:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:08:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:08:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
17:08:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:08:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:08:49 Before we begin our agenda, we have a walk-on.
17:08:52 Kathy.
17:09:03 >> Kathy Ginster, on behalf of the legal department,
17:09:07 here on item 16.
17:09:09 I forwarded you a written memo, and attached the
17:09:15 resolution, for the rescheduling of two public
17:09:19 hearings on the brown field designation application.
17:09:24 The hearing that was scheduled or rescheduled for this
17:09:27 evening cannot be held due to publication errors.
17:09:30 And so we are asking council to approve the resolution
17:09:35 calling for a new public hearing date on December
17:09:39 6th, and December 20th, both at 10 a.m
17:09:44 And because requiring at least one public hearing at
17:09:54 5 p.m. during the weekday unless council by majority
17:09:57 plus one vote votes to hold those hearings during the
17:10:00 day.
17:10:01 So there's a deadline of December 31, 2007, for the
17:10:06 applicants to get their application in to be eligible
17:10:08 for tax credits for environmental remediation.
17:10:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move we have those hearings set,
17:10:22 one in the day and one at night at the prescribed

17:10:24 dates so set.
17:10:26 >> Yes, they are both during the day.
17:10:30 >> Okay, during the day then.
17:10:31 >> December 16th and 20th at 10 a.m.
17:10:34 >> We have a motion and second at 10 a.m.
17:10:36 (Motion carried).
17:10:38 >>> Thank you very much, council.
17:10:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
17:10:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
17:10:43 I have a couple of special guests tonight.
17:10:47 They decorated our tree in the lobby.
17:10:49 Audrey, and miles, and they would both like to say
17:10:53 something.
17:10:56 >> Hey, mom.
17:11:00 Hey, dad.
17:11:00 >> Thank you.
17:11:01 >> Thank you, Madam Chair.
17:11:03 I would like to request council permission to have
17:11:06 Judy Lisi here on the 21st of February at 9:00 for
17:11:09 a ten-minute presentation, how the performing arts
17:11:13 center is doing.
17:11:13 >> Second.

17:11:14 >> Motion and second.
17:11:15 (Motion carried).
17:11:16 >> Now we go to item number 1.
17:11:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody here from legal?
17:11:34 We just need a motion to receive.
17:11:36 >> Move the resolution.
17:11:37 >> Second.
17:11:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to move the
17:11:41 resolution.
17:11:42 (Motion carried).
17:11:43 Item number 2, we need to open the public hearing.
17:11:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
17:11:46 >> Second.
17:11:47 (Motion carried).
17:11:47 >> Good afternoon City Council.
17:11:52 Michelle Ogilvie, Planning Commission staff.
17:11:55 This is the first of 13 plan amendments that you have
17:11:58 scheduled for this evening.
17:12:04 The first four including this one you heard earlier in
17:12:06 the year.
17:12:07 They were transmitted to the of community affairs, and
17:12:11 we are now having an adoption hearing, should council

17:12:16 desire to do so.
17:12:17 The first amendment this evening is the Bayshore
17:12:21 amendment, which is a number of text amendments to the
17:12:26 future land use element, and this is to designate the
17:12:30 Bayshore, as a regional attracter, as well as to
17:12:35 identify it for the corridor.
17:12:39 And the Department of Community Affairs did see this
17:12:42 amendment.
17:12:43 They have no comments, objections are, or
17:12:47 recommendations.
17:12:48 So with that, I know it's a very full night.
17:12:53 I am giving a very brief presentation since Mr.
17:12:55 Miranda would like something more.
17:12:57 Planning Commission did send a recommendation to
17:13:02 the -- of approval to the City Council.
17:13:06 >> okay.
17:13:06 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
17:13:10 Just to echo what Michelle said, this is the set of
17:13:13 plan amendments related to Bayshore.
17:13:14 The designated Bayshore as a regional attracter and
17:13:18 scenic corridor.
17:13:19 I do have my presentation that I presented to you last

17:13:24 time, also the documentation presented on June 7th
17:13:27 if you would like either of those documents.
17:13:29 I would like to make two brief clarifications, if I
17:13:31 may.
17:13:32 I received several phone calls from citizens in
17:13:35 relation to this.
17:13:35 And I found small clarifications I would like to make.
17:13:49 I'll put this up for you.
17:13:53 I did receive contact, they had concern at the Brorein
17:13:58 end, but on this map it did show that the expressway
17:14:01 was colored in.
17:14:01 That was an error, and we have revised the map to show
17:14:05 that, as well.
17:14:07 And the eastern side, the small -- let me see if I can
17:14:11 zoom in for you.
17:14:23 Being familiar with the Bayshore area, there is a
17:14:35 condominium parcel and cul-de-sac with some
17:14:40 single-family residential there.
17:14:42 Neither of those are included in the corridor as well.
17:14:44 So I did want to make both of those clarifications for
17:14:46 the record.
17:14:49 I will be happy to answer any questions.

17:14:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
17:14:52 wants to speak on item number 2?
17:14:55 >> Move to close.
17:14:56 >> Second.
17:14:57 >>GWEN MILLER: If you are going to speak, would you
17:15:02 please come up and speak on item number 2?
17:15:04 Anyone that wants to speak on item number 2, would you
17:15:09 please come up?
17:15:10 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: My name is John Grandoff.
17:15:13 My address is suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza here in
17:15:17 Tampa.
17:15:18 And on item 2, which is the Bayshore overlay, I'm
17:15:22 representing about 10 property owners on Bayshore,
17:15:27 standing between multifamily uses to commercial uses
17:15:31 to educational uses to single-family uses.
17:15:34 And my clients collectively have no quarrel with
17:15:39 Bayshore being a scenic corridor.
17:15:43 That's certainly understood.
17:15:45 And certainly a good public purpose.
17:15:48 At the transmittal hearing, in June, June 28th, we
17:15:52 placed clearly on the record any objection to any
17:15:56 further regulation that would impact current zoning,

17:16:00 current land use designation, or current use.
17:16:06 Anything that went beyond that would be an inverse
17:16:09 taking, and in my opinion would be unconstitutional.
17:16:13 We applaud the city's effort to improve the
17:16:16 right-of-way, increase public art, creating incentives
17:16:21 for developers to increase setbacks, to improve the
17:16:27 thoroughfare, to improve the sea wall, anything that's
17:16:30 within the city, and your right-of-way.
17:16:35 But I think you need to be very cautious about
17:16:36 crossing the property line beyond the right-of-way and
17:16:42 impacting current zoning.
17:16:44 Without our client's consent.
17:16:46 Now certainly ordinances can be fashioned, they could
17:16:49 request consent and there could be a trade-off.
17:16:51 This morning, we had a very good discussion for about
17:16:54 20 minutes on TDRs, transfer of development rights.
17:16:58 Certainly Bayshore would be an area within Tampa that
17:17:03 you could evaluate that and implement an ordinance
17:17:06 where the city wins and the property owner also wins
17:17:09 but certainly does not lose in that scheme.
17:17:14 What concerns me, however, is this evening's notice
17:17:18 about ten lines down says that besides providing

17:17:22 regulation, that those regulations include but are not
17:17:26 limited to building setbacks and height.
17:17:31 There's no qualification, which causes our clients
17:17:35 some concern.
17:17:36 I understand if your ordinance read "including
17:17:38 setbacks and heights with appropriate incentives for
17:17:42 property owners that do not impact existing rights."
17:17:46 This is not the time or the place to begin arguing
17:17:48 that issue, because you are going to be looking at
17:17:51 regulations after the first of the year.
17:17:52 I just want to be abundantly clear that we want to
17:17:56 be -- to make sure that our rights are not impacted
17:17:58 and we'll certainly join that discussion after the
17:18:00 first of the year.
17:18:01 I submit to you that if the ordinance is tightly
17:18:05 written, that advances public purposes within the
17:18:08 right-of-way, we will quickly adopt it and we will
17:18:10 certainly -- we will quickly support it and I'm
17:18:14 certain would you quickly adopt it.
17:18:16 If there's something otherwise, then I think we would
17:18:18 have a very prolonged discussion, it would certainly
17:18:21 benefit no one in the long run.

17:18:23 Thank you for your time.
17:18:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:18:25 Next.
17:18:31 >>> Good evening.
17:18:34 I'm George deacon.
17:18:35 I live at 1408 south DeSoto.
17:18:38 I have been in the area 25 years.
17:18:45 Use Bayshore all the time.
17:18:47 As most of you know it's a beautiful place.
17:18:50 I would hate to see us get bogged down early on with
17:18:57 legal obstacles which I'm sure can be overcome.
17:19:04 This is the first issue like this, won't be the last
17:19:08 one.
17:19:10 We all collectively have a lot of power, we can figure
17:19:15 these things out.
17:19:16 I hate to see us stop before we get started.
17:19:18 I think, you know, we can work things out.
17:19:24 Other things have passed, in other areas where it
17:19:29 wasn't 100% agreement on every word of the ordinance.
17:19:32 I would hate to see this thing die early without
17:19:34 having its chance.
17:19:37 It's got a lot of good, a lot of possibilities, and I

17:19:40 fully encourage to you continue on with it.
17:19:42 And work the issues out as we go along.
17:19:46 Thank you.
17:19:46 >> Thank you.
17:19:54 >> Grace Mary Henderson, I live at 2001 Bayshore
17:19:58 Boulevard.
17:19:59 My home was built back in 1916 and I have lived there
17:20:02 for 36 years.
17:20:04 So I feel very strongly about this issue.
17:20:07 I'm very much in favor of the corridor -- scenic
17:20:11 corridor and regional attracter.
17:20:13 I have attended I think almost every workshop on this
17:20:16 issue.
17:20:17 I don't think I missed any of them.
17:20:18 So I have been involved for a long time.
17:20:20 And I do think it's the right thing, not just for
17:20:22 people who live on Bayshore, and use Bayshore, but for
17:20:25 the city as a whole.
17:20:27 It's very much the right thing for us to do.
17:20:30 I know a lot of people are very supportive of this
17:20:33 issue.
17:20:34 I know some could not be here tonight.

17:20:36 I do think it's extremely important.
17:20:39 Not a lot I can add.
17:20:40 I think we all know how important Bayshore is to our
17:20:43 city.
17:20:43 But I picked up an old editorial from the Tribune from
17:20:46 last spring that just said that most residents
17:20:49 understand that the Bayshore is no average street, it
17:20:53 is a lineal park, as well as a major thoroughfare,
17:20:57 into the urban core.
17:20:58 It's a jogging and walking trail, providing unmatched
17:21:04 vista of sky and bay, a history lesson offering a
17:21:07 glimpse of what Tampa's neighborhoods looked like when
17:21:09 the city was new.
17:21:10 And this combination of history, scenery and utility
17:21:15 makes Bayshore a unique resource, and important single
17:21:19 destination for Tampa sightseers.
17:21:23 In a different editorial said that the Bayshore that
17:21:26 Tampa has long known and loved might not Tampa Bay
17:21:29 shore of the next generation, it's a classic piece of
17:21:34 Tampa's heritage, survived false sighted action is
17:21:38 needed now.
17:21:39 And I just encourage you to see this.

17:21:46 I note to City Council a few years ago when corner lot
17:21:50 setback issue came before the council, it passed first
17:21:54 reading, that Bayshore would be treated like every
17:21:57 other street in the city, and as large a City of Tampa
17:22:01 is, and as much as the staff and all of you and
17:22:03 everyone have to deal with, it is so easy for
17:22:05 something to just slip through the cracks.
17:22:08 And I think that's part of why we are asking you to
17:22:10 designate this, to make it special, so it looks at the
17:22:17 option in different lights.
17:22:18 But on the lot setback, some residents picked up on
17:22:21 what this would mean for Bayshore.
17:22:23 And it would have meant that some corner lots on
17:22:26 Bayshore would have had a 7-foot setback, which we
17:22:29 know is not what we want.
17:22:32 And just to kind of bring that home, I took a picture
17:22:35 at that time.
17:22:35 I put orange mesh in the front yard and measured back
17:22:39 seven feet.
17:22:40 And I don't know if this works.
17:22:44 >> Turn it around.
17:22:49 There you go.

17:22:51 >>> Anyway, I measured back from the front wall seven
17:22:58 feet.
17:22:59 And that was what it looked like.
17:23:02 And then I decided that really didn't show the depth
17:23:04 of how bad that would be.
17:23:07 And then I was silly enough to have my picture taken
17:23:10 sitting right here in front of it.
17:23:12 But if some people hadn't caught this mistake this
17:23:17 would have passed and this is what we would have today
17:23:19 on corner lots in Bayshore, if you could build out to
17:23:22 where that orange mesh is.
17:23:24 I'm just saying, I think we need special protection
17:23:27 and I urge you to adopt this.
17:23:29 (Bell sounds).
17:23:29 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
17:23:30 Next.
17:23:32 >> Karen Crawford, 1406 South Moody Avenue here on
17:23:37 behalf of the Bayshore Gardens neighborhood which as
17:23:39 most of you know we run from Howard down to Bay to
17:23:41 Bay, so the Bayshore is one of our many boundaries of
17:23:45 our neighborhood, and our neighborhood is in total
17:23:47 support of this ordinance.

17:23:48 Thank you.
17:23:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:23:49 Would anyone else like to speak?
17:23:55 >>> My name is Guy King.
17:23:57 I live at 4507 Bayshore Boulevard.
17:24:00 We recently formed the Bayshore Boulevard residence
17:24:05 association, a group that is somewhat underrepresented
17:24:08 recently when the Bayshore task force was formed.
17:24:14 These are the people that actually live on the
17:24:15 Bayshore so we are not talking about a street, we are
17:24:17 talking about our front yard.
17:24:19 And we were interested in it being an attracter.
17:24:23 It certainly is an attracter.
17:24:25 And we support that completely.
17:24:28 But we also are watching closely to make sure that our
17:24:32 property rights are not affected, and that sort of
17:24:35 thing on our homes.
17:24:37 We have got a new group.
17:24:38 And we want you all to know about it.
17:24:40 And we are looking forward to working with you.
17:24:42 That concludes our report.
17:24:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?

17:24:45 We need to close the public hearing.
17:24:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
17:24:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:24:50 (Motion carried).
17:24:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair, move an
17:24:54 ordinance for first reading consideration an ordinance
17:24:56 amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use
17:24:59 element, to add an objective and policies relating to
17:25:02 Bayshore Boulevard, from Brorein Street to Gandy
17:25:05 Boulevard, Bayshore Boulevard, and adjacent properties
17:25:10 contiguous to Bayshore Boulevard, designating Bayshore
17:25:12 Boulevard as a regional attracter, designating
17:25:15 Bayshore Boulevard as a major community asset,
17:25:17 establishing an objective for the preservation and
17:25:20 enhance.
17:25:21 Of Bayshore Boulevard and adjacent properties,
17:25:23 providing for land development regulations for
17:25:25 Bayshore Boulevard, and adjacent properties contiguous
17:25:28 to Bayshore Boulevard, based on existing development
17:25:31 patterns and existing future land use map
17:25:33 designations, including but not limited to building
17:25:36 setbacks and height, on-site landscape, buffers, and

17:25:41 streetscape, providing policies to preserve and
17:25:44 enhance Bayshore Boulevard, designating Bayshore
17:25:46 Boulevard as a scenic corridor, providing for repeal
17:25:49 of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
17:25:51 severability, providing an effective date.
17:25:53 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and a second.
17:25:54 Question, Ms. Saul-Sena.
17:25:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to thank all the
17:25:58 citizens who put so many hours into working with our
17:26:02 staff on this.
17:26:04 And this is an exciting evening.
17:26:06 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
17:26:07 (Motion carried).
17:26:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open item 3.
17:26:13 >> Motion and second.
17:26:14 (Motion carried).
17:26:15 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.
17:26:19 This next agenda item, plan amendment 06-25, is an
17:26:24 amendment to the central business district periphery
17:26:28 boundary, which is located south of Adamo drive, near
17:26:31 the Crosstown expressway in the vicinity of the Ybor
17:26:34 channel.

17:26:40 Let me just put some graphics down.
17:26:42 The particular area is related to the Channel District
17:26:49 community redevelopment area plan and the area that we
17:26:51 are looking at.
17:26:55 From the far right hand corner of the Channel
17:26:57 District.
17:26:58 The proposed amendment -- the current boundary of the
17:27:06 CBD periphery goes straight up the Ybor channel.
17:27:10 The proposal, the proposed amendment, is to move the
17:27:14 CBD line to include that right-hand portion of the
17:27:18 Channel District.
17:27:19 It was always understood or thought that these
17:27:22 boundaries coexisted.
17:27:24 So this amendment is to have those particular
17:27:28 boundaries align with one another.
17:27:32 The department of community affairs had no objections
17:27:34 to this amendment, and the Planning Commission has
17:27:37 found it consistent.
17:27:39 That completes my presentation.
17:27:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
17:27:43 Ms. Mulhern?
17:27:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, is the amendment to line up this

17:27:48 yellow line with the red line?
17:27:51 Or is it to add that little piece?
17:27:53 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: It is to add the piece in the yellow,
17:27:56 to move the red line which is vertical, to include
17:28:00 that area which is in yellow because that is an area
17:28:03 that is within the Channel District redevelopment
17:28:05 area.
17:28:06 Let me show the other map to you.
17:28:16 The boundary here is straight up.
17:28:24 It goes to the east.
17:28:30 The intent is to include that area which is to the
17:28:33 east.
17:28:35 That's part of the Channel District CRA.
17:28:38 It is not within the CBD periphery, so the request is
17:28:42 to amend that red line over to pick up that area
17:28:46 that's within the yellow, so that CRA line and the CBD
17:28:51 line in this area coexist.
17:28:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, so the rationale for this is to
17:28:58 make it the same as the CRA.
17:29:01 >>> Correct.
17:29:02 >> J was the CRA drawn with that funny piece added in?
17:29:07 >>> I don't have an answer on that.

17:29:08 I do know the CBD periphery was many, many years ago,
17:29:12 like 20 years ago, that the CBD periphery study was
17:29:15 done and the lines were followed, when the Channel
17:29:19 District was developed, I believe they were looking at
17:29:22 particular ownership patterns, when the actual final
17:29:25 district boundaries were developed.
17:29:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena.
17:29:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Who made the request?
17:29:42 >>DAVID MECHANIK: 305 south Boulevard.
17:29:44 I'm here on behalf of the applicant Gibralter
17:29:49 development.
17:29:49 As you recall, it's really a companion with items,
17:29:54 item 3, 4 and 5, we did an extensive presentation
17:29:58 before council.
17:30:01 Jan Krieger of Alex Krieger came and did a
17:30:06 presentation.
17:30:06 We have a 23-acre site that rocks around the north end
17:30:09 of Ybor City, which is proposed for mixed uses with
17:30:13 residential, office, and retail.
17:30:18 And so this was sort of a clean-up amendment to
17:30:21 facilitate the other two amendments, items 4 and 5.
17:30:25 And we did not plan on doing a full presentation

17:30:28 unless you all -- I know you have a full agenda
17:30:30 tonight.
17:30:31 But really it's to facilitate our ability to go
17:30:35 forward with that project.
17:30:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask one question?
17:30:40 When you say facilitate, does that mean you need -- we
17:30:44 need to make this land use change in order to --
17:30:52 >> What it does is it allows us to use the bonus
17:30:54 density criteria in the Channel District for that
17:30:57 piece of property that we are expanding.
17:31:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
17:31:03 wants ton speak on item number 3?
17:31:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
17:31:06 >> Second.
17:31:07 (Motion carried).
17:31:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move an ordinance
17:31:13 amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use
17:31:15 element, future land use map, to amend the central
17:31:18 business district periphery boundary located south of
17:31:20 Adamo drive and Crosstown expressway in the vicinity
17:31:24 of Ybor channel, providing for repeal of all
17:31:26 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

17:31:29 providing an effective date.
17:31:30 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
17:31:31 (Motion carried).
17:31:32 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no and
17:31:39 Dingfelder absent.
17:31:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 4 we need to open.
17:31:43 >> So moved.
17:31:44 >> Second.
17:31:44 (Motion carried).
17:31:45 >> Could I ask that you open agenda item 4 and agenda
17:31:52 item 5?
17:31:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Also open number 5.
17:31:55 >> Second.
17:31:56 (Motion carried).
17:31:57 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: These two particular amendments,
17:32:05 06-26 and 06-27 are side by side and they are located
17:32:09 in -- plan amendment 06-26 is located a little over 13
17:32:33 acres located on the eastern side, south of the
17:32:38 Crosstown, Adamo drive.
17:32:41 And this is currently heavy industrial, and the
17:32:43 request is built to an urban mixed use 60 category to
17:32:48 allow for mixed use development.

17:32:49 The plan amendment 06-27 lies west of that, and it is
17:32:57 approximately 8.84 acres, and it goes from heavy
17:33:03 commercial to regional mixed use 100, again to allow
17:33:07 for consideration of the mixed use development.
17:33:16 These particular amendments were forwarded to the
17:33:20 department of community affairs for review.
17:33:23 They did receive an objection from the state, asking
17:33:27 for demonstration of relationship to the port of
17:33:31 Tampa, the port of Tampa master plan.
17:33:37 A response was prepared to address those particular
17:33:39 issues, and however, they did ask that an additional
17:33:46 response be prepared related to compatibility of the
17:33:49 land use.
17:33:53 I want to hand out supplements.
17:33:57 And this particular supplement, department of
17:34:10 community affairs asks that the response for land use
17:34:15 compatibility related to mitigation be explored, and
17:34:23 it is allowed for in a particular policy of the
17:34:25 coastal management element, which states that land use
17:34:29 amendments for residential mix use development within
17:34:33 the port activity scepter may be approved at the -- if
17:34:37 the applicant addresses compatibility of the use of

17:34:40 properties within 250 feet of the proposed use
17:34:42 designated for industrial uses.
17:34:43 And this area is within an area of the plan that
17:34:48 currently has the heavy industrial plan
17:34:51 classification.
17:34:52 The responses to this -- and it is recommended that
17:34:57 the mitigation techniques be incorporated into the
17:35:05 adoption ordinance for consideration, and we believe
17:35:09 that this will satisfy the department of community
17:35:13 affairs with this particular item.
17:35:18 Other than that, I believe we have got everything
17:35:20 addressed related to these two particular amendments.
17:35:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions from council members?
17:35:28 Mr. Scott?
17:35:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the community affairs has not
17:35:33 reviewed this?
17:35:35 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: This has been -- the language that is
17:35:37 provided as part of this supplement has been reviewed
17:35:39 by the department of community affairs.
17:35:42 And they are in agreement with the substance of it.
17:35:47 It's related to the mitigation.
17:35:49 It's primarily related to setbacks and types of

17:35:52 mitigation towards the adjoining properties.
17:35:55 And it is expected that if the plan amendment is
17:36:00 approved and they come through for a rezoning that
17:36:03 these types of setbacks will be examined as part of
17:36:07 any type of rezoning, and you may be looking at other
17:36:10 things as well in terms of a particular rezoning on
17:36:12 these properties.
17:36:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions by council members?
17:36:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I was just going to ask, Madam
17:36:22 Chair, in other words, we have gotten to the point
17:36:24 where the passage of this is not going to be in any
17:36:27 way a detriment to the area.
17:36:31 There's been some dialogue.
17:36:33 >>> There has been dialogue between department of
17:36:36 community affairs, the city staff, Planning Commission
17:36:39 staff, as well as the applicant, and as well as some
17:36:44 of the adjoining property owners as well.
17:36:46 >> And these items listed here in dark, bold print,
17:36:50 are the track of which future land zonings will be
17:36:58 based on?
17:36:59 >> Only for the particular site.
17:37:00 >> Thank you very much.

17:37:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
17:37:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is an area that really used to
17:37:07 be a working port, industrial uses, and the proposal
17:37:14 is to transition it to retail commercial and
17:37:19 residential uses, and given the fact that most of the
17:37:24 ports, the heavy duty port activities are moving south
17:37:26 to the other port area, this seems to be pretty
17:37:29 exciting.
17:37:30 I assume that we are going to some day have the
17:37:34 transit system that will allow densities to be pretty
17:37:38 great, if you are going to put density somewhere,
17:37:40 where it's served by our streetcar system where it's
17:37:45 proximate to Ybor and downtown, I think that this
17:37:47 would be a pretty dramatic transformation and a very
17:37:50 positive one and willing to support it.
17:37:53 >> Petitioner?
17:38:00 >>DAVID MECHANIK: 305 south Boulevard.
17:38:01 I don't really have anything to add.
17:38:03 But we do believe we have satisfied the DCA concerns.
17:38:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
17:38:09 wants to speak on item number 40?
17:38:11 >>> Richard Davis, 220 east Madison street, suite 512.

17:38:22 This evening, I am here on behalf of Hess corporation.
17:38:25 And -- and you will notice that there is a storage
17:38:29 tank, petroleum storage tank on the south side of the
17:38:32 boundary of this property.
17:38:33 And first let me state for purposes of the record, I
17:38:35 have been in touch with Mr. Mechanik and we are
17:38:37 certainly working with the applicant to deal with the
17:38:40 compatibility issues.
17:38:42 Our fundamental issues before you this evening is that
17:38:46 HESS corporation has owned this property since 1989.
17:38:50 Prior to that, the Phillips Petroleum company operated
17:38:53 a storage facility on this site.
17:38:55 It is approximately 29 acres in size, and provides
17:38:59 employment for upwards of 89 individuals, both on-site
17:39:03 as well as trucking, and the petroleum products that
17:39:07 are unloaded here are shipped not only around this
17:39:09 area but also into central Florida, and it's
17:39:11 recognition of the importance of this facility.
17:39:14 My goal here this evening is to emphasize to you the
17:39:17 fact that we certainly recognize that changes are come
17:39:21 in the port area, and we want to coexist with any of
17:39:24 the uses that come in.

17:39:26 Our principal concern is that down the line, we just
17:39:30 want through these mitigation strategies to ensure
17:39:33 that we don't face someone down the line using our
17:39:36 industrial characteristics as a lever against our use,
17:39:41 and coming into council and asking our use be
17:39:45 curtailed or otherwise reduced in its size, because as
17:39:48 evidenced this morning at the workshop, at the port
17:39:50 authority, certainly the port is a very important
17:39:55 entity in the local economy, and we certainly tend to
17:39:57 have our use there for quite a long time.
17:40:00 And I have a letter which summarizes these comments.
17:40:03 I will certainly introduce into the record.
17:40:05 Between now and December 20th, I will be working
17:40:07 with Mr. Mechanik to come back and hopefully on the
17:40:11 20th, certainly finalize the work on the
17:40:14 mitigation strategies.
17:40:15 Those are the focuses, I think, of our effort, because
17:40:20 policy 13.4 of the coastal management element, which
17:40:23 was added to the plan after changes that occurred a
17:40:26 few years back, it directs your attention to
17:40:29 establishing controls for compatibility across
17:40:32 boundary lines, when you are changing industrial land

17:40:35 use designations, to promote mixed use.
17:40:39 And that's what's occurring here.
17:40:41 And we will certainly work with the applicant and the
17:40:43 city.
17:40:44 But for purposes of the record, it is very important.
17:40:47 And I have Mr. Bruce Hawkins, an executive with the
17:40:50 Hess corporation here this evening, if you have any
17:40:52 questions.
17:40:52 We just want to let everyone know we consider
17:40:55 ourselves to be a viable component of the port
17:40:59 operation, one that has contributed over time to the
17:41:01 city.
17:41:01 We look forward to continuing in that role in the city
17:41:06 and want everyone to know we do intend to be there for
17:41:08 quite awhile.
17:41:09 So I will introduce my letter into the record, so that
17:41:12 will be memorialized.
17:41:13 And I would ask that my comments this evening be
17:41:15 applied to the official record, not only amendment
17:41:19 number 26 but also amendment number 27.
17:41:22 Thank you council members.
17:41:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm looking at the map.

17:41:28 And there's not just one tank that we can see.
17:41:32 This is immediately south of the proposed land use
17:41:35 change.
17:41:37 There's a number of them.
17:41:39 That whole property owned by Hess?
17:41:44 >>> Yes, council members.
17:41:46 He's here if you have specific questions about the
17:41:48 use.
17:41:49 >> I just want to know how much of this is -- as you
17:41:54 go south of the bigger ones we can see there are a lot
17:41:57 of tanks, if staff is here.
17:42:01 Is there someone who can tell me?
17:42:04 >> We can perhaps put the aerial back up.
17:42:08 If you can even move it up a little bit more.
17:42:26 Is that as far as it will go?
17:42:28 Okay.
17:42:32 I think I have a bigger picture here.
17:42:35 As you can see, there are more as you go south.
17:42:40 So I just wondered how much of that is Hess.
17:42:45 >> I would ask Mr. Bruce Hopkins from Hess Corporation
17:42:48 for that information.
17:42:51 >> Bruce Hawkins, 2648 Reagan Trail, Lake Mary,

17:42:57 Florida.
17:42:58 Without a survey -- I mean, without checking with the
17:43:00 real estate people, to the best of my knowledge, it
17:43:02 does extend down to the roadway that you see beyond
17:43:06 the white tanks, or the storage tanks, if you will, to
17:43:12 about this portion right in here.
17:43:17 >>MARY MULHERN: So it looks like a little square.
17:43:19 Do we know what these other tanks are south of there,
17:43:25 or -- maybe somebody knows.
17:43:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott?
17:43:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't.
17:43:38 >>MARY MULHERN: If they are not, I understand you
17:43:40 probably don't know.
17:43:41 I'm wondering if maybe Mr. Mechanik or somebody knows
17:43:45 what the other surrounding areas, there are the other
17:43:49 tanks just south of there, smaller ones.
17:43:53 And then there's some green area and then there's
17:43:56 more.
17:43:58 Down here.
17:44:00 And it's pretty much all the way.
17:44:02 What are those?
17:44:06 What are those he has his finger on right now?

17:44:09 >>> Yes, I'm sorry.
17:44:12 >>> From this point, these are the Hess facilities.
17:44:14 >> And it's all petroleum?
17:44:19 >>> These are asphalt, apparently, uses.
17:44:28 And not Hess' facility.
17:44:29 >> Okay.
17:44:31 So they are not.
17:44:36 >>> So we are the --
17:44:42 >> And is it petroleum?
17:44:44 >>> Yes.
17:44:44 >> Is it had to pipeline?
17:44:47 >>> Yes.
17:44:49 The tankers that come in, they drop the product, the
17:44:53 product is pulled, stored, then we have the trucking
17:44:56 industry for the transit that comes in and pulls the
17:45:01 product from the storage tanks, and they distribute
17:45:05 throughout western and central Florida.
17:45:06 >> Right on this site is where they --
17:45:09 >>> that's correct.
17:45:09 >> So it's not going into a pipeline.
17:45:13 That all happens right there in that traffic?
17:45:15 >>> Correct.

17:45:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
17:45:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my question, what is the
17:45:21 distance of what the line is to that first tank?
17:45:23 What is that distance there?
17:45:25 Secondly, will there be some kind of buffer?
17:45:28 I guess that's the question that you need to address,
17:45:31 it's more important.
17:45:31 >>DAVID MECHANIK: The closest tank to our property
17:45:37 boundary, the tank is 112 feet to its property
17:45:44 boundary.
17:45:44 We are proposing an extensive setback on our southerly
17:45:49 boundary, of at least 50 feet, so we are looking at a
17:45:56 minimum of 162 feet for the first building to occur.
17:46:00 We also recognize -- and I told Mr. Davis that I would
17:46:05 confirm this for the record this evening.
17:46:07 We have planned this site all along, understanding
17:46:10 that Hess was there, and was planning to stay there.
17:46:13 And in that regard there are other planning
17:46:18 techniques, including orientation of buildings, and
17:46:22 putting buildings that are more suited for the nature
17:46:27 of that use.
17:46:28 And so we fully anticipate being able to coexist

17:46:33 without any difficulty.
17:46:35 You know, some of those distances are very comparable
17:46:39 to the same distance you have, the residents in
17:46:45 Palmetto Beach to heavy port maritime uses, as well as
17:46:49 residences on Harbor Island across the channel from
17:46:55 port and maritime uses.
17:46:56 So we believe we are very comparable in terms of that.
17:46:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Just following my question about a
17:47:03 buffer, do you intend to also place a buffer there
17:47:05 once you start?
17:47:05 >>> Yes, we will have screening and heavy landscaping.
17:47:10 There is an extensive road use that we are planning by
17:47:14 Hess -- planting, very, very tall trees.
17:47:18 >> For the purposes of the record, also, I do want to
17:47:20 say that Mr. Mechanik and I are working on this and he
17:47:22 has been very amenable to structuring mitigation
17:47:26 strategies and we will continue that effort.
17:47:28 And I appreciate his cooperation.
17:47:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
17:47:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
17:47:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone else that was going to
17:47:37 speak?

17:47:37 >>CHAIRMAN: Yes.
17:47:38 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a line of questions.
17:47:40 But after public comment.
17:47:43 For the petitioner.
17:47:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
17:47:52 Give it to the clerk.
17:47:53 Would anyone else like to speak?
17:47:54 Al Steenson, 4100 west Keila Avenue.
17:48:07 Some of you may recognize me as being a spokesman for
17:48:11 sun way south but I want to clear for the record
17:48:13 tonight I am down here speaking just for myself.
17:48:16 I wasn't going to come down here tonight.
17:48:17 But when I started reading the numbers on this one,
17:48:23 this 4 and 5, and the five more that come after it --
17:48:28 and these are generic comments -- these numbers start
17:48:32 scaring me.
17:48:33 Because the next thing that's going to happen is as
17:48:35 these plan amendments move forward, the next thing you
17:48:37 are going to be hearing is people back here rezoning.
17:48:40 And my question -- and keep this in the back of your
17:48:44 mind, as you review these tonight, you have UMU 60,
17:48:47 RMU 100, CMU 35, UME 60, 35.

17:48:55 And our aging and crumbling infrastructure -- can our
17:49:01 structure handle this a little further down the road?
17:49:03 We are thinking outside the box tonight, aren't we?
17:49:05 Plan amendments.
17:49:06 We have to a workshop this morning on the
17:49:09 comprehensive plan amendments coming up in 2008.
17:49:12 But what we haven't done is had a comprehensive look
17:49:16 at how we are going to find the proper infrastructure
17:49:21 for these kind of densities.
17:49:23 As you review these tonight, I am simply asking to you
17:49:26 ask yourself a question.
17:49:27 When these come back, regardless of the mitigation
17:49:29 that's built in, will the city be able to provide the
17:49:32 services for all of this density?
17:49:36 Thank you very much.
17:49:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:49:37 Would anyone else like to speak?
17:49:39 Mr. Mechanik, will you come back up?
17:49:42 Ms. Hull Mulhern has some questions for you.
17:49:51 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm trying to understand, the piece to
17:49:54 the east of the channel, is that part of the
17:49:59 Channelside, the Channelside plan this.

17:50:05 >>> Not part of the Channel District. That was that
17:50:07 periphery boundary that we were watching up in the
17:50:09 early --
17:50:10 >> But that part isn't really part of it.
17:50:12 >>> Right.
17:50:13 It is part of the regional mixed use -- I'm sorry, the
17:50:17 Ybor channel, mixed use regional activity center.
17:50:20 And that's why it's eligible for the urban mixed use
17:50:23 classification.
17:50:25 We are not asking for the highest density, which is
17:50:27 the RMU on the west side of the channel.
17:50:30 >> Frankly, I just don't get it.
17:50:38 I mean, when you look at this map, you're asking to
17:50:40 drop the mixed use.
17:50:47 And how much residential is it going to be?
17:50:52 >>DAVID MECHANIK: Well, I mean, we have a zoning
17:50:54 application that will be forthcoming, but we only have
17:50:58 really planned the initial phase of the development,
17:51:00 so we don't really have the final totals.
17:51:03 >> I just don't understand why, you know, this just
17:51:07 doesn't make sense to me.
17:51:09 And I know that's not something I want to base my

17:51:11 decision on.
17:51:12 But I would like to know why you would put this
17:51:16 development right next to petroleum tanks, and then
17:51:20 asphalt stuff right there.
17:51:22 And as you go -- and then you have got the Crosstown.
17:51:25 It's completely surrounded by industrial uses, and it
17:51:33 just doesn't seem like a real -- it's not like -- and
17:51:36 we have the neighbor to the south saying they want to
17:51:40 stay there, intending to stay there.
17:51:42 It's not as if anything around there is going to
17:51:48 suddenly start transitioning into anything else.
17:51:52 So I don't understand what the thinking is.
17:51:55 >>DAVID MECHANIK: In hindsight, and perhaps we should
17:51:58 have brought the lengthy PowerPoint presentation we
17:52:00 brought to the first hearing.
17:52:02 But Alex Krieger did a presentation of several urban
17:52:08 redevelopment projects that he has done along
17:52:12 waterfront.
17:52:14 >> If he is the guy from Harvard?
17:52:16 >>>
17:52:17 >> Yes, that's correct.
17:52:18 And what he showed in those photographs, and what my

17:52:20 client has engaged him to do in this particular case,
17:52:24 is to do the similar thing.
17:52:26 Those projects were particular examples of mixed use
17:52:30 developments that have occurred in and adjacent to
17:52:35 industrial areas, and they have worked quite well.
17:52:38 And, you know, I'm not the planner here.
17:52:41 I would like Mr. English to speak to it in more
17:52:43 detail.
17:52:44 But this is really quite common.
17:52:46 And like I say, the distances are not any closer than
17:52:52 the residents in Palmetto Beach and in Harbor Island,
17:52:58 both of whom have coexisted in the case of Palmetto
17:53:01 Beach, I think they have coexisted with the Ford
17:53:05 activity, since the 1920s.
17:53:08 So we feel this is entirely appropriate, and we fully
17:53:11 recognize we need to deal with the adjacency of those
17:53:18 uses in terms of setbacks, mitigation, buffering.
17:53:22 Would you like to speak to that?
17:53:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess my question is more, you know,
17:53:27 for the developer behind this.
17:53:32 Who is going to want to live there?
17:53:37 >>> Michael English with Wilson Miller, 2205-20th

17:53:42 street.
17:53:42 Ms. Mulhern, if I could refer you to the Elmo for just
17:53:46 a second.
17:53:46 This is sort of an important piece of a big picture.
17:53:56 It's really about urban redevelopment in an urban
17:53:58 center.
17:53:59 This is -- these are our sites.
17:54:03 >> Could you take the mike?
17:54:07 >>CHAIRMAN: Take the mike.
17:54:08 >>> Sorry.
17:54:09 These are our sites.
17:54:11 And you recognize the central business district,
17:54:13 Central Park, Ybor, the IKEA property is here.
17:54:19 You are going to hear about the Adamo redevelopment
17:54:21 corridor tonight, I think.
17:54:24 It's on your agenda.
17:54:25 The Channel District. What this really represents is
17:54:27 a link, just as the redevelopment of this part of a
17:54:31 demo will represent a link, connecting the core and
17:54:34 Central Park's redevelopment with Ybor and Palmetto
17:54:36 Beach.
17:54:41 This is a residential area that's right next to

17:54:44 industrial.
17:54:44 What we believe is that lots of urban dwellers will
17:54:47 want to live here, they will live peacefully.
17:54:50 These are very passive industrial uses.
17:54:52 They will be well buffered.
17:54:53 We think that the future of the city, major density
17:54:57 increases, is really going to be in this area, and we
17:55:00 think that the transit system is going to be improved
17:55:04 dramatically over the next decade to really allow
17:55:06 people to live in these areas and that use transit.
17:55:09 So of all the places where you might consider
17:55:12 converting old industrial property and a redefining
17:55:17 waterfront property, this is the area we would do it.
17:55:21 And that's exactly what the developer is counting on,
17:55:24 that he can do a really sophisticated, high density,
17:55:27 mixed use community here that will connect the Channel
17:55:29 District with Ybor City, and Palmetto Beach, and the
17:55:35 downtown.
17:55:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, I understand.
17:55:39 This particular piece, though, to me doesn't seem -- I
17:55:44 mean, it's not connected.
17:55:47 It's dropped into an industrial port area.

17:55:50 I don't -- I just -- I see all this area around
17:55:55 Central Park, central business district, Ybor City,
17:55:59 any of that makes sense to me.
17:56:06 But to do that when -- and I mean then is why we have
17:56:10 land use categories and zoning, because this is where
17:56:13 you have tanks full of petroleum.
17:56:16 I mean, you are talking about hazardous -- that tank
17:56:20 must be huge, that big one.
17:56:22 And I just -- I think this might happen some day, but
17:56:27 to me, there is just a lot more that needs to happen.
17:56:33 And especially with the market where it is now.
17:56:35 I mean, you know, we want to fill in the Channelside
17:56:40 district.
17:56:40 And we want more residential downtown.
17:56:43 And it, to me from a market perspective, doesn't make
17:56:48 sense.
17:56:49 But that's not even talking about my issues with the
17:56:54 fact that it just doesn't seem compatible to me at
17:56:58 all. If you were just talking about the part maybe to
17:57:01 the west of the channel, it might make sense.
17:57:03 But to put that piece there.
17:57:05 And another question, is the yellow line, is that

17:57:09 going to be the entrance to your -- to the southern
17:57:18 part of that line that goes -- keep going.
17:57:22 There.
17:57:23 Keep going, keep going.
17:57:24 It looks like a road.
17:57:26 >> It's a flag out there.
17:57:27 >>MARY MULHERN: You're on it, yeah.
17:57:31 >>> It's a secondary entrance.
17:57:33 Main entry will be Adamo drive and there will be
17:57:36 several entries from and to the east and the advantage
17:57:41 here is that it will connect at 19th street which
17:57:44 is relatively underutilized signalized intersection.
17:57:48 And, really, will eventually fill out this whole area
17:57:52 will become mixed use, and that's pretty much the end
17:57:55 of it.
17:57:56 Then you jump the Crosstown and IKEA.
17:58:00 And this one leftover industrial park and you finish
17:58:04 this side of Adamo and really created the gateway to
17:58:07 Tampa.
17:58:08 >> Right.
17:58:09 But you're planning that this is all -- all of this,
17:58:11 which is all industrial right now, except for your

17:58:15 piece here, that's all going to be mixed use?
17:58:20 We are suddenly not going to have any of that
17:58:22 industrial port business?
17:58:23 >>> It's all going to move south, which is consistent
17:58:25 with the port's master plan.
17:58:28 They have known this for years.
17:58:29 This is all private property.
17:58:31 The port has never controlled it.
17:58:33 The company that is there now is the company with
17:58:35 the -- they are selling it, they are moving south.
17:58:41 Port is moving its major operations to the south,
17:58:44 because this is all really become a new part of the
17:58:47 urban center.
17:58:48 >> I thought there were two, from what I recall, there
17:58:50 were two different shipping companies up there now.
17:58:53 >>> There's just one here.
17:58:56 There are several others in the port.
17:58:58 But they are further south.
17:59:01 >> It's further sow south down here.
17:59:03 >>MARY MULHERN: And they are planning to relocate
17:59:05 within the port?
17:59:07 >>> I know they would like to.

17:59:08 They have been in negotiation was the port for several
17:59:10 years.
17:59:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:59:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
17:59:19 John McKirchy?
17:59:21 I read Mr. Davis' letter, and his concerns on behalf
17:59:28 of his client.
17:59:30 I remember when we did Rattlesnake Point we sort of
17:59:33 were faced with some similar issues, as I'm sure you
17:59:37 recall.
17:59:39 >>> I do.
17:59:40 >> Okay.
17:59:40 And I'm just wondering.
17:59:42 And David, I can't remember if you were part of that
17:59:44 rattlesnake group.
17:59:47 A lot of attorneys.
17:59:48 It all becomes a big blur after awhile.
17:59:51 But, anyway, I'm just wondering, you know, what we
17:59:54 ended up doing.
17:59:55 Rattlesnake was adding some language, and everyone
17:59:58 though it rather unusual we add sod language in the
18:00:00 comp plan amendment to accommodate some of these sort

18:00:07 of transitional concerns.
18:00:08 And I think that in those cases, they protected
18:00:18 various interests.
18:00:18 I can't remember the details.
18:00:19 But I'm just wondering, have we looked at that, Mr.
18:00:23 Davis?
18:00:23 I don't know where you went but I'm sure you are still
18:00:26 here.
18:00:27 Have you all looked at any type of language that might
18:00:32 appease your concerns as --
18:00:35 >>> John McKirchy, legal department.
18:00:38 Yes, council member Dingfelder.
18:00:39 We have looked at those types of issues and there's a
18:00:43 myriad different alternatives to address the issue of
18:00:47 compatibility and mitigation between the industrial
18:00:50 and proposed mixed use project.
18:00:54 That specific approach has not been proposed at this
18:00:58 point but it is certainly a very viable and feasible
18:01:01 alternative.
18:01:04 The call for the adoption of land development
18:01:06 regulations, LDRs, and we haven't gone do that yet
18:01:10 in this case but it's certainly one of the

18:01:11 alternatives that we can explore.
18:01:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other question I have for you,
18:01:22 Mr. Mechanik, you mentioned that your property line
18:01:25 for PA 06-26 was 100-something feet from the closest
18:01:30 tank.
18:01:30 In looking at this picture that's on our screen, that
18:01:34 seems -- that doesn't seem right.
18:01:39 >>> The engineers measured it off from a scale aerial
18:01:43 photograph.
18:01:43 >> Do you see what I'm looking at and see why I'm
18:01:46 wondering?
18:01:50 What's the dimension of that?
18:01:53 What's the dimension of your parcel?
18:02:03 >>> He's questioning the 112 feet.
18:02:05 >> Do you see what I'm saying?
18:02:07 It doesn't look like 112 feet from the tank to the
18:02:10 line.
18:02:13 >>> It's a relatively small scale aerial photograph so
18:02:17 it looks very close.
18:02:18 >> I understand.
18:02:19 Somebody told me what your east-west dimension is then
18:02:21 I can have a better idea what we are talking about.

18:02:23 >>> It really is --
18:02:29 >> If everybody is sure of that, I'll trust you.
18:02:31 But anyway, going back to the original question.
18:02:34 You have got some adjacent property issues.
18:02:38 Is it something you all can work out?
18:02:40 >>> We have actually been asked to be more specific
18:02:42 than what we did on Rattlesnake Point.
18:02:44 DCA asked us to not adopt land development
18:02:48 regulations.
18:02:49 They asked us to identify commitments, specific
18:02:54 commitments in terms of language, that would be
18:02:56 attached to the ordinance if this amendment is
18:03:00 approved, and it includes -- and that's the language
18:03:02 we have been working on with Mr. Davis.
18:03:05 And it would include specific language about setbacks,
18:03:09 buffering, building orientation, transportation issues
18:03:14 and so forth.
18:03:15 >> When would that --
18:03:18 >>> that would come in during second reading which is
18:03:20 exactly what happened with us on the Rattlesnake
18:03:22 Point.
18:03:23 We would have that.

18:03:24 >> Okay.
18:03:25 And the substance of that language is part of the --
18:03:29 >>> is part of the package that Rose already gave
18:03:32 council earlier this evening.
18:03:33 But we haven't ironed out the specific language at
18:03:37 this point.
18:03:42 >>> We intend to work on that between now and the
18:03:44 December 20th meeting.
18:03:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. McKirchy is okay with that?
18:03:51 >>> Yes, council members, we are going to try to get
18:03:53 that to you well in advance of December 20th.
18:03:56 We are not going to wait till the last minute.
18:03:59 There's plenty of time, and we wanted to hopefully
18:04:01 have something that you can consider, if the city
18:04:05 staff wants to propose that, there's obviously some
18:04:08 concern, adjacent neighbors, it sounds like council is
18:04:15 very interested in resolving the compatibility issues
18:04:18 as well.
18:04:18 So we can do that and bring something back to you and
18:04:20 revise the ordinance at that time.
18:04:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have some concern about the loss
18:04:25 of industrial, like Mr. Steenson might have spoken to

18:04:28 that, loss of industrial, loss of Portland, but at the
18:04:31 end of the day if that's private property, and that
18:04:35 private property owner no longer wants to operate it
18:04:38 as industrial, you know, and we have wrapped the rest
18:04:41 of Channelside, the Channel District around the Ybor
18:04:44 channel, with residential and mixed use activities, I
18:04:50 don't know why we would change course here.
18:04:56 >>> If I could -- and I know you have a long
18:04:58 evening -- just wrap up a few points in response to
18:05:01 Ms. Mulhern's comments.
18:05:04 This property is, as I indicated, designated today in
18:05:08 the comprehensive plan, part of the Ybor channel
18:05:12 regional mix use activity center.
18:05:14 It is an area that's recommended for urban high
18:05:19 density urban redevelopment.
18:05:21 It's also within the waterfront redevelopment
18:05:25 district, which also encourages redevelopment along
18:05:29 the waterfront to provide public access to wallet
18:05:33 front that is sorely lacking in Tampa.
18:05:37 This property is also in an enterprise zone.
18:05:40 And the interesting thoughts about that is, in the
18:05:43 context of loss of industrial land, these properties,

18:05:47 the reason they are for sale is because the maritime
18:05:51 use, the trend is moving south.
18:05:53 Most of these activities are really marginal at this
18:05:57 point, and you're seeing very little intensive
18:06:01 industrial activity occurring on these properties.
18:06:03 And indeed the seller of this property to my client
18:06:08 has elected to relocate his ship repair business.
18:06:13 So in the context of the enterprise zone, you want
18:06:17 to -- the whole policy is to encourage redevelopment
18:06:21 to allow new job opportunities to occur in these
18:06:25 areas.
18:06:26 And we think that this project is literally the poster
18:06:30 child that fulfills the objectives that are already
18:06:34 identified in the comprehensive plan.
18:06:36 Thank you.
18:06:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:06:39 We need to close the public hearing.
18:06:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:06:42 >> Second.
18:06:42 (Motion carried).
18:06:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott, would you read that,
18:06:46 please?

18:06:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, ma'am.
18:06:55 An ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan,
18:06:58 future land use element, future land use map, for the
18:07:02 property located in the general vicinity of west of
18:07:04 17th street and 19th street and Ybor channel
18:07:08 from heavy industrial to urban mixed use 60, providing
18:07:11 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing
18:07:13 for severability, providing an effective date.
18:07:15 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:07:17 All in favor of the motion say Aye
18:07:21 Ms. Mulhern?
18:07:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted -- I think it's
18:07:29 important for us to be aware of this, what we are
18:07:32 doing.
18:07:32 And I know, Mr. Dingfelder, the trend or whatever it
18:07:38 was, it was before I was here, and was also before we
18:07:41 saw that we have a lot of residential, but it's empty,
18:07:47 and that people can't pay for it.
18:07:49 And the story in the paper today was about how the
18:07:55 port's consultants had told them how they need to
18:07:57 expand their business and how to expand.
18:08:00 And the overall plan, from whenever that was written,

18:08:05 for the port, may have been to move everything, but
18:08:09 it's not happening unless, you know, we make this land
18:08:11 use change.
18:08:12 And we decide, okay, this is now going to be mixed
18:08:17 use, and it's not going to be industrial.
18:08:21 I don't think it's compatible.
18:08:22 It's clearly not compatible.
18:08:25 And I don't feel convinced that that is a safe thing
18:08:30 to do.
18:08:30 And my really big objection, which I haven't had a
18:08:34 chance to say, was that I don't know if it's in the
18:08:40 comp plan or what, but aren't we supposed to be --
18:08:43 isn't the movement supposed to be to be moving
18:08:46 residential density away from hazardous material and
18:08:52 storage?
18:08:54 And the other thing is -- I forgot to ask you, so when
18:08:59 the public hearing was open, but that channel is owned
18:09:02 by the port.
18:09:03 Is that right?
18:09:04 Charlie, you probably know the answer to that.
18:09:07 The channel is owned by the port.
18:09:08 So I don't know how you are going to have access.

18:09:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I dug the channel.
18:09:14 [ Laughter ]
18:09:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Clerk, did we have the vote?
18:09:17 >>GWEN MILLER: We closed the public hearing.
18:09:19 You can't.
18:09:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry.
18:09:23 And I don't want to keep people here a long time.
18:09:25 This is important.
18:09:26 We are starting to talk about putting residential in
18:09:28 an area that's full of hazardous material on portland,
18:09:31 and homeland security won't even let you get near.
18:09:36 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no.
18:09:39 Second reading and adoption will be on December
18:09:41 20th at 9:30 a.m., as with items 2 and 3
18:09:45 previously.
18:09:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder, would you read number
18:09:47 5, please.
18:09:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move an ordinance for first
18:09:51 reading, an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive
18:09:53 plan, future land use element, future land use map for
18:09:55 the property located in the general vicinity east of
18:09:58 Channelside Drive south of the Crosstown expressway,

18:10:01 north of east harbor street, west of Ybor channel,
18:10:04 from heavy industrial to regional mixed use 100,
18:10:07 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
18:10:09 providing for severability, providing an effective
18:10:11 date.
18:10:11 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
18:10:13 Question on the motion, Ms. Saul-Sena.
18:10:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To answer your concerns about the
18:10:17 public access to the water, Ms. Mulhern, I have gone
18:10:21 through a change -- I thought about this whole area.
18:10:26 And this water is not used -- the reason that the
18:10:29 other area is secure is because you have got cruise
18:10:32 ships. This area is not being protected from anyone.
18:10:35 Because there's nothing happening there.
18:10:37 And really only 35 feet.
18:10:41 So it isn't really a viable area for these industrial
18:10:44 uses.
18:10:44 When we first started planning the Channel District,
18:10:48 15 years ago, there was some concern about, would this
18:10:50 make the industrial uses go further south?
18:10:53 And the answer is, yes.
18:10:54 And frankly it's better suited.

18:10:57 There's better truck access.
18:10:58 We have seen such a wonderful reinvestment of urban
18:11:02 activity dollars in this area of the Channel District
18:11:06 area, and in Ybor.
18:11:08 And this land in front of us tonight is in between,
18:11:14 and it makes sense to fill it in more with active uses
18:11:18 rather than industrial uses.
18:11:20 That's why I support it.
18:11:21 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:11:22 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no.
18:11:27 Second reading and adoption will be on December
18:11:28 20th at 9:30 a.m.
18:11:30 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item 6.
18:11:34 >> So moved.
18:11:34 >> Second.
18:11:35 (Motion carried).
18:11:35 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.
18:11:43 The next agenda item is the annual update to the
18:11:48 capital improvements element. This is done on an
18:11:50 annual basis.
18:11:51 Planning Commission reviewed this on November 5th
18:11:54 and found it consistent with the long-range

18:11:56 comprehensive plan.
18:11:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
18:11:59 Anyone in the public want to speak on item number 6?
18:12:02 >> Move to close.
18:12:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
18:12:06 (Motion carried).
18:12:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern, would you read that,
18:12:09 please?
18:12:11 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance being presented
18:12:13 for first reading consideration, an ordinance amending
18:12:15 the Tampa comprehensive plan, capital improvements
18:12:19 element by updating the schedule of projects for
18:12:21 fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2013 providing
18:12:24 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing
18:12:27 for severability, providing an effective date.
18:12:29 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
18:12:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott being absent at
18:12:37 vote.
18:12:38 Second reading and adoption will be on December
18:12:40 20th at 9:30 a.m.
18:12:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So move to open item 7.
18:12:46 >> Second.

18:12:47 (Motion carried).
18:12:51 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Agenda item 7 through 14 will meet
18:12:55 the definition for small scale future land use map
18:12:58 amendment.
18:12:58 These amendments not require any state regional review
18:13:03 but in accordance with the adoption procedures five
18:13:05 affirmative votes by City Council will be needed in
18:13:07 order to adopt each of the small scale amendments.
18:13:15 The next one is plan amendment 07-01.
18:13:22 This amendment is located at the vicinity of Swann,
18:13:34 Himes and Henderson.
18:13:36 It is a privately initiated amendment.
18:13:39 Request to go from residential 20 to community mixed
18:13:42 use 35.
18:13:43 The approximate acreage is about three quarters of an
18:13:47 acre of land.
18:13:48 Currently, the uses on that site include some offices,
18:13:53 and veterinarian clinic.
18:13:58 The current planning classification was residential 20
18:14:05 on the site.
18:14:06 Henderson Avenue is designated as community mixed use
18:14:09 35, in this particular area is looking to amend these

18:14:12 particular sites as part of that overall corridor.
18:14:15 This particular area does serve the larger community
18:14:20 commercial activity area, and serves many of the
18:14:23 residential areas in and around it.
18:14:29 The Planning Commission reviewed this amendment on
18:14:32 November 5th and found it consistent with the
18:14:34 long-range comprehensive plan.
18:14:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
18:14:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Rose, can you back up one slide,
18:14:41 please?
18:14:42 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: One slide.
18:14:44 >> That's existing?
18:14:46 >>> This is the current comprehensive plan.
18:14:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
18:14:51 And this is the corner property across the street from
18:14:53 the drugstore?
18:14:57 >>> That's correct.
18:14:57 Walgreen's is located right here.
18:15:02 >> Catter corners.
18:15:04 Keep going around.
18:15:05 >>> This is all greens right in here.
18:15:07 >> Oh, okay.

18:15:09 I'm on the wrong side.
18:15:11 Okay.
18:15:12 So that is --
18:15:20 >>> Proctor?
18:15:21 >> That's correct.
18:15:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's an L-shaped building that
18:15:24 has about ten doors on top and ten doors on the
18:15:27 bottom.
18:15:27 >>> That's correct.
18:15:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
18:15:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a staff question first.
18:15:34 The existing zoning currently, the existing land use
18:15:38 on this is --
18:15:40 >>> residential 20.
18:15:41 >> How could residential 20 have commercial uses on
18:15:44 it?
18:15:44 >>> There is some commercial zoning that's on that
18:15:47 site.
18:15:47 And I believe it was probably through the zoning
18:15:49 conformance program which at that point in time you
18:15:52 were able to cross the line.
18:15:55 >> Look at the picture we were just looking at.

18:15:58 >>> Yes.
18:15:59 >> So what you're saying is, the uses there that are
18:16:04 now -- I mean, there are professional uses and
18:16:07 commercial uses, but the underlying land use -- not
18:16:11 that picture, the one -- but the underlying land use
18:16:15 is residential 20.
18:16:16 >>> That's correct.
18:16:17 >> So -- okay.
18:16:20 Thanks.
18:16:24 So did you use the rationale of the existing land use
18:16:26 that was part of your decision making?
18:16:28 >>> As to community mixed use 35?
18:16:31 Yes, because of the way the land uses in this
18:16:34 particular area, there is across the street, or
18:16:38 existing -- let me see if I can find the existing.
18:16:41 >> Can we just stay with this picture?
18:16:45 >>> An existing --
18:16:47 >> Wait.
18:16:49 I like this one better.
18:16:51 No.
18:16:51 Not that one.
18:16:53 >>> That one.

18:16:53 >> Yes, okay.
18:16:54 The question I have is really if you look -- if we are
18:16:58 going by colors, if we look at the pink which is what
18:17:02 we are considering, everything is oriented toward
18:17:05 Henderson, which is a commercial street.
18:17:07 >>> That's correct.
18:17:08 >> And my concern about this proposal is the degree to
18:17:14 which it introduces the CMU 35 on Swann, which is
18:17:19 basically not a commercial street.
18:17:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Keep going down toward Dale Mabry
18:17:26 and it's office, office, office, office, office.
18:17:31 >> CMU 35 is more intense than office.
18:17:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But it's not R 20.
18:17:35 >> No.
18:17:37 But it's office.
18:17:38 And you don't need CMU 35 to do office.
18:17:40 >>> That's correct.
18:17:42 >> And I'm just questioning the degree that it goes to
18:17:44 the west.
18:17:46 >>> This particular graphic is showing how the land
18:17:50 areas are actually being used today.
18:17:52 This is based on the property appraiser's database,

18:17:56 and the areas along Swann, this one at Henderson and
18:18:00 Dale Mabry, down to the corner where Henderson
18:18:02 intersects I Dale Mabry.
18:18:04 All of this is commercial.
18:18:05 >> Excuse me.
18:18:06 That map doesn't distinguish between commercial and
18:18:09 office uses.
18:18:10 Which I think is very important.
18:18:12 >>> You're correct.
18:18:22 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street, Tampa,
18:18:24 33602.
18:18:25 I represent the petitioner.
18:18:27 We are seeking a CMU 35 from residential 20 to subject
18:18:31 property, about three quarters of an acre, the
18:18:33 northwest quadrant.
18:18:35 I think you understand Swann and Himes.
18:18:37 Most of you are familiar with the property N.any event
18:18:40 the existing designation is residential 20.
18:18:42 And quoting from the intent of residential 20 is,
18:18:46 quote, to designate areas that are primarily
18:18:49 single-family areas.
18:18:50 And you will see during the course of my presentation,

18:18:52 which will be very brief, is that this is the only
18:18:55 property on the west side of Henderson Boulevard
18:18:59 between Azeele and Dale Mabry that's not CMU 35.
18:19:04 The purpose of CMU 35 is to designate areas suitable
18:19:08 for general commercial office and multifamily
18:19:10 development.
18:19:11 I understand that you are not supposed to look
18:19:14 specifically at any specific use at this point in time
18:19:16 because this is kind of a generic land use change.
18:19:19 But I think I'm obligated to advise council that we
18:19:21 have a pending rezoning from the publicity property to
18:19:23 a bank.
18:19:24 So assuming that's ultimately approved, as step number
18:19:28 2 in this process, about 3700 square feet.
18:19:31 Right now as we speak there are 21 different uses out
18:19:34 there, including the cat doctor, and there will be a
18:19:37 single user, the existing facility out there -- and I
18:19:40 have a couple pictures -- and I ask council to receive
18:19:42 and file some of these documents I was going to refer
18:19:45 to.
18:19:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The properties that concern Mrs.
18:19:50 Saul-Sena the most, the ones -- the three lots that

18:19:53 back up directly to your client's property there, on
18:19:56 the map we are looking at.
18:19:57 >>MARK BENTLEY: Yes.
18:19:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think one of those is commercial,
18:20:03 or some sort of -- some type of commercial.
18:20:07 Other two are family residence?
18:20:09 >>> Yes.
18:20:10 Mr. Dingfelder, that's a good point.
18:20:12 I have got a zoning map here.
18:20:13 And I'll show you, the properties under consideration
18:20:16 are these four lots on Swann.
18:20:20 One of the lots directly to the north of our eastern
18:20:23 lot is already zoned commercial.
18:20:25 We know the entire intersection.
18:20:27 I have a zoning map zoned commercial.
18:20:29 >> That's the one on Himes?
18:20:30 >>> Yes, sir.
18:20:33 So if you take a look at this map -- and this is the
18:20:39 existing land use plan map, and you can see subject
18:20:43 property that's highlighted here, as I mentioned
18:20:45 earlier, this is the only property on the western side
18:20:47 of Henderson between Azeele and Dale Mabry that's not

18:20:51 CMU 35.
18:20:52 Part of the problem we have right now, the existing
18:20:54 uses, some of them, does not allow residential 20.
18:20:59 So if the plan amendment is approved it will resolve
18:21:03 that conflict.
18:21:04 Quite frankly it should have been resolved through the
18:21:06 comp plan update at some point in time.
18:21:08 So you have a PD for the cat doctor property but that
18:21:13 PD is PD use as well.
18:21:18 So this is an existing conflict between the comp plan
18:21:21 and the zonings on the property.
18:21:23 If you go back to the Elmo, please, you can see here,
18:21:32 it's kind of a landmark in its own right but it's got
18:21:37 20 uses.
18:21:38 And I think it's fair to say some blighting effect on
18:21:41 the neighborhood.
18:21:41 You have 20 different users here, and the existing
18:21:44 property does not meet any code in any respect.
18:21:49 Obviously signage, landscaping, parking, access,
18:21:53 things like that, ADA.
18:21:54 This is primarily drainage.
18:21:56 So this will allow redevelopment, eliminate the

18:22:01 blighting on the neighborhood and improve the drainage
18:22:03 situation in that area.
18:22:05 And that's the cat doctor's facility right there.
18:22:18 As I mentioned, we filed this rezoning and obviously
18:22:23 couldn't move with respect to the plan amendment
18:22:26 several months ago.
18:22:27 And this is for a bank that meets all the code
18:22:31 requirements, no waivers, access point that reduces
18:22:37 from 21 use towers one, reduces development from 9400
18:22:41 square feet to 3700 square feet.
18:22:44 Banks aren't open on weekends.
18:22:46 They close at five.
18:22:47 Very compatible with the area.
18:22:50 Actually kind of a quasi office use.
18:22:56 It's really not commercial and really not office.
18:22:59 If you go from swan to Himes to Dale Mabry, you will
18:23:02 see, there's some spot commercial that's not
18:23:04 conforming.
18:23:05 You will see a lot of office, too.
18:23:06 Okay?
18:23:07 So I understand your point, councilman.
18:23:11 But here again this is the only property that's not

18:23:14 CMU 35, in that whole corridor, as we speak.
18:23:17 And the zoning right now is inconsistent with the comp
18:23:21 plan.
18:23:22 Not only the development, but the zoning, the CG
18:23:25 zoning is not allowed in residential 20.
18:23:28 So that's the gist of it.
18:23:30 If you have any questions or concerns let me know.
18:23:31 I want to point out to council that during the course
18:23:34 of this process, six civic associations received
18:23:37 notification.
18:23:37 I got no negative feedback from the civic association
18:23:41 or any neighbors.
18:23:42 A couple people showed up at the Planning Commission,
18:23:45 I won't say were objectors, but not so much concerned
18:23:49 with this property but keystone homes property.
18:23:51 They had some maybe bad hits associated with that
18:23:54 rezoning.
18:23:54 If you have any questions I will try to answer them.
18:23:56 Thank you very much.
18:23:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I guess maybe they didn't send to
18:24:01 the you but we all received a letter from the lady who
18:24:04 lived behind --

18:24:07 >>> What's the name of the letter?
18:24:09 >> Catherine Hawkins Bravada.
18:24:12 >> Ms. Bravada does not live behind it. She lives
18:24:13 around DeLeon and Westshore.
18:24:14 That's a rental property she owns.
18:24:16 >> Okay.
18:24:18 On DeLeon.
18:24:22 >> She still has concerns.
18:24:23 >>> I'm not saying that.
18:24:25 But she said she owns it, and resides there. She
18:24:27 doesn't reside there.
18:24:29 I just want to clarify that.
18:24:30 >> Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak
18:24:32 on item number 7?
18:24:41 >> Gordon Moss, reside at 3606 DeLeon.
18:24:46 Good evening.
18:24:48 I was interested to see what CMU 35 means.
18:24:52 And 3500 square feet.
18:24:55 So is that two-story structure?
18:25:01 >>> The CMU 35 classification is a category that
18:25:08 allows mixed uses and allows for consideration of an
18:25:12 F.A.R. of 1.5, but it could be 2, could even be 3

18:25:17 stories tall.
18:25:18 The height is not really part of the F.A.R. but it is
18:25:21 a little bit intensive of a category.
18:25:26 That is correct.
18:25:26 >> And I didn't mention my property abuts to the back
18:25:29 of this project.
18:25:31 There was one concern.
18:25:35 Do you have that map that I could point something out
18:25:38 on?
18:25:38 >> Which one, sir?
18:25:39 >> Not that one.
18:25:41 The one we were looking at before.
18:25:55 >> Thank you.
18:25:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's upside down.
18:26:03 >> There you go.
18:26:05 >>> The one concern I think --
18:26:07 >> Where is your property?
18:26:09 >>> Excuse me.
18:26:16 The one concern, my property is here.
18:26:25 Keystone properties, which is headquartered right
18:26:28 here, they left an interesting alleyway between my
18:26:32 property and the beautiful new home they built next

18:26:35 door which is right there.
18:26:36 But this in no way affects that alleyway.
18:26:38 Would that be right?
18:26:43 Keystone owns that little sliver.
18:26:47 We have nothing to do with keystone's property.
18:26:49 That's not even an issue under consideration.
18:26:51 We just own the four lots on Swann at the corner.
18:26:55 >>> I think that was my only concern and the neighbor
18:26:58 must be's concern and it was going to be an attractive
18:27:01 building which is not monumental, 8 stories, blocking
18:27:04 out the sun.
18:27:05 Thank you.
18:27:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:27:07 Would anyone else like to speak?
18:27:09 Need to close.
18:27:09 >> So moved.
18:27:11 >> Second.
18:27:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
18:27:14 (Motion carried).
18:27:17 Mr. Caetano, would you read number 7, please.
18:27:22 >>> An ordinance being presented for first reading
18:27:24 consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa

18:27:26 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
18:27:30 land use map, for the property located in the general
18:27:32 vicinity of 3601 and 3607 Swann Avenue from
18:27:38 residential 20 to community mixed use 35, providing
18:27:42 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing
18:27:44 for severability, providing an effective date.
18:27:48 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:27:50 Question.
18:27:50 Mr. Dingfelder.
18:27:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll support this, especially for
18:27:54 first reading.
18:27:56 It gives me some comfort, Mr. Bentley, the fact that
18:28:01 you showed a one-story bank, probably not too
18:28:06 intrusive and the fact that traffic is going to come
18:28:09 in off of Himes, it looks like, and then comes down
18:28:13 toward Swann, which I think is a better direction for
18:28:16 those back door neighbors.
18:28:18 So with that, I'll support it on first reading.
18:28:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
18:28:24 I'm not going to -- if it were a lot that were
18:28:26 adjacent to Henderson, I would support it but I'm
18:28:30 concerned about having more intense underlying land

18:28:37 uses further to the west, and I'm very concerned,
18:28:40 particularly about the lighting that will eventually
18:28:43 go on this, and how that will negatively affect the
18:28:46 adjacent residential uses.
18:28:48 And I know that you can't discuss this now, because
18:28:51 the public hearing is closed.
18:28:52 But when you come back with the rezoning, because it
18:28:55 looks like you are going to get this, you really need
18:28:58 to consider how you are going to protect the neighbors
18:29:01 from commercial lighting.
18:29:02 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
18:29:05 All in favor say Aye.
18:29:08 Opposed, Nay.
18:29:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena voting no
18:29:11 and second reading and adoption will be on December
18:29:13 20th at 9:30 a.m
18:29:15 >> we need to open item 8.
18:29:17 >> So moved.
18:29:18 >> Second.
18:29:19 (Motion carried).
18:29:20 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.
18:29:26 Next plan amendment is plan amendment 07-03.

18:29:35 And it is located adjacent to the amendments that we
18:29:41 were discussing earlier.
18:29:49 In the Ybor channel area.
18:29:53 This particular amendment is a request to go from
18:29:57 heavy industrial to urban mixed use 60, a small scale
18:30:02 amendment, and approximately 3 acres of land, and
18:30:09 against the same aspects of its location and
18:30:14 development potential as part of the amendment located
18:30:18 to the -- that you reviewed earlier today that are
18:30:21 located immediately to the west of this amendment.
18:30:24 And let me just put this other larger map up and kind
18:30:28 of point to where this is in relation to what you saw
18:30:33 earlier.
18:30:34 >> Is that with the mulch facility?
18:30:37 >>> It's the former rock, that real tall towers to it.
18:30:46 >> Doesn't have mulch out there in the parking lot?
18:30:48 >>> I think that's the one that -- the next one over,
18:30:52 which in the future may come in but this particular
18:30:57 amendment is right here.
18:30:58 They are requesting a category of urban mixed use 60.
18:31:04 The Planning Commission reviewed this amendment on
18:31:06 November 5th and found it consistent with the

18:31:08 long-range comprehensive plan.
18:31:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
18:31:12 Petitioner?
18:31:18 >>DAVID MECHANIK: 305 south Boulevard, on behalf of
18:31:23 Gibralter development.
18:31:24 This property was -- my client acquired an interest in
18:31:31 this property after we filed the application from the
18:31:34 other.
18:31:34 That's why it's not in the same package.
18:31:38 I would ask, because this is a small scale amendment,
18:31:41 which requires five affirmative votes --
18:31:47 >>CHAIRMAN: He's going to get that.
18:31:49 >> Thank you.
18:32:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
18:32:21 wants to speak on item 8?
18:32:22 Need to close.
18:32:23 >> Move to close.
18:32:24 >> Second.
18:32:24 (Motion carried)
18:32:25 >> Ms. Saul-Sena, would you read number 8?
18:32:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move the following
18:32:36 ordinance presented for first reading consideration,

18:32:38 an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan,
18:32:40 future land use element, future land use map, for the
18:32:43 property located in the general vicinity of south of
18:32:47 Crosstown expressway, northeast of Ybor channel, and
18:32:50 west of 19th street, from heavy industrial to
18:32:52 urban mixed use 60, providing for repeal of all
18:32:55 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
18:32:58 providing an effective date.
18:33:00 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
18:33:01 (Motion carried).
18:33:04 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Caetano
18:33:07 being absent at vote.
18:33:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item 9.
18:33:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
18:33:13 >> Second.
18:33:13 (Motion carried).
18:33:14 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Located in the vicinity of North
18:33:21 Boulevard, Ohio Avenue, Woodlawn Avenue, and
18:33:27 Peninsular street, requested to go from residential 10
18:33:30 to suburban mixed use 6, this amendment involves four
18:33:34 noncontiguous parcels and approximately 6.79 acres.
18:33:45 The four parcels are located along North Boulevard, at

18:33:50 the intersection of several of the local streets in
18:33:53 the area, currently the land uses are all
18:33:59 single-family development, and again the current plan
18:34:01 designation is residential 10.
18:34:06 The request is suburban mixed use 6.
18:34:12 Several of you may recall that this was a request for
18:34:15 amendment on two of these parcels, a number of years
18:34:17 ago, and at that time the amendment of the staff
18:34:23 seemed nonconsistent. This was reviewed by the
18:34:25 Planning Commission on November the 5th.
18:34:28 This area is viewed as single-family developments,
18:34:33 with policies in the plans speaking to the protection
18:34:35 of the single-family area.
18:34:37 This area has areas along Martin Luther King as well
18:34:43 as portions of North Boulevard which have either
18:34:45 existing offices that are available for use, and it is
18:34:48 viewed that there are other areas in the general area
18:34:53 for redevelopment, and the Planning Commission voted
18:34:58 to find these amendments inconsistent with long-range
18:35:04 comprehensive plan, and recommend denial of this
18:35:07 amendment.
18:35:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?

18:35:10 Petitioner?
18:35:23 >>> Good evening.
18:35:29 First I would like to submit over 150 signatures in
18:35:32 support of this petition.
18:35:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It requires five votes.
18:35:44 >>GWEN MILLER: They are coming back.
18:35:46 They will be here before he finishes.
18:35:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
18:35:52 >>GWEN MILLER: You need to have your name on the
18:35:53 record.
18:35:54 >>> Chris, I reside at 702 west Ohio Avenue.
18:35:57 I'm the owner of Fast Track Legal Services which is a
18:36:04 small business that I starred about eight years ago.
18:36:05 I've lived in Riverside Heights for 31 years. I've
18:36:05 enjoyed the improvements made to our neighborhood over
18:36:05 the years.
18:36:13 However, there's still room for other improvement.
18:36:15 Especially along North Boulevard.
18:36:18 After watching International Firefighters Union get
18:36:20 approval from Council in 2004 for rezoning a
18:36:22 residential located home at 3116 North Boulevard just
18:36:25 four blocks from my property, into professional

18:36:28 office, I decided to purchase an extremely blighted
18:36:31 property on the corner of North Boulevard and Ohio
18:36:33 Avenue in order to rehabilitate it.
18:36:37 I have invested a large sum of money into turning this
18:36:42 structure into an asset for the neighborhood.
18:36:48 Recently I purchased the property across the street at
18:36:49 3602 North Boulevard in order to rehabilitate it as
18:36:52 well.
18:36:52 I had interest from several other professionals to
18:36:54 purchase my property at 702 west Ohio Avenue in order
18:36:58 to run their small businesses out of.
18:36:59 It is my intent to move my office into the property at
18:37:02 3602 North Boulevard, and improve it as one of my
18:37:05 neighbors -- improve it as well.
18:37:08 My neighbors to the south of me on North Boulevard
18:37:09 have the same intent.
18:37:13 A small law firm out of a home at 702 W. Peninsular
18:37:15 Street, which is on the corner of North Boulevard.
18:37:20 She made vast improvements to her property for the
18:37:23 same reason.
18:37:24 She is a sole practitioner with no employees.
18:37:26 We are proposing that our offices maintain the

18:37:27 residential character of the area and have developed
18:37:27 our office accordingly.
18:37:33 We will also gladly accept any conditions that may
18:37:36 need to be imposed in order for these properties to
18:37:39 always maintain the residential character.
18:37:43 Now for some of the facts pertaining to this petition.
18:37:46 This particular area of North Boulevard has mixed land
18:37:49 uses or may be considered in transition.
18:37:52 Many existing single-family detached residences are
18:37:56 less viable for sale and used as homes.
18:37:57 Arterial major traffic on North Boulevard and its
18:38:00 related perceived impacts in some ways unsafe.
18:38:06 Many existing residences are surrounded by chain link
18:38:09 fences, others show signs of blight.
18:38:14 Vacant lots have been removed.
18:38:15 Some residences have been removed and developed for
18:38:18 lawyers, realtors, doctors, and other activities.
18:38:22 There are significant structures for these uses many
18:38:24 with a residential style, which is what we have
18:38:27 proposed.
18:38:27 The mixed use category, future land use element of the
18:38:34 Tampa comprehensive plan, allows very low intensity

18:38:36 neighborhood serving uses such as a small scale
18:38:39 office, that permits only site plan control and
18:38:41 rezoning.
18:38:42 Office uses serve a variety of purposes for medical,
18:38:45 legal, and institutional, along the roadway between
18:38:49 Columbus and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
18:38:52 These offices are either existing rehabilitated
18:38:55 residences or new residential style facilities.
18:38:59 Those are compatible with the surrounding
18:39:03 neighborhoods of Tampa Heights and Riverside Heights.
18:39:05 Similar amendments have been a improved along North
18:39:07 Boulevard since a comprehensive plan was adopted in
18:39:10 1989.
18:39:11 Here is a zoning map.
18:39:13 As you can see there are several mixed use residential
18:39:24 office and PDs.
18:39:28 We are proposing these four properties here, which are
18:39:31 directly across from the cemetery, in order just to
18:39:39 bridge the gap.
18:39:40 They are currently commercial and mixed along Martin
18:39:44 Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
18:39:46 Two residential offices located at 3701 North

18:39:48 Boulevard and 3703 North Boulevard which are right
18:39:53 across the street from my property.
18:39:58 Similar rezoning for 3116 North Boulevard.
18:40:02 This property serves as the office for the
18:40:04 international association of firefighters union.
18:40:07 Other similar rezonings along this corridor will be in
18:40:09 front of council in the near future.
18:40:11 Council has recently approved similar rezonings along
18:40:14 Highland Avenue, Armenia Avenue and Cypress Street
18:40:17 which have all improved these qualities and the
18:40:19 quality of life for surrounding residents.
18:40:24 Okay, location of these properties.
18:40:26 This section of North Boulevard is considered a major
18:40:28 arterial road for the City of Tampa transportation
18:40:30 department.
18:40:31 The last traffic study was conducted in October of
18:40:34 2006.
18:40:35 As of that date the existing heavy volume was 7,240
18:40:39 vehicles per day and is definitely more today.
18:40:43 Due to the high amount of traffic, except for speeding
18:40:45 and other nuisance that is coming within loving within
18:40:49 feet of an arterial major road there's no -- next to

18:40:56 many of these residential properties becoming blighted
18:40:59 over the years.
18:40:59 There's not been any new residential constructs on
18:41:01 this road the last 40 years.
18:41:03 We have to deal with strangers that constantly walk on
18:41:06 North Boulevard at all hours of the night, knock on
18:41:08 the doors, ask for money or to use the phone. This is
18:41:11 no place to raise a child.
18:41:13 These are safety issues.
18:41:14 A little over a month ago I'm sure you recall reading
18:41:17 a newspaper, found three infants in north Tampa, one a
18:41:21 two-year-old girl which was found a block of this
18:41:25 proposed property at 3602 North Boulevard, found on
18:41:28 the sidewalk fortunately before a tragedy occurred.
18:41:31 The child's mother fell asleep and the baby wandered
18:41:35 out into onto the sidewalk.
18:41:37 Children can't play in the yard because of the close
18:41:39 proximity to the road.
18:41:40 Both the front yard and the backyard and side yard for
18:41:45 North Boulevard.
18:41:45 Traffic issues:
18:41:50 Here's a picture of my front porch.

18:41:58 That traffic backed up from Martin Luther King Jr.
18:42:07 Boulevard.
18:42:08 I believe that's approximately ten blocks.
18:42:11 That's on a regular basis.
18:42:15 Due to our close proximity to the road we not only
18:42:17 hear but feel the vibrations of buses, trucks,
18:42:22 extremely large motorcycles and extremely large must
18:42:26 have letters in existence today.
18:42:28 At nighttime this road serves as a drag strip of cars
18:42:32 racing in excess of 80 miles per hour.
18:42:34 A drunk driver heading north on North Boulevard took
18:42:39 out two telephone poles in front of our house.
18:42:42 He would have ended up in my bedroom, or I wouldn't be
18:42:45 here tonight.
18:42:47 I have allowed TPD to shoot radar because I feel it
18:42:51 helps to slow down traffic and I have got tone know
18:42:54 some of the officers over the years.
18:42:56 They don't call anybody over -- pull anybody over
18:42:59 unless they are speeding in excess of 50 miles per
18:43:01 hour so essentially the speed limit here is 50 miles
18:43:03 per hour.
18:43:07 If not they would be writing tickets for just about

18:43:09 anybody that travels this road.
18:43:10 Traffic gets worse on a daily basis and the downtown
18:43:15 condominiums, the Heights project and the ramps of
18:43:19 I-275 only exacerbate an already existing problem.
18:43:24 And I also have a letter from the Department of
18:43:26 Transportation.
18:43:29 Stating that.
18:43:30 The current project, they are waiting to find the
18:43:37 completion date.
18:43:39 And I would imagine they are waiting for these
18:43:47 projects to finish so they can give the developer
18:43:50 money to make the connection.
18:43:52 The north and south corridor west of I-275 that leads
18:43:59 directly into the Heights, downtown, and Hyde Park.
18:44:02 The Heights development project calls for 1900 condos,
18:44:05 professional offices and retail, which equates to only
18:44:08 more traffic on North Boulevard on a daily basis.
18:44:11 More people will move to the downtown area and this is
18:44:17 the main arterial road that will lead into the
18:44:21 downtown development.
18:44:22 Take a look at the current residential uses.
18:44:27 Some remaining residential homes have been vacant for

18:44:30 years or blighted property.
18:44:34 There are only a few residential homes well kept and
18:44:36 maintained along this corridor.
18:44:38 Owners of these properties can't put any money into
18:44:41 rehabilitating them because they will never see a
18:44:42 return on their investment.
18:44:45 There are several vacant residential lots that serve
18:44:47 as illegal dumping grounds, used car lots, an places
18:44:51 for the criminal elements to exist.
18:44:53 Here are a few pictures.
18:44:54 Here is a residence.
18:45:03 This is a residence in the back.
18:45:05 You can see trailers, trucks left there.
18:45:13 Here is a quadplex.
18:45:15 Another residence.
18:45:19 An empty lot for sale here has been for sale for
18:45:28 years.
18:45:28 And I don't know if anybody remembers but there was a
18:45:31 motorcycle gang known as the renegades.
18:45:40 I wouldn't want that in my neighborhood.
18:45:42 Fortunately it's no longer there but nothing is
18:45:43 stopping it from coming back.

18:45:45 Here are two other residential properties along North
18:45:51 Boulevard.
18:45:52 Yes, there is actually a house behind this.
18:45:59 Another residence, another empty lot.
18:46:06 As you can see, illegal dumping grounds.
18:46:08 People coming at all hours of the night, dump whatever
18:46:10 they want.
18:46:18 Two other residential properties.
18:46:25 Let's look at the advantages of a professional office.
18:46:27 This area is extremely desirable for professional
18:46:30 office due to its close proximity to downtown.
18:46:33 Professionals have the financial backing to purchase
18:46:35 these properties and turn them into attractive
18:46:38 residential offices.
18:46:39 All the professional office as long this corridor are
18:46:42 well maintained, attractive, and assets to our
18:46:45 community.
18:46:46 At one time they served as residences but everybody
18:46:48 converted to professional offices over the years for
18:46:50 these same reasons.
18:46:51 And here are the pictures of the offices.
18:46:58 This is a residence about two years ago, and bought

18:47:03 that and rehabilitated it, did an incredible job, and
18:47:06 he will be coming for the rezoning in front of you all
18:47:08 soon.
18:47:10 Attorney John quest's office, a new structure built
18:47:14 about two and a half years ago.
18:47:16 This is the international association of firefighters
18:47:18 union which is rezoned as previously said by City
18:47:22 Council in 2004.
18:47:24 This is the law office of Driscoll and Cotler.
18:47:30 Here we have the police union building, which is I
18:47:37 think billed built about five years ago.
18:47:39 That used to be a vacant lot and caused many problems
18:47:41 for the neighborhood.
18:47:42 Now it's an asset.
18:47:44 This is a dental office.
18:47:47 This is the office of attorney Daniel Castillo.
18:47:54 And the law office of attorney Paul McDuffy.
18:48:01 This is Frank Lagocci's office.
18:48:05 He's been there for years as a realtor.
18:48:08 This lease just ran out now the current owner,
18:48:17 renovations has had a lot of interest of someone
18:48:21 coming in to lease the property.

18:48:23 This is rehab electrical diagnostics.
18:48:34 This property here sat vacant for years.
18:48:39 And just finished with my own and it's beautiful.
18:48:50 This is gene Duncombs' property, which is on the
18:48:55 petition, which is being proposed for a professional
18:48:57 office.
18:48:58 This is a property that was just finished being
18:49:02 renovated and he's proposing to rezone to professional
18:49:04 office as well.
18:49:13 These offices provide a buffer between major arterial
18:49:18 roads and residents in the neighborhood.
18:49:25 On the west side these obstruct your vision from the
18:49:27 side street of North Boulevard will be removed to
18:49:29 allow for parking and moved to the east side to create
18:49:34 a buffer.
18:49:36 As you can see there.
18:49:41 These offices produce less trips than a residential
18:49:47 home due to their limited hours of use and will not
18:49:50 create detrimental impact to the neighborhood due to
18:49:53 increased traffic.
18:49:54 Everyone is gone by 5:30 and they are not there on the
18:49:57 weekends.

18:49:59 Ingress and egress are on North Boulevard.
18:50:02 The reason for that being is I guess 50 years ago,
18:50:09 when a developer developed these properties, they used
18:50:11 to be 26-foot lots, fronting North Boulevard.
18:50:16 They converted them -- flipped a lot to build a house.
18:50:21 50 years ago I'm sure it was fine.
18:50:23 But much earlier, it would never be allowed nowadays.
18:50:30 That's our problem.
18:50:31 My bedroom is ten feet from this major arterial road.
18:50:39 They have no curb cuts on the side roads.
18:50:44 As you can see here.
18:50:47 Now, the residents have to have a privacy fence and
18:50:54 eliminates curb cut.
18:50:55 (Bell sounds).
18:50:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Wrap it up.
18:50:59 >>> Okay.
18:51:01 Provide adequate lighting in a safe environment.
18:51:04 Some of the residential properties are dark at night
18:51:06 without any lights on.
18:51:08 These professional offices are well lit and provide
18:51:11 for -- allowing for these rezonings will inspire other
18:51:16 professionals to create a corridor that all residents

18:51:19 can be proud of.
18:51:25 This is the main corridor least leading to the Heights
18:51:28 project.
18:51:28 This will increase for the city due to no homestead
18:51:32 exemption.
18:51:33 Each property contributes at least $3,000 extra a year
18:51:36 in taxes and the City of Tampa, which wouldn't hurt in
18:51:39 this time of budget cuts and economic instability.
18:51:42 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to wrap it up.
18:51:48 We have a question by councilman Saul-Sena.
18:51:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for staff.
18:51:55 For the Planning Commission staff.
18:52:02 The land use request before us today obviously would
18:52:07 allow office uses.
18:52:08 But what other uses would it allow?
18:52:13 >>> South of Fletcher -- south of Fowler, in this
18:52:17 particular area, the suburban mixed use category would
18:52:19 be residential, which is a large lot development, or
18:52:23 residential office that allows an F.A.R. of .5, a
18:52:28 little more intense than even the F.A.R. of the
18:52:31 current plan classification.
18:52:33 >> I'm looking at this map.

18:52:38 Doesn't the current plan classification allow offices?
18:52:40 >>> It does.
18:52:41 If they meet locational criteria. They do not meet
18:52:45 locational criteria in the residential 10 in this area
18:52:48 because it is solid single family.
18:52:51 Areas that are closer to MLK where there was some
18:52:53 existing office or commercial, you could fill in, the
18:52:57 policy in the residential is single-family and you
18:53:00 could do -- these other uses request a rezoning but it
18:53:03 was more as an in-fill on a particular block.
18:53:08 But you have more closer to MLK, and you have some of
18:53:12 that closer south of Plymouth, but in this particular
18:53:17 area it's all single-family.
18:53:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:53:19 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
18:53:20 item number 9?
18:53:21 If you are going to speak, please come up and speak.
18:53:27 >>> I appreciate the time to address the council.
18:53:33 My name is John Curtis.
18:53:34 I live at 707 west Adley which is just about a block
18:53:40 of some of the properties or adjacent to some of the
18:53:42 properties that the previous speaker mentioned.

18:53:44 Had I known this was such a bad area from the sounds
18:53:48 of it, I don't know if I would be living there now.
18:53:50 But the wife and I purchased our house seven years
18:53:52 ago, and we have been remodeling it ever since.
18:53:55 And I think that the community is doing that.
18:53:58 And seeing office buildings going in, I wouldn't have
18:54:03 purchased my house had I known this was what was going
18:54:07 to develop later on.
18:54:09 The firefighters union is just basically across the
18:54:12 street and up three houses from where I live.
18:54:16 Half of that yard I think has been blacktopped to
18:54:19 allow parking.
18:54:20 I think that's an issue, the gentleman said how
18:54:24 traffic is so bad, how parking is so bad.
18:54:26 Will they have to blacktop their yards to allow
18:54:30 parking there?
18:54:32 There's no sidewalks in most of these areas.
18:54:35 Are we increasing more foot traffic?
18:54:38 Making it harder for the residents that do live there
18:54:40 that are out walking with the increased traffic?
18:54:45 I guess we need to draw a line in the sand.
18:54:47 I hope we don't allow more office use in this area, it

18:54:51 is single-family residential.
18:54:53 And I certainly don't want more, hope that the council
18:54:59 agrees with us, and the commissions vote as well on
18:55:05 the recommendation.
18:55:05 Thank you.
18:55:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:55:10 >>> Mark Johnson, I reside at 706 west Indiana Avenue
18:55:17 and I have property directly adjacent and touching one
18:55:19 of these properties.
18:55:20 I don't want a business as a neighbor.
18:55:23 I have a very good neighbor right now.
18:55:26 One of the things that my wife and I were looking for
18:55:28 when we purchased the home. If we saw a home that was
18:55:31 for sale and it was next to be a business, we went on
18:55:33 down the road.
18:55:34 And my neighbor has indicated that if this goes
18:55:37 through, well, he would want to consider doing that.
18:55:39 So if it passed, an it would pass for him, then I have
18:55:42 a neighbor, a business as a neighbor.
18:55:44 That's not something that we -- my wife and I bought
18:55:47 into in this community.
18:55:57 This is where we live.

18:55:58 Thank you for your time.
18:55:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:56:00 Would anyone else like to speak?
18:56:01 If you are going to speak, please get up and line up
18:56:03 and come speak.
18:56:10 Come to the mike.
18:56:12 >>> My name is Felix Cordillo, I live at 807 West
18:56:24 Woodlawn Avenue, been living there for over 40 years,
18:56:27 as a resident of 807 West Woodlawn Avenue.
18:56:32 I have always been opposed to commercialization or any
18:56:36 future commercialization of the subject area.
18:56:41 I feel that this commercialization will only erode the
18:56:45 tranquility of our neighborhood.
18:56:47 And by increasing traffic and other commercial
18:56:50 activity.
18:56:54 Therefore I am very opposed to our planned amendment
18:56:57 04-07.
18:56:58 Thank you.
18:57:03 >>> Brian Hinkon. I live at 721 West Kentucky Avenue.
18:57:08 I'm actually for this project, because I was born and
18:57:11 raised in Tampa.
18:57:12 I grew up in Hyde Park.

18:57:13 And I was about years old and play in the streets when
18:57:20 it would get dark we would have to come inside because
18:57:23 it was a rough area back in the '70s and '80s.
18:57:27 I remember walking to the end of my street which was
18:57:29 three blocks from Bayshore on the west side of Howard,
18:57:33 and there was actually residential houses on Howard
18:57:35 that were dilapidated and falling apart.
18:57:40 And as I grew up in that neighborhood I noticed that
18:57:44 there was beautiful homes everywhere.
18:57:45 There was bungalows, and houses, and about 50% of the
18:57:50 houses back in the '70s and '80s were in
18:57:54 disrepair.
18:57:54 And I noticed when the houses along -- I went to
18:57:58 Wilson junior high school and I used to walk up Swann
18:58:04 to Wilson, and on that walking was all residential
18:58:07 houses.
18:58:07 And as I grew up, it created Hyde Park village, and
18:58:13 Swann, the residential houses slowly became
18:58:14 businesses, and I noticed the trend, now, continue
18:58:18 down Swann to Boulevard, and then from Boulevard to
18:58:22 Kennedy, the trend continues.
18:58:25 And then right after Kennedy, you have the university,

18:58:31 it's beautiful, and then just past that they have this
18:58:35 new prep school.
18:58:36 But as soon as you cross over the Hillsborough River
18:58:39 you notice that you are no longer in South Tampa.
18:58:41 You are just like in another element.
18:58:43 And I feel like from Columbus to Martin Luther King,
18:58:50 the houses -- the properties that stick out are the
18:58:54 properties that -- the commercial properties that are
18:58:57 being taken care of, that are being maintained, that
18:59:02 are being, you know, the lawns are manicured.
18:59:08 I just feel like my mom still lives in Hyde Park.
18:59:11 When I tell people that I live in Riverside Heights,
18:59:14 people don't even know where Riverside Heights S.but a
18:59:16 lot of people know where Hyde Park is.
18:59:18 And I just wanted that corridor from Hyde Park up to
18:59:22 Riverside Heights, the trend to follow because it goes
18:59:25 to Kennedy, it goes to the Hillsborough River, and
18:59:28 then it stops.
18:59:28 And why should it stop?
18:59:30 Why shouldn't it continue to Martin Luther King -- and
18:59:36 I'm a business owner.
18:59:38 It's in East Tampa.

18:59:39 I would love the opportunity to live and work in my
18:59:41 neighborhood.
18:59:41 And I think of that we should allow this possibility.
18:59:44 Because when you bring new businesses in, you bring
18:59:46 money and jobs into the neighborhood, which brings up
18:59:50 the neighborhood.
18:59:51 (Bell sounds).
18:59:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:59:55 >>> My name is -- Mendez, I live on 807 west Kentucky
18:59:59 Avenue.
19:00:00 I currently look at a different aspect.
19:00:04 I am a family man.
19:00:05 I have two kids.
19:00:07 Currently on North Boulevard, you are a homeowner but
19:00:13 you are a home owner into a neighborhood.
19:00:15 Yeah, that's an entrance, a main artery road.
19:00:18 Compared to what's actually on that road currently is
19:00:21 not -- we all take care of our own properties.
19:00:26 And I feel that sometimes, if you have friends or you
19:00:29 have relatives coming over, really don't want to drive
19:00:33 them down North Boulevard with what's there now
19:00:36 compared to the commercial properties that are well

19:00:37 maintained, manicured, most of them are nine to five,
19:00:41 so you don't see people hanging outside, kids walking
19:00:46 on the street where the kids are in danger.
19:00:48 Speed, I think, definitely plays a role.
19:00:50 For me I feel like it would be an asset to us because
19:00:53 things would concentrate on beautifying that area and
19:00:57 actually extend them all the way from south Boulevard
19:01:01 on over to our side, which is exactly the way it is
19:01:04 now, as the gentleman just explained.
19:01:09 Thank you very much.
19:01:10 Good night.
19:01:11 >>GWEN MILLER:
19:01:14 >>> My name is Steve Lopez, I live at 810 west
19:01:17 Kentucky Avenue.
19:01:18 I have been living there for 25 years.
19:01:20 And I am for developing into a small business or
19:01:26 whatever.
19:01:26 It seems like going back and forth to work, I use
19:01:30 North Boulevard, and then seems like that whole road
19:01:34 has got dentist offices, lawyers' offices, credit
19:01:40 union, whatever that thing is down there.
19:01:42 And I don't know if this makes any sense but when I go

19:01:50 out for a walk I never go towards North Boulevard
19:01:53 because I know if it rains that's where he would head
19:01:58 and I would be splattered.
19:02:00 I take him into the neighborhood.
19:02:01 I use it for work all the time.
19:02:03 I big -- drive big trucks.
19:02:06 I don't see where I would want to raise a family
19:02:08 living there on North Boulevard, and seems like
19:02:11 there's a house on Indiana and North Boulevard there.
19:02:15 Seems like every time, every other time I go by there,
19:02:19 there's a U-Haul truck, because I guess the people
19:02:22 live there and the traffic and the noise and stuff,
19:02:24 they just decide to move on.
19:02:26 They don't want to live there.
19:02:29 My grandmother used to live on Habana, and all nature
19:02:34 long hearing stuff going back and forth.
19:02:36 And not further into the neighborhood like I do. So I
19:02:41 guess it's okay for him to build this -- plus he's got
19:02:46 it looking real nice.
19:02:47 I don't know the gentleman personally.
19:02:49 But I have seen all the other house as round there.
19:02:51 They don't look like they are very well taken care of.

19:02:54 At least he's got it looking pretty, though.
19:02:57 Thank you.
19:02:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:03:03 >>> My name is Barbara Bidell.
19:03:07 I'm a resident on Ohio, one house, two houses across
19:03:09 the street from the man that's proposing the business,
19:03:14 wants to build a business there.
19:03:15 And he has been very nice about this, not having a lot
19:03:19 of traffic there.
19:03:20 But it's very interesting that the man who came up and
19:03:25 talked about Hyde Park.
19:03:26 I also grew up in Hyde Park and I grew up in 1953 we
19:03:30 moved in Hyde Park, and I played out there.
19:03:32 My faint memories of going to Anderson park, which is
19:03:36 a beautiful park, Kate Jackson, and we had a family
19:03:41 there, our family and friends that we played W.
19:03:47 North Boulevard is pretty horrendous.
19:03:50 If we have more businesses on there it's going to get
19:03:52 more so.
19:03:52 We have more schools now for children in the area.
19:03:54 I have been a resident in that area for 42 years.
19:03:57 I bring two children.

19:03:59 I have done community service in that neighborhood.
19:04:04 I have been a block leader for community services
19:04:06 there. I love it.
19:04:07 It's traditional -- I do not want to see a business
19:04:12 there. If his business is going to sell, we don't
19:04:14 know what type of business is going to go there.
19:04:16 He wants to move to the house that faces North
19:04:19 Boulevard.
19:04:19 We do have businesses on North Boulevard that are
19:04:24 vacant, that have been vacant for a long time.
19:04:27 Yes, people are trying to maintain that area to keep
19:04:30 it family oriented.
19:04:33 Also maintaining to keep their property value up.
19:04:36 Our taxes are going up.
19:04:37 And a lot of people have lived there for a long time.
19:04:39 So I'm opposed.
19:04:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
19:04:46 >>> My name is Leslie civic, I am a full-time realtor
19:04:53 in the Heights.
19:04:54 Specifically Riverside Heights.
19:04:57 My husband and I, and my mother, all own property in
19:05:00 Riverside Heights.

19:05:01 One of our properties for 15 years.
19:05:04 I can tell you in nearly five years they have been
19:05:07 practicing full-time real estate in Riverside Heights,
19:05:10 and I do have two homes listed for sale on North
19:05:14 Boulevard and on Ohio.
19:05:16 The only inquiries we are getting is, can I put an
19:05:20 office there?
19:05:21 No one is interested in buying it for residential
19:05:24 purposes.
19:05:27 I am for it and I do think that the area between
19:05:32 Columbus and MLK is blighted with these homes that sit
19:05:38 empty, that cannot be, you know, even rented
19:05:44 because -- and let's face it, we all know renters, not
19:05:49 all renters but some renters don't have pride of
19:05:51 ownership.
19:05:52 So I do think it's a blight and I do think that small
19:05:55 offices, professional, you know, the ones that dot
19:05:59 North Boulevard now, are very nicely kept.
19:06:01 And I think they have actually been an added value to
19:06:04 our neighborhood.
19:06:05 My husband and I just purchased the property directly
19:06:07 behind firefighters hall, and we are rehabilitating

19:06:12 it.
19:06:13 And so I do think it's a good thing.
19:06:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
19:06:24 >>> My name is Gene Bidell, and I live at 707 west
19:06:30 Ohio.
19:06:30 My house -- the lady with the red jacket is my wife.
19:06:34 So I hope it's okay that we can each do it.
19:06:39 What she said is what I wanted to tell you.
19:06:41 But the man has improved the property.
19:06:44 That house didn't look all that bad.
19:06:47 They make that -- they made it sound like it was a
19:06:51 dump.
19:06:51 It wasn't a dump.
19:06:54 [Sounding gavel]
19:06:55 >>> My property, I keep my property up and I have --
19:06:58 I'm on Social Security disability.
19:06:59 I have a pacemaker in my heart and I still try to keep
19:07:02 my property up.
19:07:03 Everybody in that neighborhood does a good job.
19:07:06 When I started having heart attacks, I retired at 62,
19:07:10 I put an in-ground pool in my backyard and I built an
19:07:13 in-ground pool because I knew I was going to be home a

19:07:17 lot.
19:07:17 I wanted my rocking chair on the front porch and stay
19:07:20 in the pool, right?
19:07:21 The traffic has got so bad, you talk about the
19:07:24 traffic.
19:07:25 I can hear the tire noise, the motorcycles, the cars
19:07:29 that go you and down there with their boom boxes.
19:07:35 They can hear two blocks away.
19:07:37 So don't go on my porch and I don't go to the pool.
19:07:40 I go to the library and I go for walks.
19:07:43 And I own a house in Hyde Park.
19:07:46 I can't back out of the driveway because there's
19:07:48 double parking on both sides.
19:07:49 Mr. Dingfelder, I read an article in the paper that he
19:07:51 tried to go to HUGO's to get some black beans and
19:07:56 yellow rice.
19:07:57 He's not here.
19:07:58 He had to park in front of somebody's house and walk
19:08:00 there.
19:08:00 And so I ride my bicycle over to Hugo's.
19:08:08 There's no place to park.
19:08:11 We live at 2006, also, have that property also -- I

19:08:14 was going to move into but I can't get out of my back
19:08:17 property.
19:08:17 I'm serious.
19:08:19 That's what they did in Hyde Park.
19:08:20 They took those old bungalows and made them wide as
19:08:25 offices and title places and all that stuff and no
19:08:28 place for them to park, the people that do have to
19:08:30 park in the street.
19:08:34 You have to wait for one to go.
19:08:36 It's terrible.
19:08:36 I have been in Tampa since 1961.
19:08:38 And I have seen this town grow.
19:08:42 I moved from Cleveland, Ohio, which gangs, graffiti,
19:08:47 pollution.
19:08:48 We moved to Tampa.
19:08:48 It was nice.
19:08:49 Now we got the traffic, the pollution, the crime, all
19:08:54 that stuff that we left.
19:08:55 And when you bring more traffic there, then it's going
19:08:58 to get worse.
19:09:00 It's the straw that broke the camel's back.
19:09:02 Where does it stop?

19:09:03 You might just let everybody make everything
19:09:06 commercial.
19:09:06 That's it.
19:09:07 And people aren't going to move here.
19:09:09 And the people that are stuck, their volume value,
19:09:14 it's going to go down.
19:09:15 People aren't going to buy my house 150 feet from a
19:09:19 commercial strip.
19:09:20 That's all I got to say.
19:09:22 Thank you.
19:09:32 >>> My name is Larry LaBacca.
19:09:36 I feel kind of rough going after that one.
19:09:38 I moved to Tampa in 1974 from New York City.
19:09:43 And I lived in the Heights for 13 years.
19:09:47 I own the property at 1014 west Woodlawn.
19:09:51 Before that, I lived for 20-some years in Seminole
19:09:55 Heights.
19:09:55 I have known the owners of hutters corner for many
19:10:00 years, the Bokers.
19:10:03 So I have grown up and lived in the Heights and in the
19:10:04 Clearfield area across the street many years.
19:10:07 In 2000 I took my house down from a 2 and 1 to a 6 and

19:10:14 3 on Woodlawn.
19:10:15 I have three children so I had a big interest in the
19:10:17 Heights.
19:10:17 I do not want to move.
19:10:19 I'm very excited about the Heights project that the
19:10:22 city is doing.
19:10:23 I use the North Boulevard corridor as a main -- to get
19:10:31 to work every day.
19:10:32 I am 100% in favor of this.
19:10:35 I have watched my whole childhood, watched the houses
19:10:41 deteriorate when they are residential.
19:10:42 They do not sell.
19:10:45 For residential.
19:10:46 Nobody wants to live there with their bedroom ten feet
19:10:50 from a road, with the busy traffic.
19:10:53 They are run down.
19:10:55 The properties, I watched the properties in question
19:10:58 and I was thrilled when they were bought and fixed up
19:11:01 because they were dumps.
19:11:02 They were dumps.
19:11:03 I watched them get fixed up and get painted.
19:11:06 I have a small business myself where I paint homes,

19:11:09 and do handyman work.
19:11:11 I do not get any work off the houses off North
19:11:15 Boulevard.
19:11:16 Nobody calls about painting them or fixing them up.
19:11:19 Only in the interior part of the neighborhood.
19:11:25 In touchdown a friend of mine bought a double lot off
19:11:28 of Kentucky and North Boulevard, an empty lot, was one
19:11:32 of the most recent lots I've seen to buy, have not
19:11:38 been developed, built two stucco homes.
19:11:41 Last one on the end, Kentucky and North Boulevard,
19:11:43 left this zoned this way, specifically for if a person
19:11:48 wanted to run a small business, they could.
19:11:51 And that has sold three times because of that.
19:11:55 They just don't move if they are residential.
19:11:57 I don't want to see my kids grow up in a neighborhood
19:12:00 where the perimeter deter rates and you have gangers
19:12:05 and druggers and just empty homes staying there.
19:12:09 I think it's the best way to save the North Boulevard
19:12:12 corridor.
19:12:13 And I'm a member of the civic club.
19:12:18 We have met several times.
19:12:20 This has been a topic that's been on the agenda.

19:12:22 And I have watched twice this get voted unanimously by
19:12:27 the Heights civic club.
19:12:28 So I know most of the neighborhood, all the members
19:12:32 voting unanimously for this.
19:12:35 I don't see a reason why these gentlemen shouldn't be
19:12:38 able to keep the look of the residential home, they
19:12:40 keep it up, they keep it clean, and it keeps the
19:12:43 property value up, therefore it keeps your tax revenue
19:12:47 up.
19:12:47 We all need that.
19:12:49 Thank you.
19:12:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Ladies and gentlemen, if you don't have
19:12:52 any new information or new things to say, could you
19:12:55 just come up and give us your name and say you oppose
19:12:57 it or you are in favor?
19:12:58 We have a very long night tonight.
19:13:01 >>> My name is Samantha laBacca, and I am in favor of
19:13:05 this.
19:13:06 Thank you.
19:13:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:13:10 >>> My name is Brian Curry.
19:13:12 I live at 822 west Braddocks.

19:13:16 I'm in favor of it.
19:13:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:13:19 >>> My name is Joseph Lee Duncan.
19:13:23 Long-time resident of this area and was raised in this
19:13:26 area.
19:13:26 I'm against it due to the fact that properties do not
19:13:29 face North Boulevard, except for one of them.
19:13:32 It would be more of a problem entering and existing
19:13:34 the neighborhood.
19:13:35 Thank you.
19:13:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:13:39 >>> My name is Steve Newhouse, I live at 806 W.
19:13:43 Peninsular Street, and I'm against it as well.
19:13:53 >>> I'm Bill Bartlett, I live at 3811 west Tyson
19:13:57 Avenue.
19:14:00 I am for this rezoning.
19:14:01 This residence is the ideal thing for an office or a
19:14:05 business.
19:14:07 He's got the parking and everything.
19:14:08 And no matter where you live at, you are going to hear
19:14:11 motorcycles and cars.
19:14:12 Thank you.

19:14:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:14:18 >>> My name is George Miranda.
19:14:21 I live at 915 west -- and I approve this, and I think
19:14:29 this is a very safe neighborhood, and we have three
19:14:32 nice parks where I have raised four kids, and it's
19:14:38 real safe.
19:14:38 And I think this should be approved.
19:14:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:14:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Are you related to Mr. Miranda up
19:14:44 here?
19:14:46 You're not?
19:14:46 Okay.
19:14:47 So he can vote for it then.
19:14:48 [ Laughter ]
19:14:52 >> He is the son of one of Tampa's best baseball
19:14:57 players.
19:14:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
19:14:59 >>> My name is Tim Ireland, I live at 806 west
19:15:03 Kentucky, and I am for this.
19:15:04 >> Thank you.
19:15:09 >>> I'm representing my grandmother at 805 Ohio
19:15:15 Street.

19:15:15 And I am for this.
19:15:18 I also want to say I spent my childhood in the
19:15:20 neighborhood.
19:15:20 And North Boulevard has always been very much
19:15:24 congested with traffic and speeders.
19:15:27 It has just gotten worse between my childhood and
19:15:30 currently.
19:15:30 I think the neighborhood has never been better since
19:15:34 Mr. Ireland and they converted the property.
19:15:39 I'm very much for it.
19:15:40 >>> My name is Fred -- my family owns the property at
19:15:43 West Ohio.
19:15:48 I think agent of the property out there is bringing up
19:15:51 the property value, good for that corridor through
19:15:53 there.
19:15:54 Most of the properties are vacant.
19:15:59 Bad shape.
19:16:00 I'm for the rezoning.
19:16:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:16:04 >>> My name is Faith Still. I live at 701 Woodlawn
19:16:08 Avenue, one of the houses on the petition.
19:16:10 And I just want to say that I have lived there since I

19:16:15 went to college at the University of Tampa in 2002.
19:16:17 Since I lived there my house has been broken into,
19:16:20 completely cleaned out all my personal belongings,
19:16:22 everything gone.
19:16:26 I have had stuff taken off the porch.
19:16:28 I have had a car run into the side of my house.
19:16:32 I don't think anybody should live there.
19:16:34 If I had kids, I would not live there.
19:16:38 It's just definitely not good house for a residential
19:16:42 place.
19:16:42 When I do get married and have kids I do not plan to
19:16:45 stay there. I think it is a perfect ideal place for a
19:16:47 business.
19:16:48 The parking lot is perfect for the backyard.
19:16:50 And the parking and traffic would go to North
19:16:53 Boulevard, not into the neighborhood.
19:16:55 So I'm definitely for this, obviously. I'm on the
19:16:56 petition.
19:17:04 >>> My name is Elaine Fisher.
19:17:06 I live at 716 West Woodlawn Avenue.
19:17:08 And I am definitely against it.
19:17:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

19:17:11 >>> My name is Mercedes Guillermo, 704 West
19:17:20 Peninsular, my house is directly next door to one of
19:17:23 these homes.
19:17:24 I strongly oppose it.
19:17:25 I have three small children.
19:17:26 I want to keep it strictly residential.
19:17:28 I don't want to have an office for a neighbor.
19:17:31 I strongly oppose it.
19:17:33 Thank you.
19:17:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:17:34 >>> George Guillermo, I live at 704 West Peninsula.
19:17:42 One of my neighbors.
19:17:45 Strictly oppose it.
19:17:46 I grew up in the neighborhood.
19:17:49 It's a real bad neighborhood.
19:17:51 My parents -- were at 704.
19:17:55 I came back when my father passed away.
19:17:57 And knocked down the old house and rebuilt it a new
19:18:00 house.
19:18:05 They play in the yard.
19:18:08 They try to make it look like North Boulevard is
19:18:10 really a corridor, and people flying.

19:18:13 It's not.
19:18:14 It's busy in the morning.
19:18:17 It's a corridor from south Seminole to the downtown
19:18:20 area so there is some traffic in the morning and there
19:18:21 is some traffic in the afternoon.
19:18:23 I also want to put in into the record 296 signatures
19:18:28 that oppose this amendment.
19:18:31 And these are not friends, these are not relatives,
19:18:35 these are people who live in the neighborhood.
19:18:37 I thank you.
19:18:39 I oppose it.
19:18:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:18:41 Next.
19:18:42 >>> 705 west peninsula, speaking for my parents, 809
19:18:50 west peninsula.
19:18:51 They have been living there for 30 years.
19:18:54 I have been living there for ten.
19:18:57 Live 150 feet from North Boulevard.
19:18:59 But the neighborhood has been revitalized by the
19:19:08 people, not by the business.
19:19:09 And if you go at night on North Boulevard, I work at
19:19:12 night.

19:19:12 And if you come at night on North Boulevard, you will
19:19:16 be amazed at the stuff that goes on.
19:19:18 And those parking lots.
19:19:20 And also, a lot of the landscape of those places were
19:19:25 very creative, very nice.
19:19:27 Today they are not.
19:19:28 So they are not going to fix the neighborhood.
19:19:31 The people in the neighborhood are fixing the
19:19:32 neighborhood.
19:19:34 I'm opposed.
19:19:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Please, no clapping.
19:19:42 Just listen.
19:19:43 >> 1705 west Johnson Avenue.
19:19:47 And I am absolutely 100% in favor of this.
19:19:53 I don't know, something was stated earlier about the
19:19:55 last time this was presented before you, but it was
19:19:58 not consistent.
19:19:59 Is there any way to get the minutes or anything from
19:20:01 that?
19:20:01 Because if I recall, because I was there, it was
19:20:04 consistent with the Planning Commission.
19:20:13 >> We have a report.

19:20:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know what date it was.
19:20:19 I wasn't here there. I was in compile.
19:20:20 But if get with the clerk's office, the date you know
19:20:24 the date you were here, evidently, go to the clerks'
19:20:27 office, they will give you the report of that hearing.
19:20:33 >> It was stated it was consistent.
19:20:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:20:37 >>> Ray Fernandez, and I live at 1705, and I am all
19:20:43 for it and I think he's doing a great job with the
19:20:46 neighborhood.
19:20:47 It looks really nice.
19:20:48 And I think it's a good as set forth community.
19:20:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:20:52 Next.
19:20:56 >>> William Gerrut, I live at 2911 North Boulevard.
19:21:02 I have been here for 12 years in Tampa.
19:21:05 Along that area, in the last seven years, I developed
19:21:10 seven homes.
19:21:12 Six out of the seven have been for office buildings,
19:21:15 and residential.
19:21:18 I have seen it grow very much.
19:21:20 I'm in favor of this.

19:21:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:21:23 Next.
19:21:25 Please no, clapping.
19:21:27 >>> Cathy Evans.
19:21:28 I live at 813 west Kentucky.
19:21:30 I'm also the vice-president of the Riverside Heights
19:21:32 Civic Association.
19:21:33 And I would like to say that I am for it and I would
19:21:36 also like to say I have never seen so much
19:21:38 neighborhood spirit.
19:21:39 I wish everybody would come to our meetings.
19:21:42 When we voted thon at our neighborhood meeting there
19:21:44 was not one person opposing it and any of the
19:21:47 presentations that we had over the past two years.
19:21:50 I think it would -- our neighborhood has three big
19:21:54 parks, right on the river, and to walk my son, my dog,
19:21:58 walk round the park it's just gorgeous.
19:22:00 There's a sidewalk all the way around west Boulevard.
19:22:02 And I don't see necessarily neighbors walk along that.
19:22:07 So I think that having the commercial, the light
19:22:09 commercial use in there is really going to be an asset
19:22:11 to our neighborhood.

19:22:12 Thank you.
19:22:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:22:13 Next.
19:22:17 >> Ernie Hearsey, 2908 north Decatur.
19:22:22 I own several properties in the neighborhood and
19:22:24 developed some properties.
19:22:25 I'm totally for this.
19:22:28 I lived off a major street on North Armenia, and know
19:22:32 what the noise is like so I got out thereof.
19:22:34 I live closer to the river now so it's very quiet.
19:22:37 I don't have to deal with all of that.
19:22:38 But most of these businesses, I think, will be
19:22:41 shutting down, more or less at 5:00 or 5:50 so it's
19:22:46 not lying like a big overcrowding so I'm in favor of
19:22:50 it.
19:22:51 >>> My name is Vincent Traynor, I live at 210 west
19:22:55 Florida.
19:22:55 Although I don't live in the neighborhood, I drive
19:22:57 back and forth down North Boulevard and it's day and
19:23:00 night. The businesses just beautify the neighborhood,
19:23:00 so I'm for it.
19:23:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

19:23:08 Next.
19:23:11 >> My name is Nicola Cada. I live at 901 West ...
19:23:18 I lived there for 52 years.
19:23:21 I'm definitely for Chris.
19:23:22 The issue on North Boulevard, my mother has called
19:23:26 numerous, numerous times to be try to get the city to
19:23:29 clean up that area.
19:23:32 Thank you.
19:23:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
19:23:36 >>> My name is Jane Miranda, no relation to Charlie.
19:23:40 I live at 915 West Alfred street.
19:23:43 I am in favor of rezoning for Chris.
19:23:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just for the record, her father is
19:23:53 the one that was the greatest baseball player.
19:23:54 And her two uncles. (Laughter)
19:23:57 >>> I agree.
19:23:58 My husband's family made the best...
19:24:04 >>> Any my name is Joanne Ireland, I live at 911 West
19:24:07 stafford Street, and I'm all for it.
19:24:09 >> Thank you.
19:24:10 Next.
19:24:12 >>> My name is Larry banjo.

19:24:15 I own the property on 701 Indiana.
19:24:17 I base my decision on the fact that it's obvious to
19:24:24 everybody here, I'm for it.
19:24:27 Thank you.
19:24:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:24:30 >>> Joanne Brook.
19:24:32 I'm at 702 Ohio.
19:24:34 And I am in favor of the rezoning and I also have a
19:24:39 bet letter here from someone who is unable to attend,
19:24:42 Roger Lindsey, who is also in favor.
19:24:45 That I would like to submit to you.
19:24:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Give to the our attorney.
19:24:48 Next speaker.
19:24:50 >>> Kristina.
19:24:54 I am completely in favor of Mr. Ireland with his
19:24:57 intentions for his property.
19:24:58 I live just behind MLK and I am completely -- feel
19:25:02 safe because of all the buildings behind me and
19:25:06 offices have surveillance which protects my backyard.
19:25:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:25:13 >>> Michelle, I live at 710 west peninsula, and I am
19:25:18 near one of the houses that are being petitioned for

19:25:21 this.
19:25:21 And I am completely opposed to it because I just built
19:25:26 a brand new home, and a lot of money and lot of effort
19:25:30 into keeping that as a residence for the next 30
19:25:33 years.
19:25:34 So I definitely don't want to live next to anybody who
19:25:37 has an office.
19:25:37 Thank you.
19:25:39 >>> 701 West Woodlawn Avenue. It's a horrible place
19:25:43 to live. I can't see raising a family there at all
19:25:53 and I can't see anyone in the future wanting to.
19:25:55 Thank you.
19:25:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:25:57 >>> William Fisher, I live at 716 west Woodlawn
19:26:02 Avenue. I've been in the neighborhood since the early
19:26:02 '70s. I have to rebut some of the things said.
19:26:07 Number one, there are speeders there. The police
19:26:11 department does a fine job sending their wolf packs
19:26:14 out there and stopping speeders from time to time to
19:26:16 try to slow down but you can't stop them.
19:26:19 The second place is, there are a number of commercial
19:26:22 properties along North Boulevard.

19:26:24 He's right.
19:26:24 But those commercial properties got in there with the
19:26:26 same kind of thing he's saying about how we are going
19:26:28 to make the neighborhood great.
19:26:30 Even the City of Tampa firefighters union if you saw
19:26:33 the picture he put up is a pink building with
19:26:36 absolutely no landscaping and nothing but flat ground
19:26:37 for parking. They did nothing to the neighborhood.
19:26:39 The property that he's trying to rezone, all face the
19:26:44 inside the neighborhood, not North Boulevard, except
19:26:46 for one, and that one is a double lot that is in the
19:26:50 neighborhood.
19:26:50 Why would you want to rezone that?
19:26:53 All this is about money.
19:26:54 Because these people are buying these properties
19:26:55 because they say nobody wants to live there but they
19:26:58 want to sell them to make money.
19:26:59 People in the neighborhood have been there for years
19:27:01 and want the property values to go up as they have
19:27:02 over they have over the years because the neighborhood
19:27:04 is a nice neighborhood and a good place to live.
19:27:08 The properties already there need to go, not expand

19:27:10 it.
19:27:11 Because they are the ones that Mayor Iorio had to come
19:27:12 in when she got into office and kick out the drug
19:27:16 dealers, the hookers that were walking up and down the
19:27:19 street, because of the vacant properties, like you
19:27:22 said, at 5:00 they go home.
19:27:24 There is no lighting.
19:27:25 There's nobody to control those properties.
19:27:26 And people that live behind them now have vagrants and
19:27:30 drug dealers of people hanging out on their corner
19:27:32 right behind the house.
19:27:33 They don't need that.
19:27:33 That's why we don't need any more properties in there.
19:27:37 You said the Heights property is coming up.
19:27:39 When it comes up, we aren't too far from that and it's
19:27:42 a natural extension.
19:27:43 If it's not full of businesses there. That's just
19:27:45 going to continue into our neighborhood.
19:27:47 Our property values go up even more.
19:27:50 Do you want 15 new businesses giving you property tax
19:27:51 value, or do you want the whole neighborhood's
19:27:54 property tax value to go up?

19:27:56 That's the way to do it is without the businesses,
19:27:57 let it stay a neighborhood, and allow the whole
19:27:59 neighborhood to go up.
19:28:00 And then you won't have the problem we are having
19:28:02 there now.
19:28:03 We have gotten it cleaned up since Mayor Iorio stepped
19:28:06 into office.
19:28:07 I would like it to stay that way, not put more
19:28:10 commercial properties in there.
19:28:12 And as far as the noise and stuff goes, well, Mr.
19:28:14 Highland didn't like the noise, then why did he buy
19:28:17 two properties across the street from each other both
19:28:19 on North Boulevard?
19:28:21 The second one he bought after he was turned down the
19:28:23 first time for the zoning.
19:28:26 If you don't want this property, sell it.
19:28:29 Let somebody else rehabilitate them the way they
19:28:31 should have been and leave it at that.
19:28:32 Thank you.
19:28:33 >>GWEN MILLER: No clapping.
19:28:36 >>> 101 South... I'm for the proposal. I see him
19:28:43 working in the past before and he definitely does

19:28:45 great work.
19:28:46 I bought houses in the area before, the past 10, 15
19:28:49 years.
19:28:52 I also went to school on the corner, Villa Madonna.
19:28:52 To me it's a very special place, and I really believe
19:28:55 that what he's doing, he's definitely enhanced the
19:28:56 neighborhood.
19:28:59 Thank you.
19:29:03 >>> Pat Chirpanic, I have property at 3134 North
19:29:10 Boulevard which is already zoned for professional use.
19:29:13 Also, have owned many residential properties in that
19:29:18 area.
19:29:18 And I think for a residential office use, in
19:29:24 comparison with what we have on the corner of Columbus
19:29:27 and North Boulevard, an outdoor boutique, also across
19:29:32 the street from that, we have a vendor, CD, boom boxes
19:29:44 with a lot of cursing and carrying on, and I don't
19:29:46 think that the problem with prostitutes, drug addicts,
19:29:50 and the loud noises are the property owners' problem,
19:29:56 or the commercial property owners' fault.
19:30:00 It looks like to me that the police department could
19:30:03 enforce some of the laws in that area.

19:30:06 And clean it up a little bit.
19:30:09 Not the property owners.
19:30:10 I'm definitely for him.
19:30:13 I don't see any reason why a residential office for an
19:30:17 accountant or attorney is going to blight the area.
19:30:21 Thank you.
19:30:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:30:23 >>> Good evening.
19:30:27 My name is Linda Valdez Rodriguez.
19:30:30 I reside at 704 west Ohio.
19:30:32 I have been a resident there for 55 years.
19:30:35 My whole lifetime.
19:30:37 A couple years ago, I would say, Mr. Ireland brought
19:30:43 this up, the same issue and it was knocked down, and I
19:30:46 was fighting him tooth and nail because I didn't want
19:30:48 it.
19:30:49 Okay.
19:30:50 I speak to you today from my heart.
19:30:51 I have seen several things happen within the
19:30:54 neighborhood.
19:30:55 They gave me a change of heart.
19:30:58 One thing is that a car came and knocked a couple of

19:31:04 telephone polls down, the lights down.
19:31:06 We had no lights for several -- quite a few hours.
19:31:10 And, also, there was a little child who was outside on
19:31:16 the next block, because Tampa parents were renters,
19:31:25 and luckily nothing happened to that child.
19:31:27 And I searched my soul, my heart, and I see things
19:31:30 happening, and the truth about it is, Mr. Ireland
19:31:35 couldn't live there, okay.
19:31:37 I raised my children there.
19:31:38 And I searched, and I think, would I want to worry
19:31:42 about that bedroom being a car running into it or
19:31:48 whatever?
19:31:49 And I have to say no.
19:31:50 So I am asking you to approve this.
19:31:55 I never wanted it, but I see the need for that.
19:32:00 Okay.
19:32:01 If we get people as you know, if you can't rent -- I
19:32:06 mean, if you can't -- if they can't use it for a small
19:32:09 business, okay, then you have no choice but to rent
19:32:13 it.
19:32:13 Okay.
19:32:14 And of course we know we are going to have people,

19:32:17 different people coming in, families and families,
19:32:20 because as soon as something happens to them, they are
19:32:21 going to be ready to move.
19:32:23 Okay.
19:32:24 I would prefer to see someone come in with a small
19:32:27 business and work at a job, and everything than to
19:32:35 listen to people moving in, and loud music every
19:32:39 night, like my lady in back of me, they had renters
19:32:43 next door to them, and then of course you have got
19:32:46 problems all the time.
19:32:47 So I am asking that you approve this.
19:32:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:32:51 >> My name is Dan Idle, I live at 911 west Alfred
19:33:04 street.
19:33:04 I have lived there since 1975.
19:33:07 And I am for this.
19:33:10 And I would like to see it go through.
19:33:12 And I have a letter from somebody.
19:33:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
19:33:19 >>> My name is Jean Duncomb, I live at 702 West
19:33:23 Peninsular Street, one of the properties in the
19:33:27 application for rezoning.

19:33:29 I purchased the property about three years ago, and my
19:33:32 son actually attended the academy right there on North
19:33:35 Boulevard, and right beside the graveyard.
19:33:40 I would drive up and down the street, and I would
19:33:42 always look for something that was on sale because I
19:33:47 saw several law offices along North Boulevard, medical
19:33:50 offices and I thought it would be nice for me to buy
19:33:52 one of those properties so I could convert it into a
19:33:55 building for a law office, a house went up on the
19:33:58 market for sale, I purchased it, lived in it, I
19:34:01 renovated it, to the point now where in the future I
19:34:04 would like to operate my law office out of the
19:34:07 residence, as far as traffic, if I see four clients a
19:34:13 month I'm doing well, so as far as a lot of traffic in
19:34:16 and out, that would not be a problem, as Mr. Ireland
19:34:20 said earlier, the entrance and exit would be off of
19:34:23 North Boulevard, out into the neighborhood.
19:34:27 As far as the property being residential, living right
19:34:30 there on the main corridor, it's not very desirable.
19:34:34 Traffic, the noise, the vibration at night, a lot of
19:34:37 people speeding or racing.
19:34:41 I am in favor for the rezoning.

19:34:42 And I ask that you all would look at this application
19:34:45 favorably.
19:34:50 >>> Good evening, finally. Desiree Valdes, president,
19:34:57 Riverside Heights Civic Association. No relation to
19:34:59 Charlie Miranda.
19:35:02 John, it's so good to see you.
19:35:06 We are the neighborhood association -- first I want to
19:35:12 mention the fact that this is the first time I've
19:35:15 probably seen about five of these people at our
19:35:18 meeting, okay?
19:35:20 This is the first time I have ever seen most of the
19:35:23 residents that are here.
19:35:24 And I just want to commend them for actually coming
19:35:26 out and, you know, having an opinion and supporting
19:35:29 and bringing out the neighborhood to come here
19:35:33 tonight.
19:35:33 So I really appreciate that.
19:35:34 And I would really like to see more of them be
19:35:38 involved in our neighborhood.
19:35:42 Presented before you this evening is a petition to put
19:35:48 light professional in the corridor of North Boulevard.
19:35:53 The neighborhood association has met several times on

19:35:56 this issue, but it's always been presented to us as
19:36:01 this particular zoning.
19:36:04 And we have voted unanimously to approve it, with all
19:36:06 the members that were present at the meeting.
19:36:12 We also know that the 200-some-odd signatures that you
19:36:16 were submitted by another resident was the reason
19:36:21 these people were signing this is because they were
19:36:23 being told that they were going to put apartment
19:36:27 buildings, multi-level condos and all that there.
19:36:35 Some of that is true, some of that is not.
19:36:37 I'm not sure how that all got mixed into it.
19:36:40 But all I know is, the neighborhood association voted
19:36:44 on what was presented to us, and that is for
19:36:47 residential office uses and nothing to be converted
19:36:52 to, you know, major uses like multifamily use, or
19:36:59 apartment complexes, or anything of the sort.
19:37:02 So I just want to make that very clear on the record
19:37:05 that we have no intention of voting -- of supporting
19:37:10 that because that wasn't what was presented to us.
19:37:12 Okay.
19:37:13 And no one has ever said that, but I wasn't sure what
19:37:17 that petition said, that said all those opposed

19:37:20 signatures are on it because I have never seen it
19:37:22 before.
19:37:26 So with that, I just want to say, I'll submit my
19:37:29 letter for the record of support from the association
19:37:40 for the Irelands.
19:37:54 >> My name is Joyce... I live at 805 West Woodlawn
19:38:26 Avenue.
19:38:29 And I vehemently oppose this.
19:38:33 First of all, that's why we are here.
19:38:38 If he were putting in a park he wouldn't have to ask
19:38:41 permission.
19:38:42 If he was putting a residence in the middle, he wont
19:38:44 probably wouldn't have to ask for it.
19:38:46 But it's office use.
19:38:47 It's different.
19:38:48 It's a different dynamic.
19:38:50 And it's not like a neighborhood.
19:38:52 You talk about all of your differences in
19:38:57 neighborhoods.
19:38:57 And what I want you to notice is, this is -- where the
19:39:04 brick streets are of our neighborhood is entirely
19:39:06 residential.

19:39:06 Down here it's the first office space.
19:39:12 It happens to be vacant right now and it's for sale or
19:39:15 for lease.
19:39:16 So all of this is residential.
19:39:17 With the exception of this lot, 60 by 130.
19:39:22 I don't know where they are even going to have
19:39:24 handicapped accessible parking.
19:39:30 The petitioners say it will improve the neighborhood.
19:39:34 I really don't think it will.
19:39:36 I don't like the large parking.
19:39:38 I don't like what the retention ponds look like.
19:39:44 They harbor mosquitoes.
19:39:46 They collect debris.
19:39:48 It's just not nice, you know, that depression in the
19:39:52 ground.
19:39:52 You talk about safety going on?
19:39:54 They think it's going to be safer?
19:39:56 These places are going to be empty at night.
19:40:00 And where we see empty commercial lots is where we are
19:40:05 attracting the problem.
19:40:06 Up by Martin Luther King, we have offices.
19:40:09 That's where we have problems.

19:40:11 Down by -- we have offices.
19:40:14 This is where we have problems.
19:40:15 We don't have problems in the middle.
19:40:17 My neighbor across the street worked at one of those
19:40:23 lawyer offices in Hyde Park.
19:40:24 She's not able to be here.
19:40:27 She writes, for seven years I worked at a law firm on
19:40:30 south Boulevard.
19:40:31 A beautiful old home converted to an office.
19:40:33 After 5 p.m. it was a magnet for vagrants and homeless
19:40:39 people.
19:40:39 Every morning that I went to work I picked up beer
19:40:41 bottles, food containers and other substances,
19:40:44 including feces from the walkway and porch.
19:40:47 Many times I would not everyone enter the building
19:40:50 until a male co-worker arrived for fear the
19:40:53 intoxicated bum passed out on the porch would wake up
19:40:56 as I stepped over him.
19:40:58 We worked with the door locked and clients rang a bell
19:41:00 to be let in.
19:41:02 That procedure was implemented after I was chased by a
19:41:05 vagrant.

19:41:06 I'll submit the letter in case anyone -- but this is
19:41:11 basically what's going on here.
19:41:12 In daytime, sure, that will be sweet to have offices
19:41:15 there, whatever, maybe not so sweet.
19:41:19 But it might now.
19:41:22 The other thing I did want to mention, just with
19:41:24 regard to the homeowners association, I look at
19:41:30 Riverside Heights web site all the time and I click on
19:41:32 the meetings, and if you go there, the meetings are
19:41:36 listed for February 20th, and March 13th, when
19:41:40 you click on the meetings, there is a meeting agenda
19:41:45 and those the only meetings listed.
19:41:47 I asked Chris how many were in attendance when they
19:41:50 talked about it and he told me himself there were
19:41:52 about 25.
19:41:53 Well, I know that there's a lot of people that care
19:41:58 about this, more than 25.
19:41:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up.
19:42:02 Your time is up.
19:42:03 >> Can I submit this?
19:42:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, you may submit that.
19:42:07 >> Office space available.

19:42:11 I also see residences on North Boulevard.
19:42:16 >>CHAIRMAN: Give them to our attorney.
19:42:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:42:22 Next speaker.
19:42:25 >>> Anthony Peter, I have quite a lot of property in
19:42:30 the neighborhood, about four just on North Boulevard.
19:42:34 I'm for development and fixing up these properties and
19:42:37 having the highest and best use for them.
19:42:42 I don't even know the petitioner.
19:42:43 My name was mentioned in the presentation and I wasn't
19:42:46 even coming here because I heard the Planning
19:42:48 Commission was going to be against this petition.
19:42:51 So I figured it was going to be a no brainer and it
19:42:54 wasn't going to go through.
19:42:55 But just in case I turned around and came by, just to
19:43:00 give my opinion on it.
19:43:03 I feel that any improvement to any of these properties
19:43:05 is a wonderful thing.
19:43:06 But as far as -- the last time it was actually
19:43:11 presented from my understanding it was just a couple
19:43:12 of properties that were presented and now I think you
19:43:14 are looking at five properties to be changed all at

19:43:16 one time.
19:43:18 Four or five.
19:43:18 I'm not sure who even the petitioner is.
19:43:21 I think that the highest and best use for some of
19:43:24 these properties may be residential office.
19:43:27 Like the others, some of the other zonings, which I
19:43:30 even own on that street.
19:43:32 But I feel that there should be an individual basis
19:43:36 rather than being blanketed, doing five at one time,
19:43:39 because there's a couple of those actual properties
19:43:41 there that maybe don't have enough of the lot space
19:43:47 for parking and everything else, but I'm all for
19:43:52 having residential office on North Boulevard.
19:43:57 But I am just maybe not in favor of having five or
19:44:01 four of them approved at one time without an
19:44:04 individual coming up, giving his or her opinion of why
19:44:07 she feels or he feels that that would make a good
19:44:09 office for him or her.
19:44:12 Because that probably will come to this council in the
19:44:14 future for one of my properties on that street.
19:44:18 But the council has to look at that particular
19:44:21 property and so will the neighbors to see whether or

19:44:23 not that's going to be something that will be
19:44:25 suitable.
19:44:27 In regards to the civic association, I briefly want to
19:44:31 mention that the meetings were posted occasionally,
19:44:35 and we do see a sign or do hear about the meeting.
19:44:38 Since this particular petition came up, I didn't hear
19:44:41 about it until after the fact.
19:44:44 And since the actual meeting happened there's been at
19:44:46 least four or five e-mails related to this issue, like
19:44:51 for this issue having neighbors come out and speaking
19:44:54 for it.
19:44:56 The previous president, which is kind of our president
19:44:59 emeritus because she was the founder of the civic
19:45:02 association, she was there for 25 years or so, always
19:45:06 had like an attitude towards looking at these kind of
19:45:09 things and being pretty indifferent as far as the
19:45:14 association not being for or against something.
19:45:16 This association board has really pushed and really
19:45:21 mentioned that this redevelopment or rezoning of these
19:45:26 properties is the way to go.
19:45:28 One meeting with 20 or so people doesn't really
19:45:31 represent the whole neighborhood.

19:45:34 This gentleman came up to my house and my street, and
19:45:38 explained to me what the situation was going on with
19:45:40 this rezoning, and had 200 some odd signatures at the
19:45:44 time he came up to my door.
19:45:45 And I feel that the neighborhood has a lot of issues
19:45:49 regarding this.
19:45:50 The neighborhood is not in consensus.
19:45:53 And, unfortunately, this is a time that I don't
19:45:57 believe the civic association is speaking for the
19:45:59 entire neighborhood, unfortunately.
19:46:00 And if you remember the rezoning for the alcohol,
19:46:04 which I was here, is another example of that, which
19:46:11 the council was good enough to correct that situation.
19:46:14 I won't take up more of your time.
19:46:16 That's just my two cents.
19:46:17 And I thank you.
19:46:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:46:19 Petitioner, do you want rebuttal?
19:46:21 >>> I was able to obtain the 2005 and 2007 staff
19:46:24 reports.
19:46:25 As was mentioned, there's commercial properties up
19:46:41 along North Boulevard.

19:46:43 Is that the case?
19:46:45 As you can see right across here, which I believe the
19:46:49 gentleman that was just speaking who owns this
19:46:51 property, there are two properties.
19:46:52 They are zoned residential office.
19:46:54 That is directly across the street from it.
19:46:56 Also, one block north of that on our side of the
19:46:59 street there's a residential office.
19:47:01 >> Which way is north?
19:47:05 I think you have got it upside down.
19:47:08 >>> Okay, yeah.
19:47:09 The north, we have the office here.
19:47:12 And then one block north of that is a residential
19:47:14 office.
19:47:16 On a 55-foot lot. This is also the map.
19:47:24 (off microphone)
19:47:25 Another thing, councilman Dingfelder knows about our
19:47:34 conditions.
19:47:35 We need to have the condition placed on the properties
19:47:37 for all we can ever have and all it can ever be, are
19:47:40 residential office.
19:47:42 They have to maintain that residential character.

19:47:44 No one can ever come in here and tear them down and
19:47:47 put up an office building because it goes with the
19:47:50 neighborhood. This is not about money.
19:47:52 If this is about money I bought that dump on Ohio for
19:47:55 $100,000.
19:47:57 I could rent it out for five or ten years.
19:48:00 We can't control growth.
19:48:01 There's going to be more traffic as time goes on.
19:48:04 I could have held onto it.
19:48:05 It would have appreciated -- the area. I invested
19:48:10 over $100,000. That improved values in the area.
19:48:14 We had ample parking.
19:48:17 And the reason for that, I mentioned before, these
19:48:19 lots were originally were 26-foot by 130-foot fronting
19:48:24 North Boulevard which is why all the cut-outs are on
19:48:27 North Boulevard.
19:48:28 This is the property at 3602 North Boulevard. As you
19:48:31 can see, the cut-out is there.
19:48:36 This is my property at 702 west Ohio Avenue which
19:48:42 faces Ohio, but all ingress and egress is off North
19:48:44 Boulevard on this cut-out.
19:48:47 I have another 70-foot of space that's fenced in for

19:48:50 ample parking.
19:48:51 We have plenty of room for parking.
19:48:53 There is no need for parking to be on the street.
19:48:59 This is the International Fire Department Union that
19:49:04 the gentleman spoke of earlier.
19:49:06 I don't see that as being too blighted.
19:49:08 Maybe I'm wrong.
19:49:12 They spoke of asphalt paving.
19:49:14 I'm totally against that.
19:49:15 We are as green as we can possibly be.
19:49:17 We have proposed any excess parking for the paver
19:49:19 design to allow for water flow to flow through.
19:49:23 You will notice here on the property at 3602 North
19:49:25 Boulevard, we have eight grand oak trees with every
19:49:30 intention to preserve every single one of them.
19:49:33 How many developments do you get that with?
19:49:39 Speaking of petitions, I spoke to several neighbors
19:49:41 going around, and they told me, well, I already signed
19:49:43 their petition opposing it.
19:49:46 What did they mention to you? Oh, there's going to be
19:49:48 commercial development, food stores, apartments, it's
19:49:52 going to bring all kinds of problems into the

19:49:54 neighborhood.
19:49:55 I spoke with them for 15 or 20 minutes.
19:49:57 They sended up signing my petition.
19:49:59 You will notice there's some signatures, at least ten,
19:50:02 that are on both petitions.
19:50:04 Another thing I found fun toy believe is they mention
19:50:06 they don't -- the civic association about the meetings
19:50:11 and everything else.
19:50:12 The same petition that I have if you will notice,
19:50:17 They kept that petition, and took off the main part of
19:50:20 it.
19:50:21 It says, residential 10.
19:50:28 When they came back in the store we have to stop this
19:50:31 development.
19:50:31 My petition states the facts allowing for low density
19:50:35 residential office.
19:50:38 I talked to people they just signed because they were
19:50:42 being pestered so much.
19:50:43 They told me they were totally in favor of this.
19:50:50 It will not bring any more traffic than already
19:50:52 exists.
19:50:53 Once again all parking is off North Boulevard.

19:51:01 That pretty much sums it up.
19:51:03 I respectfully request Council's approval of this and
19:51:06 to move forward and this corridor become something we
19:51:08 can all be proud of.
19:51:09 Thank you for your time.
19:51:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
19:51:10 We need to close the public hearing.
19:51:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
19:51:13 >> Second.
19:51:15 Miranda.
19:51:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of staff before you close.
19:51:20 I was going to try to close it real -- look it up real
19:51:24 fast.
19:51:25 Ms. Petrucha, what are the possible categories within
19:51:32 SMU?
19:51:34 >>> I believe there are PDs that come under site
19:51:40 control district.
19:51:41 SMU 6 category was originally designed for large PDs
19:51:48 in the New Tampa area.
19:51:49 It was modified to include areas that might be south
19:51:53 of Fowler Avenue to allow for consideration of office
19:52:00 development that are interpreted to be appropriate

19:52:03 because they will serve as a very low intensity with
19:52:06 activity centers, a neighborhood need, and mortgage.
19:52:10 Kind of like the qualifications on suburban mixed use
19:52:13 6 category.
19:52:14 >> What if somebody wanted to do RO as -- residential
19:52:20 office?
19:52:22 RM?
19:52:25 >> Tony Garcia has the next agenda item.
19:52:46 My impression was that they were supposed to be PD.
19:52:51 Tony, come on.
19:52:55 What zoning classification can be conferred under
19:52:57 suburban mixed use categories?
19:52:59 >>> Of course the PDs but mostly RO.
19:53:03 OP.
19:53:03 Those are mostly what you will see over there.
19:53:05 Low density office.
19:53:11 >> I have the matrix table that shows the RO, PD, and
19:53:15 the PDA.
19:53:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question -- wait, Tony.
19:53:20 This is a question for you.
19:53:22 If a person wanted to do -- if some people discussed
19:53:29 things that were not commercial, sort of office uses,

19:53:31 but residential offices, a home office where you live
19:53:38 in a home, and you have a computer and do work, you
19:53:42 can do that in a residential zoning?
19:53:43 >>> You can actually do that now, a home occupation if
19:53:47 you don't have any employees.
19:53:48 Just a regular home occupation.
19:53:50 >> Residential zonings.
19:53:51 >>> Actually, you don't even need a zoning.
19:53:53 You can just apply to the city through the home
19:53:55 occupation process and get an occupational license as
19:53:58 long as you don't have any employees.
19:53:59 >> Thank you.
19:54:00 >>> You're welcome.
19:54:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
19:54:05 (Motion carried)
19:54:07 What is the pleasure of council?
19:54:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
19:54:10 I would like to move for denial based on the Planning
19:54:13 Commission staff report, and board report.
19:54:18 It basically based on way heard from the majority of
19:54:22 the people in the residential neighborhood, that they
19:54:24 want to protect the integrity of this residential

19:54:26 neighborhood, and they feel that it can continue in a
19:54:29 healthy way, as a residential neighborhood, and if
19:54:32 people want to have home occupations in a residential
19:54:35 use they can do that there without changing the
19:54:37 zoning.
19:54:38 But the character would change along North Boulevard
19:54:41 with increased parking, signage, and it would
19:54:45 undermine the residential integrity of the
19:54:47 neighborhood.
19:54:51 >> I'll second that for discussion.
19:54:53 I understand -- council is made up of different ideas
19:54:59 and different individuals from all sectors of life.
19:55:03 What happens here is that my main concern, there was a
19:55:07 large number of neighbors involved in this.
19:55:10 50% against, 50% for, or 48, whatever it is.
19:55:15 The main thing that I carry here is that I certainly
19:55:18 don't want a divided neighborhood.
19:55:21 I don't want people getting mad at each other.
19:55:24 This is not the way.
19:55:26 When you talk about tax revenue, I, or I guess I could
19:55:29 speak for all members of council, I have never voted
19:55:32 for something based on tax -- that doesn't happen with

19:55:37 any council member.
19:55:38 I think what Ms. Saul-Sena spoke about is if you
19:55:43 really want to have a home occupied use, you can have
19:55:45 it now.
19:55:47 Am I correct?
19:55:48 And that's when I heard from the Planning Commission.
19:55:53 I wasn't here when this cam bake the first time, back
19:55:56 now.
19:55:57 But from what I understand, and it was a controversy
19:56:00 whether it passed or didn't pass, and that will be
19:56:03 determined when you look at the records of the city's
19:56:06 clerk's office, that it was denied or some portion of
19:56:09 it was denied.
19:56:10 We have certainly heard more testimony today on this
19:56:15 development, possible development,
19:56:21 Than a lot of developments have taken 20 acres or 10
19:56:24 acres, or the one at the port that's got right next to
19:56:27 27 acres.
19:56:31 But it's all based on the use and the feelings.
19:56:38 And let me talk a little about what they broke into my
19:56:42 house.
19:56:42 Now what?

19:56:43 They broke into my house.
19:56:44 They stole not only one car from me, they stole two
19:56:47 cars from me at different times.
19:56:49 So you're not immune.
19:56:51 When you live in any city in America, you have a
19:56:54 problem.
19:56:54 When you live in any city in the world, you got the
19:56:57 same problem.
19:56:58 So you have got to be vigilant of what you see and
19:57:00 what you hear.
19:57:01 You have got to be the ears and the eyes of all
19:57:04 government no matter where you live at.
19:57:05 And I'm not trying to lecture you.
19:57:08 I have never been a school teacher in my life.
19:57:10 But sometimes these basic principles that your parents
19:57:12 taught you and I are the basic things that lead us
19:57:15 through life.
19:57:15 When you take a look and understand that we are not
19:57:19 immune from disease, and we are not immune from
19:57:23 break-ins.
19:57:26 Certainly we like to help you anyway we can.
19:57:30 And from what I have heard, I have taken some notes

19:57:31 down, on the individual needs of that community, we
19:57:34 are going to see more police, I guarantee you.
19:57:38 We are going to see more code enforcement.
19:57:42 Some of you may like it.
19:57:43 Some of you may not like it.
19:57:44 Because statistics tell thaws 60% of all speeders come
19:57:47 from the same neighborhood.
19:57:49 So today, 50% of you or more are not going to like me
19:57:52 and other council members.
19:57:53 The problem is you can come back twice and not like
19:57:57 the other council members.
19:57:59 So 100% locked out but that's a job we took, a
19:58:03 responsibility we took when we ran for office.
19:58:05 And that's why I made that second.
19:58:08 And see where this thing goes.
19:58:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I just want to clear us on my
19:58:15 report on the Planning Commission that this was voted
19:58:17 on November 5th and we need to be clear.
19:58:19 In my report November 5th, resolution.
19:58:25 Also in 2004 request for planned amendment facilities,
19:58:28 properties were reviewed and found to be inconsistent
19:58:30 with the Tampa comprehensive plan by both the Planning

19:58:32 Commission and the Tampa City Council.
19:58:34 So I just wanted to go back and read for the record.
19:58:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
19:58:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First, I wanted to start off,
19:58:46 Desiree welcomed me back but I listened to all the
19:58:49 testimony.
19:58:50 We have lots of televisions in the back there so I was
19:58:52 listening.
19:58:53 And I heard all the testimony.
19:58:55 I just wanted to make that clear.
19:59:00 As Charley mentioned this is a tough one.
19:59:05 You know, the concern I have is not only what the
19:59:09 Planning Commission staff mentioned but also the fact
19:59:11 that this category of SMU 6 has a potential of
19:59:14 building out six units per acre.
19:59:18 And I haven't sat there and calculated that but it
19:59:21 sound like it has the potential for townhouses or
19:59:25 condos, which I think would be completely inconsistent
19:59:27 with the neighborhood.
19:59:28 I recognize the developer said what he's going to do
19:59:32 and he's just going to do offices but the bottom line
19:59:35 at this stage in the game, if you have got the SMU 6

19:59:39 and the office thing didn't work out, then cot go to
19:59:43 condos or townhouses when that market comes back.
19:59:45 And I don't think that's what this neighborhood is
19:59:47 about.
19:59:48 That's a big reason -- I'll support the motion.
19:59:51 I can't support the project.
19:59:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
19:59:56 >>MARY MULHERN: This is really difficult.
19:59:58 Because both options look pretty good.
20:00:03 I have to say, though, that the photographs that we
20:00:09 got later on really showed me a neighborhood and a
20:00:12 street at North Boulevard that looked like there were
20:00:17 mostly some really nice houses there and well kept.
20:00:20 So I think this is primarily residential neighborhood,
20:00:26 nice brick streets.
20:00:29 If you had to choose where it would go, it's a
20:00:33 residential neighborhood.
20:00:34 So if it looks like it's in the direction of becoming
20:00:38 a safer and better-kept neighborhood, I think we need
20:00:42 to just go with that.
20:00:44 That's how it's zoned.
20:00:45 So even though it seems like a reasonable thing, and

20:00:54 it seems terrible to have houses converted into
20:00:56 offices, that wasn't what it was designed for and it's
20:00:59 not what people moved to that neighborhood for.
20:01:03 So I'm going to vote to deny.
20:01:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I want to make one other quick one.
20:01:11 I live very close to Bay to Bay and Bay to Bay, and I
20:01:14 talked to some of the old timers in my neighborhood,
20:01:16 used to be two lanes and they extended to four lanes.
20:01:19 Bay to Bay used to be all residential, okay?
20:01:22 But now if you look at Bay to Bay around MacDill
20:01:26 Boulevard, what happened is little by little, it's
20:01:30 become more and more like opposites.
20:01:33 But then you have restaurants.
20:01:34 And then you have got a couple bars.
20:01:36 And the character of Bay to Bay has changed quite a
20:01:39 bit from when I was a little boy.
20:01:42 And I'm afraid that even though this particular use
20:01:46 might not be that bad, it is opening the door to more
20:01:51 and more intensive uses that are incompatible with the
20:01:54 neighborhood.
20:01:55 Bay to Bay, a lot of people might like what's
20:01:57 happening up and down Bay to Bay but it don't does

20:02:00 have spin-off effect on the adjacent neighborhoods.
20:02:02 Anyway, for what it's worth.
20:02:04 >>GWEN MILLER: There's a motion and second for denial.
20:02:06 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:02:07 Opposed, Nay.
20:02:09 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
20:02:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open number 10, Madam
20:02:21 Chair.
20:02:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
20:02:24 (Motion carried).
20:02:24 >>> Good evening members of council.
20:02:35 Tony Garcia.
20:02:47 [Sounding gavel]
20:02:47 >> please go out quietly.
20:02:48 We still have a meeting to carry on.
20:02:52 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
20:03:13 What I have to present to you now, what is before you
20:03:15 this evening, I think will be a little bit shorter
20:03:18 than this.
20:03:19 >>GWEN MILLER: I sure hope so.
20:03:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Blame it on you, Tony.
20:03:29 >>TONY GARCIA: What you have before you is the Tampa

20:03:31 comprehensive plan amendment.
20:03:37 Wishart Boulevard, between Rome and Darby, to go from
20:03:43 public/semi-public to residential 10, a small scale
20:03:47 amendment located on approximately 1.38 acres.
20:03:50 The general location as you can see is almost right in
20:03:52 the heart of the City of Tampa.
20:03:58 To give you some context this is located within the
20:04:00 Wellswood neighborhood, located south of Hillsborough
20:04:03 Avenue, east of Armenia, just west of Rome, just north
20:04:07 of Wishart and west of the Hillsborough River.
20:04:11 As you can see by this particular aerial most of the
20:04:14 development here is pretty much single-family detached
20:04:18 residential uses.
20:04:20 The subject property in question is a 1.3-acre site of
20:04:25 a much larger parcel which is belonged to a church,
20:04:30 the church wanting to sell 1.8 acres to a developer,
20:04:36 this particular parcel of land which lies along the
20:04:39 Louisiana Avenue.
20:04:39 Again there is Wishart and here is Rome Avenue.
20:04:42 Here's Tampa Catholic high school.
20:04:45 This is Tampa Catholic.
20:04:47 What you have over here is primarily you can see the

20:04:49 character of Wellswood, single-family detached,
20:04:52 residential -- a large-lot development.
20:05:00 The request is to go to residential 10.
20:05:03 Let me give you another aerial quickly for more
20:05:06 context.
20:05:06 As you can see, there are some public field, public
20:05:10 park, and this is a hospital that people can access
20:05:14 off of Osborne street, goes to the west.
20:05:20 Here's a different perspective looking to the south.
20:05:23 Here is Rome once again.
20:05:26 Here is the parcel of land along Louisiana.
20:05:33 The current category is public-semi public that's used
20:05:39 for schools.
20:05:40 There's a school here.
20:05:41 This is a medical facility.
20:05:44 This is the high school Tampa Catholic.
20:05:46 As you can see the primary use for public-semi-public
20:05:49 is for nonprofit public use.
20:05:55 The request, if approved, would change the color to
20:05:59 residential 10, which as you can see over here, is the
20:06:02 predominant land use category residential category for
20:06:05 Wellswood, residential 10, which again as you can see

20:06:08 by the parcelization is really encourages
20:06:12 single-family detached residential use.
20:06:16 >> The considerations under the residential 10
20:06:19 category does allow single-family uses, this is
20:06:21 adjacent to single-family uses and will interface
20:06:24 single-family attached, single-family detached
20:06:27 residential homes.
20:06:28 There are public facilities readily available, as far
20:06:30 as relationship of the comprehensive plan was
20:06:32 consistent with the future land use element, and
20:06:35 policy D-1.2 which talks about residential
20:06:40 neighborhoods and 3.3 which talks about minimal
20:06:43 disruption.
20:06:44 Planning Commission, staff found the proposed request
20:06:47 consistent with comprehensive plan.
20:06:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
20:06:52 Currently, this is a parking lot that's adjacent to a
20:06:55 church?
20:06:56 >>TONY GARCIA: This is part of the church property.
20:06:59 It is used, the majority of this land is being used
20:07:02 for parking, Ms. Saul-Sena.
20:07:04 >> I have an interesting question.

20:07:09 While personally it looked like this land use might be
20:07:11 okay, what about the church having enough room to
20:07:15 park?
20:07:17 I know that isn't part of your consideration when you
20:07:20 are considering this request.
20:07:21 But that is part of the reality of the neighborhood.
20:07:24 Is that something you review or consider or anything
20:07:27 like that?
20:07:29 >> No, not at this juncture.
20:07:31 From what we have seen of the amount of what you have
20:07:34 on the site, if you will recall, when you do from a
20:07:37 zoning aspect, to quickly give you an example.
20:07:40 If you will recall, many of the churches that you have
20:07:44 approved in the past for special uses, you have
20:07:46 allowed quite a few waivers for parking for churches.
20:07:49 And I might also add into this you do have an adjacent
20:07:53 church located directly to the east of this particular
20:07:55 site.
20:07:55 So I don't know if an agreement can be reached in the
20:07:58 future but again we are getting to an avenue that
20:08:01 really is not pertinent to the land use change.
20:08:04 >> But it does really affect the reality of living in

20:08:07 the neighborhood.
20:08:07 So I just wonder if that was something you considered.
20:08:09 >> When one considers that, we are talking about 1.38
20:08:12 acres and we are talking about a residential 10 land
20:08:15 use category.
20:08:16 At best when you consider stormwater retention, and
20:08:18 setbacks, probably only realistically looking at 8 to
20:08:23 9, when you consider the amount of parking that's
20:08:25 going to be displaced for the church I think it's
20:08:27 rather minimal.
20:08:29 >>CHAIRMAN: Petitioner?
20:08:36 >>> Jeremy catch, representing applicant.
20:08:42 I haven't been sworn in.
20:08:43 >>GWEN MILLER: You don't have to be sworn in.
20:08:46 >>> Okay.
20:08:48 Nothing thus far.
20:08:49 We agree with the staff.
20:08:51 The owner would like to put up a few residential homes
20:08:56 there.
20:08:56 Itself seemed to be consistent with the neighborhood.
20:08:58 And it would help the church out.
20:09:00 They need some extra funds for some projects they are

20:09:02 looking for in the future.
20:09:04 And we request favorable outcome.
20:09:06 Thank you.
20:09:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The only question I have is, why
20:09:13 45-foot lots?
20:09:13 Is that consistent with the pattern of development, or
20:09:16 the pattern that was developed in Wellswood during the
20:09:21 development years?
20:09:22 >>> I believe so, sir, yes.
20:09:23 >> You are telling us that a lot of the wells lots in
20:09:27 Wellswood are 45-foot frontage?
20:09:29 >>> I believe they are 50-foot in some areas.
20:09:32 But we haven't actually submitted a site plan for
20:09:34 final approval yet.
20:09:35 So we'll have to meet all the R-10 requirements at
20:09:40 that time.
20:09:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:09:43 wants to speak on item number 10?
20:09:47 Mr. Dingfelder?
20:09:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tony,
20:09:58 Can that accommodate attached single-family?
20:10:01 Or is this necessarily just detached?

20:10:04 >>TONY GARCIA: It will support detached or attached.
20:10:07 But the entire 1.3 acres would have to come in under
20:10:10 one unified PD for that to be the case.
20:10:13 And it will still have to come in front of this
20:10:15 council for approval for consideration of
20:10:17 single-family attached, which I'm sure there is no
20:10:21 evidence, just to let you know, from what I've seen in
20:10:25 this particular area, of any single-family attached
20:10:28 developments.
20:10:29 So I do not think down the road that that would be a
20:10:33 favorable use for this particular vicinity of
20:10:36 Wellswood.
20:10:38 But again that's something that can be enforced, and
20:10:43 of course the citizens of the area would have the
20:10:44 opportunity to bring that up in the public hearing
20:10:46 process when the project comes up, in whatever form it
20:10:49 may come up, under the rezoning.
20:10:54 You could have lots developed over the standard RS-50
20:10:57 category or RS-60 category. That would determine how
20:10:59 many lots would be ultimately determined.
20:11:01 But that's another option that the developer would
20:11:02 have to sell off individual lots.

20:11:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to close the public hearing.
20:11:09 >> so moved.
20:11:10 >> Second.
20:11:11 (Motion carried).
20:11:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, do you want to read that?
20:11:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I pass.
20:11:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
20:11:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: For purposes of first reading I'll
20:11:29 go ahead and read this, and if the neighborhood wakes
20:11:32 up and wants to come down for second reading, they are
20:11:35 more than welcome to. I move an ordinance amending
20:11:38 the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element,
20:11:40 future land use map for the property located in the
20:11:43 general vicinity of 4740 Wishart Boulevard, between
20:11:47 Rome Avenue and Darby Avenue, from public/semi-public
20:11:51 to residential 10, providing for repeal of all
20:11:53 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
20:11:55 providing an effective date.
20:11:57 One of those residents might be Mary Alvarez.
20:12:00 Maybe we need to hear from Mary.
20:12:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a technical question.
20:12:06 I guess I'll wait.

20:12:10 Our neighborhood organization notified when there's a
20:12:15 public hearing on a land use change?
20:12:18 Maybe a council member can answer that.
20:12:23 >> Wellswood civic association voted and as I
20:12:27 understand they he have no opposition to the.
20:12:29 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say Aye.
20:12:31 Opposed, Nay.
20:12:33 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no and
20:12:35 Mulhern absent at vote.
20:12:37 Second reading and adoption will be held on December
20:12:39 20th at 9:30 a.m.
20:12:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open number 11.
20:12:46 >> Motion and second.
20:12:46 (Motion carried)
20:12:49 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.
20:12:52 Plan amendment 07-06.
20:12:57 Is located in the vicinity of Channelside Drive,
20:13:06 2nd and 4th avenues in Ybor City.
20:13:08 Request is to go from heavy commercial 24 to community
20:13:17 mixed use 35 on approximately 3.7 acres of land.
20:13:26 These particular parcels are located within the Ybor
20:13:31 City area.

20:13:32 The northern portion of the northernmost block is
20:13:36 located within the Barrio Latino commission, historic
20:13:40 district of Ybor City, so any type of project that
20:13:42 would be proposed would require some form of a review.
20:13:46 We looked at the aspect of Ybor City and many of the
20:13:51 proposed amendments in this area.
20:13:53 This has been a general trend to change these to
20:13:55 community mixed use 35 for consideration of either
20:13:58 residential or some form of mixed use development.
20:14:02 This will continue the revitalization efforts of Ybor
20:14:05 City to provide work and live environments.
20:14:09 This particular area is located right along the
20:14:12 streetcar alignment.
20:14:16 It is located in proximity to redevelopment efforts
20:14:19 within Channel District, the Central Park Village, the
20:14:23 CBD, as well as port of Tampa.
20:14:25 The Planning Commission reviewed this petition
20:14:29 amendment on November 5th and found it consistent
20:14:31 with the long-range comprehensive plan.
20:14:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:14:39 >>> Amy Anderson, 3001 North Rocky Point Drive,
20:14:45 Inglehart Hammer, representing the applicant.

20:14:47 I just wanted to come up and have a few brief reasons.
20:14:51 Rose pretty much touched on all of these so I'll keep
20:14:54 it brief.
20:14:55 But this amendment is consistent with recent land use
20:14:57 trends in the area, CMU 35 is very common land use
20:15:01 change that's been occurring in this area.
20:15:04 We feel that this amendment will offer better
20:15:06 transition between Ybor City and the Channel District,
20:15:11 the trolley, bus routes along Channelside Drive and
20:15:16 the Tampa comprehensive plan evaluation identified
20:15:25 Ybor City as having the potential to meet future
20:15:25 growth needs for the city, and CMU 35 will certainly
20:15:27 allow that to occur in this area.
20:15:28 That concludes my comments.
20:15:31 I can be available for questions.
20:15:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know a portion of this is within
20:15:36 the barrio, and will be reviewed for architectural
20:15:39 compatibility.
20:15:40 And that we are not reviewing for that now.
20:15:42 But I just want to know that in terms of intent,
20:15:45 everything you do will be compatible with the Barrio
20:15:48 Latino.

20:15:49 >>> Absolutely.
20:15:54 I believe it is the intent of the applicant to come
20:15:56 forward with a site plan control, YC 9 or PD for the
20:16:03 project ultimately.
20:16:04 So whatever happens will be reviewed by this council,
20:16:06 and certainly by the Barrio Latino commission.
20:16:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:16:11 wants to speak on ordinance number 11?
20:16:15 Mr. Dingfelder.
20:16:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ma'am, is the street vacated
20:16:20 between the two?
20:16:21 >>> Yes: I believe there's a utility easement that
20:16:25 runs along the street but it is a vacated street.
20:16:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: and the property next door, that's
20:16:42 the craftsman property?
20:16:44 >>> Yes.
20:16:45 That's the RMU 100.
20:16:48 Amendment.
20:16:55 >> So does the plan survey include the vacated street?
20:17:03 >>> Yes, the amendment area, the 3.7 acres does
20:17:08 include the vacated.
20:17:09 >> It's not showing that on the map.

20:17:11 >>> The map we provided with the application showed
20:17:17 it.
20:17:17 >> Thank you.
20:17:18 Move to close.
20:17:18 >> Second.
20:17:19 (Motion carried).
20:17:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott, would you read that,
20:17:24 please?
20:17:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
20:17:25 And petitioner may want a full board.
20:17:33 I will move --
20:17:34 >>CHAIRMAN: It's okay, we got it.
20:17:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I move an ordinance amending the Tampa
20:17:39 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
20:17:43 land use map for the property located in the general
20:17:45 vicinity of Channelside Drive between 2nd Avenue
20:17:48 and 4th Avenue, from heavy commercial 24 to
20:17:51 community mixed use, 35, providing for repeal of all
20:17:54 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
20:17:57 providing an effective date.
20:17:59 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
20:18:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just for the record I was in the

20:18:03 back watching on television and listening to all the
20:18:05 testimony when Reverend Scott said he need add full
20:18:07 board.
20:18:09 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:18:11 Opposed, Nay.
20:18:14 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
20:18:15 Second reading and adoption on December 20th,
20:18:18 2007, at 9:30 a.m.
20:18:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 12.
20:18:21 >> So moved.
20:18:22 >> Moved and seconded.
20:18:24 (Motion carried).
20:18:25 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.
20:18:33 Plan amendment 07-09 locate in the Hyde Park area,
20:18:36 located in the vicinity of south Boulevard, south --
20:18:45 and Azeele, a request to go from residential 35 to
20:18:50 community mixed use 35 for one lot, .89-acre.
20:19:02 It currently is occupied by an office development.
20:19:05 And the reason why the request is being made is the
20:19:09 petitioner is looking to increase the size of the
20:19:13 office by a small amount, and they are maxed out at
20:19:19 the current land use classification.

20:19:22 Considerations we have in this area, the committee
20:19:24 mixed use 35 category does allow for consideration of
20:19:27 office and residential mixed.
20:19:29 This is located within the Hyde Park historic
20:19:33 district, the national district.
20:19:36 There are various redevelopment activities that are
20:19:39 occurring, that have an impact in this area including
20:19:41 Kennedy Boulevard redevelopment area, as well as the
20:19:43 University of Tampa, relationship to the comprehensive
20:19:49 plan to recognize urban form of activity centers and
20:19:52 Hyde Park is recognized as an activity center.
20:19:56 Planning Commission approved this on January 5th
20:19:59 and found it consistent with the long range
20:20:01 comprehensive plan.
20:20:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:20:06 >>> David Mechanik, 305 south Boulevard.
20:20:13 This is a petition for expansion of our law offices,
20:20:17 Mechanik Nuccio law firm, and has Rose indicated, this
20:20:21 is just a very minor expansion.
20:20:24 Unfortunately, we had to ask for an increase in the
20:20:28 plan amendment category in order to allow for that.
20:20:32 But we believe the land use is consistent with the

20:20:34 area.
20:20:36 And with that, I will be happy to answer any
20:20:39 questions.
20:20:39 >> Where are you extending?
20:20:43 >>> In the rear over the parking lot.
20:20:45 We have -- the office on the second level and the
20:20:47 parking is underneath so we could just continue to
20:20:49 expand to the rear over the parking lot.
20:20:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the parking lot that
20:20:55 wants to speak on item 12?
20:20:58 >> Move to close.
20:20:58 >> Second.
20:20:59 (Motion carried).
20:21:00 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Caetano, would you read number 12,
20:21:05 please.
20:21:06 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) ...comprehensive
20:21:10 plan, future land use element, land use map, for the
20:21:16 property located in the general vicinity of south
20:21:17 Boulevard between West Platt street and west Azeele
20:21:20 street in the south Hyde Park, north neighborhood,
20:21:23 from residential-35 to community mixed use-35.
20:21:28 Providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,

20:21:30 providing for severability, providing an effective
20:21:32 date.
20:21:33 >> I have a motion and second.
20:21:35 Question on the motion?
20:21:36 >> I just wanted to make sure.
20:21:37 David, you didn't charge your client too much on this
20:21:39 one, did you?
20:21:41 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:21:43 Opposed, Nay.
20:21:44 We need to open 13.
20:21:45 >>> Motion carried unanimously.
20:21:48 Second reading and adoption will be on December 20,
20:21:51 2007, 9:30 a.m.
20:21:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Next?
20:21:56 >> Move to open.
20:22:00 >> Second.
20:22:01 (Motion carried).
20:22:02 >>ROSE FERLITA: This is plan amendment 07-10.
20:22:12 It is located in the vicinity of Adamo drive.
20:22:23 It's a popular area, what can I say?
20:22:25 It's on the south side.
20:22:26 Second Avenue to the north.

20:22:29 15th street and 17th street to the east and
20:22:31 west.
20:22:32 This is the Kimmins property.
20:22:36 The request is to go from light industrial to an urban
20:22:42 mixed use plan classification on approximately 3.7
20:22:47 acres of land.
20:22:50 Again, this area is located within the Ybor City, the
20:22:56 Barrio Latino, the local district, which means that
20:23:00 any type of a project that would come about in here
20:23:03 would have to be reviewed by the Barrio Latino
20:23:05 commission.
20:23:08 Consideration, we looked at the Ybor City again, the
20:23:12 revitalization efforts in this area, to create a work
20:23:15 and live environment.
20:23:16 There are redevelopment efforts because of this
20:23:19 particular location to the Channel District, Ybor
20:23:22 City, Central Park Village, as well as the port of
20:23:26 Tampa and the efforts that are being looked at on the
20:23:30 south side of Adamo drive by the Ybor channel.
20:23:33 This particular area served as a gateway and edge to
20:23:38 Ybor City.
20:23:38 It is located within the Adamo drive redevelopment

20:23:41 corridor, which in the comprehensive plan has a number
20:23:44 of criteria to be looking at in terms of mobility, and
20:23:50 historic character to Ybor City.
20:23:53 The Planning Commission reviewed this amendment on
20:23:56 November 5th and found it consistent with the
20:23:59 long-range comprehensive plan.
20:24:02 >> Petitioner.
20:24:09 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.
20:24:13 I represent Kimmins corporation.
20:24:15 Joined this evening by Mr. Joe Williams,
20:24:17 vice-president of Kimmins and also Emmy Anderson of
20:24:20 the ink will heart group.
20:24:23 We have been in process for about a year and a half on
20:24:24 this one.
20:24:25 And this was a culmination of the redevelopment
20:24:28 corridor efforts that we began.
20:24:30 We had many, many meetings with literally hundreds of
20:24:33 neighbors that we had notified, and had a very good
20:24:36 response.
20:24:37 Joe is here to answer any questions you may have.
20:24:39 Amy is going to give you the presentation on the
20:24:41 Planning Commission report and recommendation of

20:24:44 approval.
20:24:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Let me see if -- does anyone in the
20:24:48 public want to speak on item 13?
20:24:49 >> Move to close.
20:24:50 >> Second.
20:24:51 (Motion carried).
20:24:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait a minute.
20:24:56 We all received a letter from the president of the
20:24:59 historic Ybor neighborhood civic association which
20:25:02 says that -- and it's about this petitioner, this is a
20:25:08 staff question, it says blah-blah-blah, that anything
20:25:14 done there would be subject to historic design
20:25:17 guidelines which limit height and change in land use
20:25:20 must not permit a development that would surpass
20:25:22 reliable height limits.
20:25:23 Question is for staff, and this rezoning isn't
20:25:30 addressing height, or is it?
20:25:33 >>> Yes, this is not a rezoning, this is an amendment
20:25:37 to the long-range comprehensive plan.
20:25:39 I know the urban mixed use -- height restrictions?
20:25:43 No.
20:25:45 Urban mixed -- CMU.

20:25:51 >> CMU 35.
20:25:57 >> Urban mixed use.
20:26:00 >> We are going from industrial to UMU 60.
20:26:05 >> The question, Rose, if there's a conflict, is what
20:26:10 they are asking for going to preclude the barrio from
20:26:14 having their consideration in terms of height and
20:26:17 compatibility?
20:26:18 >> This land area is located within the historic
20:26:22 district.
20:26:22 They are going to have to review it.
20:26:25 Just because this plan classification allows for
20:26:28 consideration, it's an urban mixed use category.
20:26:31 You're right.
20:26:31 It's an urban category but much of Ybor City is very
20:26:34 urban.
20:26:36 But the Barrio Latino commission will have to review
20:26:38 any proposal on this site.
20:26:40 And as part of the redevelopment -- Adamo drive
20:26:45 development corridor, that will affect this land area,
20:26:49 a very strong criteria in that was the aspect of
20:26:51 whatever is proposed in the Adamo drive redevelopment
20:26:54 corridor has to recognize its relationships to Ybor

20:26:57 City area, because of the district.
20:27:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I want to clarify in my own mind.
20:27:03 There was a great debate in 2002, early 2003, about
20:27:09 such properties as this on the northern side of Adamo.
20:27:12 Was that considered historical or voted by the council
20:27:15 historical or not?
20:27:16 >> It has a particular overlay, I think.
20:27:22 >> Is it in the barrio?
20:27:24 >> Is it in the boundaries or not in the boundaries?
20:27:27 As I remember there was a vote taken by the council at
20:27:29 that time.
20:27:29 >>> This particular land area is located within the
20:27:32 local historic district.
20:27:35 Is that the question?
20:27:36 >> The question was, there was a vote taken on that
20:27:40 because I remember voting on it.
20:27:45 You are saying it was voted and passed because it
20:27:48 wasn't historical before.
20:27:49 >> This is located within the historical district.
20:27:53 When they expanded the district this area was
20:27:54 included.
20:27:54 >> It was included.

20:27:55 That's what I'm asking.
20:27:56 Was it included at that time in 2002 or early 2003?
20:28:01 That's the vote that I'm talking about.
20:28:03 I thought my computer was downloading.
20:28:07 >>> That's the vote you are speaking of.
20:28:09 They extended the boundary to the south.
20:28:11 >>>: Thank you.
20:28:11 >> motion and second to close.
20:28:13 (Motion carried)
20:28:17 Ms. Mulhern, number 13.
20:28:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Move to adopt an ordinance for first
20:28:22 reading consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa
20:28:24 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
20:28:26 land use map, for the property located in the general
20:28:29 vicinity of 1501 and 1617 east 2nd Avenue located
20:28:33 between 15th and 17th streets in the northeast
20:28:37 corner of the intersection of 15th street and
20:28:39 Adamo, from light industrial to urban mixed use 60,
20:28:43 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
20:28:45 providing for severability, providing an effective
20:28:47 date.
20:28:48 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.

20:28:49 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously, second
20:29:01 reading and adoption will be on December 20th at
20:29:03 9:30 a.m.
20:29:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
20:29:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just before you open the next one,
20:29:07 I just had a comment.
20:29:09 I couldn't figure out why we had so many plan
20:29:11 amendments tonight.
20:29:12 And then all of a sudden, it dawned on me as I looked
20:29:15 out on my brethren, land use attorneys and planners,
20:29:18 that this is the "I'm afraid of hometown democracy
20:29:22 night."
20:29:23 Anyway, carry on.
20:29:26 >>> I don't know how you approved David Mechanik's
20:29:29 project.
20:29:29 [ Laughter ]
20:29:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion to open item 14.
20:29:33 All in favor say Aye.
20:29:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: He said the same thing about yours.
20:29:39 [ Laughter ]
20:29:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 14.
20:29:50 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission.

20:29:57 This is the comprehensive plan amendment PA-07-12,
20:30:02 Armenia avenues and Gray Street.
20:30:04 Mr. Miranda, please let me know when I do the context
20:30:06 if I have all the facts straight because I know --
20:30:12 This is a privately initiated amendment going from
20:30:14 public semi-public to community mixed use 35.
20:30:17 This is a small scale amendment of 9.99 acres.
20:30:22 The general location as you can see is just south of
20:30:25 Columbus drive, just north of -- to give you a little
20:30:34 bit of visual perspective.
20:30:38 The business corridors of West Tampa of Howard and
20:30:40 Armenia avenues.
20:30:41 Just a few blocks north of Kennedy Boulevard in the
20:30:44 West Tampa, north Hyde Park area.
20:30:49 To give you an aerial perspective, I have a couple of
20:30:52 aerials to give you a little perspective.
20:30:54 Of course we have Howard Avenue.
20:30:57 This is located on the eastern side of the armory
20:30:59 which is right here.
20:31:00 Armenia Avenue.
20:31:02 Which is one way south.
20:31:04 Kennedy Boulevard as well to the south.

20:31:06 Of course, we have this is the parking area.
20:31:12 We have the National Guard.
20:31:14 We have this little piece that's going to be staying
20:31:16 historic and therefore retain the public/semi-public
20:31:21 land use designating.
20:31:24 This is north Hyde Park.
20:31:25 West Tampa is to the north.
20:31:28 This is Cyprus.
20:31:44 There is interstate 275.
20:31:46 Here's one more perspective to the south as you can
20:31:48 see the major east-west arterial at Kennedy Boulevard
20:31:51 and once again Howard Avenue on Armenia Avenue.
20:31:54 I didn't label this but this is Cass Street which used
20:31:59 to be one of the main thoroughfares for people to go
20:32:02 into the downtown Tampa area.
20:32:03 Downtown Tampa core.
20:32:09 As far as the future land use categories, you have
20:32:11 three appraise dominant land use categories, two of
20:32:14 which are residential.
20:32:15 Residential 10, which allows single-family attached
20:32:17 uses, heavy commercial 24, and residential 20.
20:32:22 We also have a land use category of CMU 35 which I'm

20:32:25 sure most of you that have traveled Howard Avenue, the
20:32:32 office district, in between Gray Street, south all the
20:32:35 way to Kennedy Boulevard.
20:32:38 The public semi-public designation.
20:32:47 CMU 35 is right here and over here on Howard and on
20:32:52 this segment of Cass Street represented by office
20:32:56 uses.
20:32:57 Considerations of the CMU 35 land use designation
20:33:00 allows all residential uses, but also allows general
20:33:03 and neighborhood commercial uses.
20:33:05 It also allows office uses of various intensities.
20:33:10 Both facilities are readily available in the area and
20:33:12 this is a significant area as this is an area,
20:33:16 particular venue that has historical significance, was
20:33:19 designated as a local historical landmark and we do
20:33:22 know that this venue has been the site of many
20:33:24 historic figures throughout our era, as we know, John
20:33:32 F. Kennedy, and we have had Martin Luther King in the
20:33:35 past make speeches in this area for rallies, and of
20:33:38 course we have had many significant entertainers such
20:33:41 as James Brown and Elvis Presley perform at this venue
20:33:44 many times.

20:33:44 >> There are any other celebrities, Mr. Miranda?
20:33:47 >> Oh, yes, you missed many of them.
20:33:51 >> That was just to name a few but I don't know if
20:33:54 time permit.
20:33:55 >> I won't go into that.
20:33:59 >> It is consistent with the policies that you see in
20:34:05 front of you related to land use element which talks
20:34:07 about encouraging development and mixed use
20:34:09 categories, the promotion of development of land use
20:34:12 categories, encouragement of mixed use and of course
20:34:19 preserved as part of the proposed rezoning which will
20:34:23 come to this council in the ensuing months ahead.
20:34:27 Based on the facts provided to you this evening, the
20:34:29 recommendation by the Planning Commission was to find
20:34:32 the plan amendment PA-07-12, request for
20:34:35 public/semi-public MU 35 consistent with the plan.
20:34:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:34:45 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street, Tampa
20:34:51 33602, I represent the armory board State of Florida
20:34:54 department of military affairs, the National Guard,
20:34:57 and we are seeking a land use change, obviously from
20:34:59 the existing public semi-public which limits the

20:35:03 development objections to nonprofit institutional type
20:35:06 uses to CMU 35 to facilitate redevelopment of the
20:35:09 armory property.
20:35:12 There's the recommendation of November 5th from
20:35:13 the Planning Commission, and the staff has endorsed
20:35:16 this change as well.
20:35:17 So I'm here to answer any questions.
20:35:19 Otherwise, I respectfully request you approve our
20:35:22 petition.
20:35:22 Thank you very much.
20:35:23 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Mulhern?
20:35:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have one question.
20:35:33 Did your client -- there's already been a contract
20:35:37 signed, is that right? Between the developer and the
20:35:40 armory?
20:35:42 >>MARK BENTLEY: My client is the National Guard.
20:35:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
20:35:45 >>> On or about July 17, 2007, a contract was entered
20:35:52 into between the department of military affairs and
20:35:54 the heritage group LLNC.
20:35:56 >> Okay.
20:35:57 So when that occurred, at least the armory your

20:36:04 client, ba A wear that this would be dependent on City
20:36:10 Council voting for the land use, any land use
20:36:13 designation, and voting not only to approve the
20:36:18 rezoning but also to release the reverter?
20:36:22 >>> Oh, obviously, that was part of the -- from ground
20:36:26 zero, the process, the city published a memorandum
20:36:29 saying the city would assist in facilitating land use
20:36:32 change in rezoning the property.
20:36:33 Otherwise you couldn't redevelop it.
20:36:34 >> Right.
20:36:35 But the city, that was the administration.
20:36:41 We would have to vote for it.
20:36:42 >>> As City Council?
20:36:43 >> Yes.
20:36:44 >>> If your question was are we aware of legislative
20:36:46 action by City Council, the answer is yes.
20:36:48 >> Okay.
20:36:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:36:53 wants to speak on item 14?
20:36:54 >> Move to close.
20:36:56 >> Second.
20:36:57 (Motion carried)

20:36:59 >> CHAIRMAN: Reverend Scott, would you read that,
20:37:02 please, 14?
20:37:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa
20:37:10 Comprehensive Plan, future land use map, future land
20:37:15 use element, Armenia Avenue, West Lemon Street, Howard
20:37:18 Avenue, Gray Street, from public/semi-public to
20:37:22 community mixed use 35 providing for repeal of all
20:37:24 ordinances in conflict providing for severability,
20:37:26 providing an effective date.
20:37:26 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion.
20:37:29 Question on the motion?
20:37:30 >> I want to speak on my second, Madam Chair.
20:37:33 For the record, whoever would have been the first,
20:37:35 second or third, it's still applicable to all three,
20:37:38 would have had to have the same rezoning for them to
20:37:40 have some type of a construction, I believe.
20:37:42 >>> That's correct.
20:37:43 >> I just want to say, my question is because we do
20:37:49 have -- we are being asked to -- and I'm going to
20:37:54 support it -- to change the land use from a public use
20:37:58 to a different category.
20:38:03 And I think that is something we have to consider as a

20:38:09 council that we are doing, our constituents expect to
20:38:12 us do.
20:38:12 So I just wanted to understand, or make it clear, that
20:38:20 I have questions about how we got to a process where
20:38:26 we pretty much have to approve this land use.
20:38:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, this is a comprehensive plan
20:38:32 amendment which you have an opportunity when the
20:38:34 zoning comes back before you, which at this point you
20:38:36 have to vote for the issues on that.
20:38:42 >> all in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:38:44 Opposed, Nay.
20:38:47 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
20:38:49 absent at vote, second reading and adoption will be
20:38:51 held on December 20th at 9:30 a.m.
20:38:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open
20:38:56 item 15.
20:38:56 (Motion carried).
20:38:58 >>> Good evening again.
20:39:07 Kate Ginster on behalf on the first public hearing
20:39:12 scheduled for a brownfield designation of the Tampa
20:39:15 international center which is the IKEA project.
20:39:22 This is the first two of public hearings that are

20:39:25 required to be held and the second public hearing will
20:39:26 be scheduled for December 20th at 10 a.m., when
20:39:31 council will be requested to approve a resolution
20:39:34 approving the brownfield designation.
20:39:37 And there is -- the applicant's plan is on file with
20:39:40 the city clerk for anyone in the public that would
20:39:43 wish to review it.
20:39:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
20:39:50 item 15?
20:39:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have a question for the
20:39:53 applicant, not the city, but the IKEA representative.
20:39:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Are they here?
20:39:58 >> Frank Hearn, 305 S. Boulevard, on behalf of
20:40:06 Panatoni who is the representative of the property
20:40:09 owners and the developers.
20:40:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
20:40:14 After our last hearing, I wrote a letter saying you
20:40:17 all purport to be sustainable and green and good
20:40:20 stewards of the environment, and you are building
20:40:23 350,000 square feet.
20:40:25 And I was hopeful that you do something a little more
20:40:29 sustainable and thoughtful given the growing

20:40:31 recognition that this is a responsible thing to do.
20:40:34 And I never received a response to my letter.
20:40:37 So I would really encourage to you think about it
20:40:39 seriously and respond.
20:40:41 >>> Sure.
20:40:42 Who did you direct the letter to?
20:40:44 >> The person who at that hearing was the
20:40:46 representative, but I have it in my file.
20:40:50 If you could leave your card here I will readdress it
20:40:53 to you.
20:40:54 Because I think it's really important.
20:40:55 You are doing such a very large project.
20:40:57 And IKEA has such a reputation as a progressive
20:41:00 company, and you are building a building that could
20:41:02 have been built in 1950.
20:41:03 So --
20:41:06 >>> well, I'll make sure that message is conveyed.
20:41:09 >> Thank you.
20:41:09 I really would appreciate it.
20:41:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
20:41:13 >> So moved.
20:41:14 >> Second.

20:41:15 (Motion carried).
20:41:15 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item 17 through 19.
20:41:21 >> So moved.
20:41:22 >> Second.
20:41:22 (Motion carried).
20:41:23 >>CHAIRMAN: Public hearing for second reading.
20:41:30 Does anybody in the public want to speak on 17 through
20:41:32 19?
20:41:33 You can stand and raise your right hand.
20:41:35 Seeing none, we would --
20:41:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
20:41:39 >> Second.
20:41:40 (Motion carried).
20:41:41 >> Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak
20:41:46 on item 17?
20:41:48 Mr. Miranda, would you read that, please?
20:41:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move an ordinance presented for
20:41:52 second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the
20:41:54 Jen general vicinity of 2907, 2909 west frierson
20:41:58 Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida more particularly
20:42:00 described in section 1 from zoning district
20:42:02 classifications RM-16 residential multifamily to PD

20:42:06 planned development, residential, single-family, semi
20:42:09 detached, providing an effective date.
20:42:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
20:42:12 Vote and record.
20:42:44 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
20:42:46 Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
20:42:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:42:50 wants ton speak on item 18?
20:42:52 Need to close.
20:42:53 >> Move to close.
20:42:54 >> Second.
20:42:54 (Motion carried).
20:42:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would like to move an ordinance on
20:43:00 second reading, zoning property in the general
20:43:02 vicinity of 2901, 2903, 2905, 2907 and 2909 west Hayes
20:43:08 street in the -- Haya street from zoning district
20:43:12 classification PD planned development single-family
20:43:14 attached, to PD, planned development, office, medical,
20:43:18 providing an effective date.
20:43:22 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
20:43:24 Vote and record.
20:43:27 Vote and record.

20:43:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
20:43:47 Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
20:43:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public want to speak
20:43:51 on item 19?
20:43:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
20:43:54 >> Second.
20:43:55 (Motion carried).
20:43:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Move to adopt an ordinance being
20:44:01 proposed for second read beings, and ordinance
20:44:03 rezoning property in the general vicinity of 2910 and
20:44:06 2912 north Decatur Avenue in the city of Tampa,
20:44:09 Florida and more particularly described in section 1
20:44:14 from zoning district classification RS-60 residential
20:44:16 single-family to PD, planned development, residential
20:44:19 single-family detached, providing an effective date.
20:44:24 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
20:44:26 Vote and record.
20:44:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
20:44:39 absent at vote.
20:44:41 >>CHAIRMAN: Can you clean up the agenda?
20:44:53 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
20:44:56 What I have given to you for distribution is a mock-up

20:44:59 agenda for the rest of this evening, agenda items.
20:45:08 You will see item number 20.
20:45:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Does everybody have one?
20:45:14 >> Item number 20 you will see on your agenda, Z 0-71,
20:45:26 was a continued case, was communicated to staff that
20:45:29 the petitioner would be requesting a continuance.
20:45:31 However, this evening, I was told by petitioner that
20:45:34 he would like to move forward with the case tonight as
20:45:37 a Euclidean rezoning request.
20:45:40 So we will be handling that item first.
20:45:46 >> Item 20?
20:45:47 >> Yes.
20:45:47 The other item that needs to be continued is item
20:45:50 number 26, if you would, please, Z 07-87 is requesting
20:45:56 a continuance to February 14th.
20:45:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody that came to hear tempt number
20:46:01 26?
20:46:02 We need a motion R a mocks.
20:46:03 >> So moved to continue to February --
20:46:05 >> just a moment, we have two people.
20:46:09 Someone came?
20:46:10 No.

20:46:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to continue, Madam Chair, to
20:46:13 February 14, the year 2008.
20:46:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that the first continuance?
20:46:20 It was originally scheduled to be heard --
20:46:27 >> Valentine's day.
20:46:35 >>ABBYE FEELEY: This would be the second.
20:46:38 And item number 27 --
20:46:41 >>CHAIRMAN: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:46:42 (Motion carried).
20:46:44 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item number 27 is a S requesting a
20:46:47 continuance.
20:46:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are still not clear on the last
20:46:51 vote.
20:46:51 It's still on the screen.
20:46:53 I made a motion to continue to February 14,
20:46:56 Valentine's day, the year 2008.
20:46:58 6 p.m.
20:46:59 That's what it always is.
20:47:03 >> I'll second it.
20:47:05 >> already carried it.
20:47:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item 27, petitioner is requesting a
20:47:10 continuance to December 13th.

20:47:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open.
20:47:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open number 27 for the
20:47:19 purpose of continuation possibly.
20:47:22 >>CHAIRMAN: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
20:47:24 Anyone in the public came to speak on item 27?
20:47:28 We need a motion to continue.
20:47:30 >> I move to continue with all due respect to everyone
20:47:32 to October -- I mean December 13th.
20:47:36 December 13th.
20:47:38 Of the good year 2007.
20:47:41 At 6:00.
20:47:42 (Motion carried).
20:47:45 We continued a lot of them to the same time.
20:47:48 I hope they don't all show up together.
20:47:51 [ Laughter ]
20:47:52 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I believe that's it $
20:47:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We go to 20 now?
20:48:02 >>CHAIRMAN: Yes.
20:48:02 Do 20 first.
20:48:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you like to swear in the
20:48:05 witnesses?
20:48:06 >> Anyone in the public that's going to speak on 20

20:48:10 through 27, 28, please raise your right hand.
20:48:16 (Oath administered by Clerk).
20:48:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that all written
20:48:26 communication which has been available for public
20:48:27 inspection in council's office be received and filed
20:48:29 prior to action by motion.
20:48:31 Vote now, please.
20:48:35 >> Second.
20:48:37 (Motion carried).
20:48:39 >> Item 20, Z 07-71 was previously before you on
20:48:49 September 27, a Euclidean rezoning request located at
20:48:53 4312, 4316, 4318, north Hubert Avenue, 4313 north
20:49:02 Coolidge and 4308 and 4300 north machining Boulevard.
20:49:09 They are requesting rezoning to CI commercial
20:49:13 expensive from RM-16.
20:49:14 Staff did find this application consistent with the
20:49:19 plan.
20:49:20 And the case originally came before you.
20:49:22 There were some concerns raised relative to the adult
20:49:25 use potential on this property.
20:49:27 And it was council's direction that the petitioner --
20:49:38 it's the petitioner's desire to move forward with the

20:49:40 CI zoning and not consider the PD so it's back before
20:49:44 you again.
20:49:48 I could go ahead and familiarize you once again with
20:49:52 the site.
20:50:02 The site is located along Martin Luther King to the
20:50:04 west of Hubert Avenue.
20:50:07 You will see that most everything along MLK in this
20:50:10 area is CI commercial intensive and everything is
20:50:13 located to the north is IC with the exception of the
20:50:20 two PDs.
20:50:22 I believe that current use on the site is automotive
20:50:25 related which will not be permitted in a residential
20:50:28 zoning district.
20:50:28 Therefore, by a log the zoning they would become a
20:50:35 legal conforming use on the site.
20:50:40 Here is the aerial.
20:50:45 There are some mobile homes in this area.
20:50:48 Here's a picture of a site.
20:51:05 I would like to know, the site is heavily heavily
20:51:10 treed, and just a couple of comments for the
20:51:13 petitioner, will need to comply with the landscape
20:51:19 code.

20:51:20 They will have to meet all code provisions at the time
20:51:22 of permitting.
20:51:28 This is northeast of the site.
20:51:30 Corner of Hubert and MLK.
20:51:35 Let me go back and show you one more picture.
20:51:38 It may be a little hard to see.
20:51:41 You can see it's heavily wooded.
20:51:47 This is just to the west of the site.
20:51:54 I referred to east of the site.
20:52:02 As I said, staff did review this commercial intensive
20:52:08 district and found that it is consistent.
20:52:12 And a couple comments from landscape and parks and
20:52:14 recreation concerning the trees, just to make the
20:52:16 petitioner aware that those items will be needed to be
20:52:19 addressed at permitting.
20:52:21 The minimum lot area meets the criteria and staff is
20:52:25 available for any questions.
20:52:36 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning commission staff. I have been
20:52:37 sworn.
20:52:38 Planning Commission also in reviewing this at the
20:52:40 hearing also agreed with staff's recommendation of a
20:52:43 finding of consistency.

20:52:44 We did find it consistent with the comprehensive plan.
20:52:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:52:53 >>> Jeremy Cotler representing applicant. I'd like to
20:52:59 thank you again tonight for hearing our petition.
20:53:00 At the last hearing I wasn't able to make a decision
20:53:02 for the applicant as to whether or not they would like
20:53:04 to go forward with engineering and site permitting and
20:53:07 things like that, which would be in nature with the
20:53:09 PD.
20:53:10 Tonight, the owners have come, Mr. Travis Allred is
20:53:14 here and Mr. Jerry Briscoe from the Briscoe brothers
20:53:18 is here.
20:53:18 Our request is that the site is currently zoned
20:53:21 residential, but is in use as a heavy commercial for
20:53:25 the repair shop.
20:53:27 We looked at the different zonings in this area, using
20:53:30 the CG, we would be nonconforming.
20:53:34 And using the IG, the same compatibility requirements
20:53:39 came up because you could be a crematorium or other
20:53:41 issues of that.
20:53:43 Since the last hearing we talked with the staff, and
20:53:45 we tried to see if we could put conditions on

20:53:48 Euclidean zoning.
20:53:50 There was concern that the CI has a use of adult use,
20:53:55 and our client -- the owner has no intention to make
20:53:59 an adult use.
20:54:01 He would just like to bring the site up to current
20:54:03 standards.
20:54:07 Is F there was a way that we could put a condition on
20:54:09 adult use of the crematorium we would like to enter
20:54:13 that into the record right now as testimony, that
20:54:15 there's no intention to do that, but I don't believe
20:54:17 that there's a provision for us to do that.
20:54:24 They have been in the neighborhood for 25 years and
20:54:27 operated their business for 25 years there.
20:54:31 It's the only lot left on MLK in the immediate area
20:54:36 within a quarter to half mile on both sides that is
20:54:39 not zoned CI.
20:54:41 And we would respectfully request you approval in
20:54:46 accordance with the staff conditions.
20:54:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My Mike wasn't on.
20:54:55 I just had a couple questions.
20:54:56 Do you understand that with this particular zoning
20:54:58 category, because it is in a planned development, you

20:55:03 can't ask for any waivers from either taking trees
20:55:06 down or setbacks in the residential uses to the south?
20:55:11 You have to play by all the existing rules.
20:55:13 >>> Absolutely.
20:55:14 There are no development plans right now.
20:55:17 We don't request to remove any trees, don't request to
20:55:20 put any buildings up.
20:55:21 When you look at the map it's the only residential
20:55:24 parcel left.
20:55:25 And it's colored by commercial on all sides.
20:55:28 And we would just like to bring it up.
20:55:33 Thank you very much.
20:55:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
20:55:35 wants ton speak on item number 20?
20:55:36 >>> Good evening.
20:55:44 Janett La Russa Fenton appearing before you tonight in
20:55:47 my capacity takes Drew Park CRA manager.
20:55:51 I had appeared at the last public hearing at this
20:55:53 issue just to relate to you what occurred at the Drew
20:55:56 Park advisory committee meeting when they considered
20:55:59 this land use request.
20:56:01 And you will recall that the advisory committee did

20:56:03 vote to support, and I do want to emphasize that.
20:56:07 They did vote to support it.
20:56:08 However, there were some concerns that were raised.
20:56:12 And you are aware of them.
20:56:13 They have to do with the adult use and the potential
20:56:15 for a bar, a bottle club, a crematorium, several
20:56:19 things that might not be appropriate, given the
20:56:23 redevelopment plans that we have for Drew Park.
20:56:25 So I'm just here tonight to reiterate that, bring them
20:56:29 to your attention.
20:56:30 We certainly have every confidence in Mr. Allred and
20:56:37 feel his intentions are very good and honorable.
20:56:40 It's just that when this is rezoned to CI, and that
20:56:43 property is sold, then we are stuck with what we have.
20:56:48 So I would be happy to answer any questions that you
20:56:51 may have.
20:56:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
20:57:00 >> Jerry Bristol, Bristol brothers body shop.
20:57:05 I currently own the property across the street from
20:57:08 the property, we would like rezoned.
20:57:12 We have been purchasing this property for the last 30
20:57:15 years.

20:57:15 We have been business owners in Tampa since 1973.
20:57:20 We have occupied the current spot of Bristol brothers
20:57:24 body shop.
20:57:26 One thing that I would like to make perfectly clear,
20:57:29 my brother and I have been respectable citizens of
20:57:32 this community since 1968.
20:57:36 We have no intentions of opening an adult
20:57:39 establishment, or allowing an adult establishment on
20:57:43 our properties.
20:57:47 We have a three generation customer base at our
20:57:51 business.
20:57:51 And I have a lot of clientele who are ladies, a lot of
20:57:56 clientele who are teenagers.
20:57:59 We definitely do not want to expose the community to
20:58:02 anything like this.
20:58:02 We wouldn't be -- would be here in front of you
20:58:06 opposing any type of adult establishment on our
20:58:09 property.
20:58:12 I am definitely against it.
20:58:13 But we would like to be in compliance with everybody
20:58:18 else that's in Drew Park along Martin Luther King
20:58:22 Avenue and Lois Avenue, and for future expansions of

20:58:26 our body shop, for the last 30 years we have been very
20:58:31 successful there, and expect to maintain our business
20:58:33 for another 30 years.
20:58:35 Thank you very much.
20:58:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
20:58:38 I have known not personally but the Briscoe family
20:58:42 name has been here for many years, in fact that family
20:58:45 and maybe some in the audience will remember Don
20:58:47 cherry and gorgeous George, and McKay auditorium, and
20:58:51 the armory.
20:58:55 See what I'm saying?
20:58:56 So we go back.
20:58:57 We used to wrestle one side but I was on this side of
20:59:01 the TV screen.
20:59:02 And I always won.
20:59:05 >>CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to
20:59:07 speak?
20:59:07 Need to close.
20:59:08 >> Move to close.
20:59:09 >> Second.
20:59:09 (Motion carried).
20:59:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Give to the Mr. Caetano.

20:59:23 Do you have an ordinance?
20:59:26 >>> There's no change to the organization ordinance.
20:59:45 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) 4312, 4316, 431
20:59:53 north Hubert Avenue, 4313 north Coolidge, and 4308 and
20:59:58 4300 north Martin Luther King Boulevard in the City of
21:00:01 Tampa and more particularly described in section 1
21:00:04 from zoning district classifications SRM 16
21:00:09 residential multifamily to CI commercial intensive,
21:00:13 providing an effective date.
21:00:15 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
21:00:17 Question, Mr. Scott.
21:00:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you for being here tonight.
21:00:21 Thank you for your comments.
21:00:24 Did the whole tour out there as well.
21:00:26 And I will be supporting this tonight.
21:00:31 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
21:00:36 absent at vote.
21:00:38 Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:00:40 20th at 9:30 a.m.
21:00:41 >> We need a motion an S and second to open all items
21:00:46 from 21 to 28.
21:00:51 >> So moved.

21:00:52 >> Second.
21:00:52 (Motion carried)
21:01:09 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
21:01:11 I have been sworn.
21:01:12 Case Z-07-91 is located at 3716 north 39th street.
21:01:19 It is a Euclidean rezoning request from RS-50 to CG
21:01:23 commercial general.
21:01:24 There are no waivers requested.
21:01:26 Or permitted with this request.
21:01:29 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property
21:01:31 from RS-50 to CG which would allow for higher level
21:01:34 intensity of use on the site.
21:01:37 The 17,724 square foot site is located in the RS-50
21:01:41 zoning district and surrounded by a mix of zoning
21:01:45 districts with commercial intense intensive and
21:01:48 industrial general to the east, west and south of the
21:01:50 property and residential single-family to the north
21:01:54 across Lindell Avenue ands to the west.
21:01:56 Property uses in the immediate vicinity includes a
21:01:59 church, vacant land, single-family homes, and
21:02:04 warehouse storage.
21:02:06 The Euclidean request must comply with all regulations

21:02:09 set forth under the commercial zoning district, and
21:02:11 the East Tampa overlay district.
21:02:14 There can be no waivers requested through this site
21:02:16 plan -- I mean, for this site through this process.
21:02:25 Site requirement for CG, 10,000 square foot lot size
21:02:28 with 75-foot, the setbacks are 10 feet front and 10
21:02:33 feet side yard.
21:02:34 10 feet rear and 10 feet corner.
21:02:36 The building can have a maximum height of 45 feet and
21:02:39 a maximum floor area ratio of 1.0.
21:02:43 This may be increased to 1.5 if 50% of the required
21:02:46 parking is located in the structure.
21:02:58 I will familiarize you with the site.
21:03:01 On the zoning atlas, you can see that site is located
21:03:06 there in green on 39th at the corner, the
21:03:09 southwest corner of 39th and Lindell.
21:03:11 There is commercial intensive immediately to the east
21:03:14 of the site, industrial general to the south of the
21:03:19 site, along 40th Street, and a small pocket of
21:03:22 residential single-family to the north of this site.
21:03:26 A large commercial intensive locate to the west that's
21:03:30 currently a church use.

21:03:38 You can see from the aerial -- and again this is the
21:03:42 IG portion of the property here, to the south of the
21:03:45 area, that small CI parcel here is a warehouse,
21:03:50 storage for a church, and then the old CG industrial
21:03:54 general.
21:03:54 That is a lot of auto body repair, and far more
21:03:58 intensive uses, open storage, you can see from there.
21:04:02 Then this is also another church over here to the
21:04:05 southwest.
21:04:13 This is a picture of the site.
21:04:19 Is that a grand tree?
21:04:24 This is the western portion of the site also with
21:04:30 several trees.
21:04:41 This is another view of the site looking west.
21:04:50 This is the rear.
21:04:51 Located immediately to the south of the site in the
21:04:54 industrial general portion.
21:04:58 This is the other commercial intensive site, the
21:05:02 church storage area.
21:05:04 This is looking down Lindell towards 40th.
21:05:13 And this is just predominantly that vacant area to the
21:05:18 south.

21:05:20 You can see on page 2 of the staff report, there are
21:05:22 comments by Land Development Coordination, landscape,
21:05:28 Mary Bryson, there are a number of significant
21:05:30 specimen trees on the site.
21:05:33 That will need to be complied with chapter 13 at the
21:05:36 time of permitting.
21:05:39 No waivers can be requested.
21:05:41 And also a comment in the water department that the
21:05:46 main water extension will be necessary to provide
21:05:48 water service to this site.
21:05:50 Staff did review this.
21:05:51 It is compliant with the CG, commercial general,
21:05:54 Euclidean zoning standards.
21:06:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Planning Commission?
21:06:04 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission.
21:06:06 I have been sworn.
21:06:06 The area is located on 39th street in East Tampa.
21:06:12 As you can see there's two predominant land use
21:06:15 categories, transition, this red color which is light
21:06:22 industrial.
21:06:23 The surrounding uses in the area that exist east, and
21:06:27 just to the west of 40th Street.

21:06:29 And of course as you can see there are quite an amount
21:06:32 of vacant land, whether it's a small pocket of
21:06:35 residential, just to the north, to look at the land
21:06:40 use designation of which this category falls
21:06:43 underneath which is transition use 24 you will see the
21:06:45 intent of the transitional use 24 category is to
21:06:48 provide a logical transition of uses, because
21:06:51 basically it reflects, does have a juxtaposition of a
21:06:56 variety of uses whether it be heavy residential, as
21:07:01 shown here, that display the character.
21:07:10 Also to understand, which Ms. Feeley has stated, this
21:07:13 is a lower transition as far as Euclidean CG, as you
21:07:18 do have CI in the surrounding areas so you do have
21:07:22 less expensive use, and granted there are some trees
21:07:24 on the site, the requirements will be much more
21:07:29 stringent.
21:07:32 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
21:07:34 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
21:07:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
21:07:38 Petitioner?
21:07:38 >>> Jackie Suttle, own the property at 3716 north
21:07:51 39th street and I'm before you to ask for approval

21:07:54 of the rezoning, the way the property is currently
21:07:57 zoned, RS-50 to general commercial.
21:08:01 The primary use of this property, we are trying to
21:08:03 open up a little cafe, a bakery, in the community
21:08:06 there.
21:08:08 And ask your consideration for approval.
21:08:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone in opposition?
21:08:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Questions of the petitioner?
21:08:20 Anybody here to speak for or against this petition?
21:08:27 >>> My name, council members, is James Sutherland,
21:08:36 minister to the Church of Christ, and we are here in
21:08:39 support of the petition.
21:08:40 Thank you very much.
21:08:41 >>> My name is Linda Calhoun, I'm the property owner
21:08:49 located at 3604 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
21:08:53 which is approximately two miles away from this site.
21:08:56 I am in favor of this.
21:08:58 It would be a welcome addition to the community to
21:09:00 have some good food.
21:09:05 [ Laughter ]
21:09:07 >> Move to close.
21:09:13 >> Second.

21:09:14 (Motion carried).
21:09:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Entertain a motion?
21:09:17 >> So moved.
21:09:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I move an ordinance rezoning property
21:09:23 in the general vicinity of 3716 north 39th street
21:09:26 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
21:09:29 described in section 1 from zoning district
21:09:31 classification RS-50 residential single family to CG
21:09:37 commercial general and more than happy for the people
21:09:38 who move forward with this business venture.
21:09:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Any discussion on the motion?
21:09:45 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
21:09:46 Any opposed?
21:09:47 Motion passes unanimously.
21:09:49 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller being absent
21:09:52 at vote.
21:09:53 Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:09:54 20th at 9:30 a.m.
21:09:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open.
21:10:05 Miranda.
21:10:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are all open?
21:10:08 All right.

21:10:08 Number 22.
21:10:10 >> Item number 22, Z 07-95 is located at 8523 and 8525
21:10:22 Otis street. It is a Euclidean rezoning request from
21:10:27 RS 60 to RS-50, residential single-family.
21:10:29 There are no waivers requested or permitted with this
21:10:31 application.
21:10:32 The petitioner is proposing to rezone the property to
21:10:35 build two buildable lots measuring 50 by 115, 5,750
21:10:41 square feet each.
21:10:42 Subdivision was originally platted in 1985 with
21:10:46 25-foot wide lots.
21:10:47 The site is currently vacant.
21:10:52 RS-50 is as follows: 20-foot front, 20-foot rear,
21:10:56 7-foot side yard.
21:10:59 Requested Euclidean zone district.
21:11:01 Therefore no site plan is required.
21:11:02 Proposed construction must adhere to all applicable
21:11:04 City of Tampa code requirements.
21:11:16 You can see on the zoning at lat giving given the size
21:11:19 of the lot, the original plat was 25 feet.
21:11:24 They are small.
21:11:25 You can see that to the east of the property, there is

21:11:28 one other PD, and also a couple blocks over to the
21:11:32 west there is another PD, in that area, that most
21:11:35 likely -- they have lots that were 50 or smaller in
21:11:40 order to --
21:11:42 >> Why on did that neighborhood end up with all those
21:11:47 25 and 50-foot lots?
21:11:48 >> When you look at -- I wasn't here.
21:11:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you know?
21:12:00 >>> You will see that some of them, the map that I
21:12:05 provided to you is the re properties on that will
21:12:09 conform so they have a width of 60 or greater, the red
21:12:13 properties.
21:12:13 The blue properties on that map have a width of 50
21:12:16 feet or greater.
21:12:18 But anywhere from 50 to 59 feet, because they are not
21:12:22 red so they are not up to 60 feet.
21:12:25 You will see given the development pattern in the area
21:12:27 that these lots would be consistent with the existing
21:12:32 development patterns.
21:12:37 Staff has reviewed the petition against the code of
21:12:39 ordinances and found it consistent.
21:12:41 You will see that I did provide a written analysis of

21:12:44 the map on page 2 of the report.
21:12:48 And on the block phase kind of look at all those
21:12:52 blocks that are on the red-blue map and then the
21:12:57 subject -- along the block face, 75% of the lots have
21:13:01 been developed at 50 feet.
21:13:06 Let me show you some pictures of the site.
21:13:11 The site has been cleared.
21:13:12 There were no large trees.
21:13:20 This is the house immediately adjacent to the south of
21:13:22 the lot for sale.
21:13:29 This was the house immediately to the north.
21:13:34 This is the house across Otis.
21:13:36 It looks like a more recent in-fill.
21:13:41 This is a have you looking north on Ois with the
21:13:45 subject parcel on the east side.
21:13:48 There are a couple other smaller homes on that street.
21:13:57 Staff found the request consistent and is available
21:14:05 for questions.
21:14:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Planning Commission?
21:14:08 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission.
21:14:10 I have been sworn.
21:14:16 This one is pretty much as stated.

21:14:20 Residential zoning is single-family detached.
21:14:30 (away from microphone)
21:14:34 Red and blue map.
21:14:35 Planning Commission staff found the request consistent
21:14:39 with the comprehensive plan.
21:14:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Petitioner?
21:14:42 As you are coming up let me see how big a crowd there
21:14:45 is for this.
21:14:46 Is there anyone else here to speak for or against this
21:14:48 petition tonight?
21:14:49 Raise your hand.
21:14:52 Petitioner, name and address.
21:14:54 >> Frank Otero it.
21:14:57 I have been sworn.
21:14:58 >> All in favor of the motion say Aye.
21:15:02 Any opposed?
21:15:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance rezoning property
21:15:13 in the general vicinity of 8523 and 525 Otis street
21:15:17 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
21:15:19 described in section 1 from zoning districts
21:15:21 classifications RS-60 residential single-family to
21:15:25 RS-50 residential single-family, providing an

21:15:27 effective date.
21:15:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously, second
21:15:36 reading and adoption will be on December 20th at
21:15:38 9:30 a.m
21:16:31 >>> Item number 23 on your agenda is case Z 07-97.
21:16:36 It has previously petitions including Z 05-102 and 49
21:16:42 located at 5303 West Kennedy Boulevard, and it is
21:16:47 requesting a rezoning from PD, hotel and multifamily
21:16:52 residential to PD, planned development, hotel.
21:16:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is the annual review?
21:16:58 >>> Many of you are familiar with this.
21:17:03 This is the clarion hotel located near Westshore mall
21:17:06 across Kennedy Boulevard when you are getting onto the
21:17:10 interstate getting ready to head south over to
21:17:12 St. Petersburg.
21:17:15 It was previously before you.
21:17:16 They were going to do some condo there.
21:17:18 And now they are looking to simply renovate and
21:17:23 redevelop it as another hotel.
21:17:27 I believe petitioner may speak to who the tenant may
21:17:30 be.
21:17:34 Let me go through this.

21:17:35 First I would like to make a couple of corrections.
21:17:38 There are five waivers associated with this.
21:17:40 The first is to allow 37 parking spaces to be used by
21:17:46 valet for the hotel.
21:17:47 Second is to reduce the required number of spaces from
21:17:50 one to zero.
21:17:51 The third is to utilize the northern eight feet of
21:17:54 Kennedy Boulevard right away for parking and
21:17:56 maneuvering, as per the existing conditions with FDOT
21:18:00 approval.
21:18:01 The fourth is to utilize O'Brien street right-of-way
21:18:04 from maneuvering as per the existing condition with
21:18:08 transportation approval.
21:18:09 Fifth is to reduce the required number of parking
21:18:11 spaces.
21:18:12 There is an error in the way that waiver is written in
21:18:15 your staff report.
21:18:16 It should be from 272 to 1999 and I'll explain that to
21:18:20 you so that's 73 spaces to waive.
21:18:24 Right now, you can see on the site plan that parking
21:18:30 space as long Kennedy and parking spaces on O'Brien,
21:18:33 the parking spaces are located in the right-of-way so

21:18:35 they cannot be counted, although they are existing and
21:18:38 functioning that way today.
21:18:39 They cannot be counted as required spaces.
21:18:44 That's why the waiver needs to come down to the 199.
21:18:47 Now, they may be able to use those spaces with FDOT
21:18:50 approval for the Kennedy and with transportation's
21:18:53 approval for the O'Brien, but we need to shift to the
21:18:59 PD if they don't get to use those spaces we need the
21:19:02 waiver to reflect it as such.
21:19:06 The last document I handed out to you is two pages of
21:19:10 related necessary revisions for approval of the plan.
21:19:14 I have reviewed these with the zoning administrator,
21:19:16 Catherine Coyle.
21:19:17 She has determined that they are minor in nature, and
21:19:19 they all could be made in between first and second
21:19:22 reading.
21:19:22 However, in order to alleviate, you are reading off
21:19:26 all of them, I have given a copy to petitioner, asked
21:19:28 petitioner to commit to make these changes, and also
21:19:32 provided one into the record, so that that could be
21:19:38 just referred to.
21:19:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Incorporated by reference.

21:19:44 >>> Incorporated by reference.
21:19:46 Thank you.
21:19:55 I have pictures of the site.
21:20:01 They are having a large liquidation sale right now.
21:20:07 Here is a picture of the clarion.
21:20:18 Ten story towering front, and three story in the back.
21:20:25 Talk a little about what they are proposing to do and
21:20:28 their renovation.
21:20:29 Here is a view of the rear of the property.
21:20:32 Two office buildings, located one to the north, one to
21:20:38 the south.
21:20:41 This is a look down O'Brien.
21:20:46 You can see some of that parking that I was referring
21:20:48 to that's occurring in the right-of-way.
21:20:51 This is a multifamily residential locate add cross
21:21:01 Kennedy.
21:21:05 Go back to the aerial a moment.
21:21:09 On your aerial you can probably see better, that here
21:21:12 is the parking I'm referring to here, and also in the
21:21:15 front here.
21:21:18 The new design for the property.
21:21:20 You will see also on the zoning atlas there are

21:21:24 several PDs located immediately adjacent and across
21:21:27 the street from the property, Westshore mall is
21:21:33 located over in this area.
21:21:40 The proposed renovation is going to include a building
21:21:46 extension to the north part of the building and the
21:21:48 southeast corner for a total of 168,884 square feet or
21:21:54 increase of 33,000 square feet.
21:21:57 Renovated design will incorporate increased green
21:22:00 space from the existing layout and design due to the
21:22:03 reconfiguration of the existing parking along the
21:22:05 southern and western boundaries.
21:22:07 Maximum height will be 120 feet.
21:22:12 Landscaping plan has been provided.
21:22:16 It is in existing condition, that's why there are
21:22:19 several waivers related to this property.
21:22:24 With the addition of those changes, staff would find
21:22:27 this consistent.
21:22:34 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
21:22:36 I have been sworn in.
21:22:39 Hopefully the third time is a charm for this project,
21:22:41 as you can see, on the future land use map, because in
21:22:51 2005 and 2006 and now in 2007, the annual review of

21:22:58 this project.
21:22:59 Just to give you some context, it's in the Westshore
21:23:03 mixed use.
21:23:06 The highest one other than central business district
21:23:09 category, this is mixed use 100 in, close proximity to
21:23:13 major corridors, memorial highway, 275, and of course
21:23:19 Kennedy Boulevard.
21:23:23 There's a little more perspective.
21:23:24 You have done a fine job of giving the context of the
21:23:26 area.
21:23:27 Considering this was originally a 250 room hotel and
21:23:31 going back to its original form of 250 room hotel,
21:23:36 basically no additional impact to the area, some
21:23:40 ancillary uses added to the additional meeting rooms
21:23:44 and possibly a couple of restaurants.
21:23:46 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
21:23:48 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
21:23:49 >> Petitioner?
21:23:51 >>> Good evening, council members.
21:23:57 Jim Shimberg with Holland and Knight, 100 North Tampa
21:24:01 Street, here tonight representing MHI hospitality
21:24:07 corporation, owners of this property at 5303 west

21:24:11 Kennedy.
21:24:12 Unlike the other petitions you have heard on this
21:24:14 property previously, our client is a hotel developer.
21:24:17 They actually closed on this property exactly one
21:24:19 month ago.
21:24:21 The financing is in place and they are ready to begin
21:24:23 construction as soon as we get through this process.
21:24:26 And the goal is to have the property opened by the
21:24:29 Super Bowl in early '09.
21:24:31 MHI is a publicly traded hospitality group and two of
21:24:36 their representatives are here tonight and I'll have
21:24:37 one of them speak to you in just a minute.
21:24:40 They own a number of other hotel properties in the
21:24:43 southeastern United States and they operate under
21:24:46 brand such as Hilton, crown, Hilton, starwood hotel.
21:24:50 This particular project will be a Crown Plaza, of
21:24:54 which they currently operate one, or renovating one in
21:24:58 Hollywood that and Jacksonville.
21:25:00 They really specialize in finding under performing
21:25:05 properties and renovating them and turning them around
21:25:07 and making them an asset to the community.
21:25:09 The first thing that they did when they came to town

21:25:12 was we went and met with Emmy Reynold and Margaret
21:25:16 Vizzi, and Ms. Vizzi will speak in a minute, but we
21:25:23 wanted to meet with them in the neighborhood to see
21:25:25 what kind of comments they had, and what we heard them
21:25:27 say was they wanted a hotel there.
21:25:32 So that's hopefully a positive thing, and that you
21:25:35 will hear from Ms. Advise Nay minute.
21:25:37 But the plan is, and the only reason we are here today
21:25:41 again is two applications ago, the city rezoned the
21:25:45 property to hotel and residential and the number of
21:25:48 units were limited to like 150 in the current hotel,
21:25:51 about 250.
21:25:52 So in order to basically put it back to what it always
21:25:55 has been we have to go through this process.
21:25:57 We are totally in agreement with the proposed changes
21:26:00 that the city has recommended, and those changes will
21:26:03 be made to the plan prior to the second reading.
21:26:07 >>CHAIRMAN: Can I cut you off for a minute?
21:26:08 Let's see if anybody is here in opposition.
21:26:10 Anybody in the public wants to speak on item number
21:26:13 23?
21:26:17 Ms. Vizzi, come an and speak.

21:26:26 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.
21:26:29 Yes, council, this is our third time down here.
21:26:32 The first one, we were concerned about, the second one
21:26:37 we were a little less, because it was going back to a
21:26:42 hotel and condo.
21:26:44 So now that it will not be residential, we do support
21:26:49 it.
21:26:49 And let me give you a little bit of a basis for that.
21:26:53 We have a resolution in the Beach Park homeowners
21:26:56 association which basically the board reviews all
21:27:00 matters such as this, and then does what is best for
21:27:03 the neighborhood.
21:27:04 And that's how we were here before you in the past,
21:27:09 with our concerns and our opposition to those
21:27:11 projects, because we figured that growth would cut
21:27:18 through the neighborhood.
21:27:19 However, when you have a total which this is going
21:27:21 back to, do you not have that.
21:27:23 You don't have people who are living in a hotel
21:27:26 cutting through neighborhood.
21:27:27 So that is why now, though we did have some concerns,
21:27:32 one of the concerns that we did express to the

21:27:34 petitioner was the parking along Kennedy.
21:27:39 We are not opposed to that parking.
21:27:41 But we ask them to please make it as attractable
21:27:46 looking as they possibly could, because we all will be
21:27:49 looking at it.
21:27:50 But as far as the concept of going back to a total
21:27:54 hotel, we felt, in the beginning, that such a hotel
21:27:57 was needed -- that was another one of our oppositions,
21:28:02 a hotel in that area was needed.
21:28:04 I strongly encourage council to support this new PD,
21:28:10 going back to a hotel.
21:28:13 Thank you.
21:28:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:28:17 The young lady, do you want to speak?
21:28:23 >>>:
21:28:27 >> Peggy CURLIN, 212 south O'Brien which would be
21:28:32 directly south whereof this property is.
21:28:34 Although you can't get there from here because of the
21:28:37 street being barricaded.
21:28:40 I'm not sure, you know, how I feel about this
21:28:43 particular property, because I haven't been in on the
21:28:47 discussions of the homeowners association, although I

21:28:50 am a member of it.
21:28:53 I think my major concern, you know, you realize there
21:28:57 are not many people here that talk about this issue.
21:29:04 I have been out of town, and I knew this was coming
21:29:07 up, and I have been watching the property, looking for
21:29:10 a sign about rezoning, and I hadn't seen, you know,
21:29:15 the big signs about the sales, but no sign.
21:29:18 And I know other people in the neighborhood have
21:29:20 mentioned that they hadn't seen a sign.
21:29:22 So today before I came here, I went by the property,
21:29:27 unfortunately I didn't have my camera with me.
21:29:29 There is a sign.
21:29:30 However, it's like about ten degrees from the ground,
21:29:35 it's not vertical, it's laying over, and nobody could
21:29:37 see it.
21:29:38 And I'm just concerned that the people were not really
21:29:43 aware of what's going on because the sign was not
21:29:46 visible at all.
21:29:49 Thank you.
21:29:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:29:52 Mr. Shimberg, do you want to say something else?
21:30:00 Do you have a picture of the sign?

21:30:04 >>> Three signs have been posted.
21:30:19 Another thing I was going to say was, in the Diggs
21:30:27 addition of the square footage, I think it's closer to
21:30:30 about 15,000 square feet, I don't think that matters.
21:30:35 We are here to answer any questions, our clients are
21:30:38 happy to address you, very excited about this.
21:30:40 We have some renderings to show you what it will look
21:30:43 like.
21:30:44 Know you are pressed for time.
21:30:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: (off microphone) I am interested to
21:30:52 see how you will be screening the parking, and what
21:30:56 kind of landscaping you will be install.
21:30:58 And I thought it was really curious that the Westshore
21:31:01 overlay district -- the Westshore overlay doesn't
21:31:07 allow to you put in the grass.
21:31:13 They keep holding the pictures up while you are
21:31:15 talking.
21:31:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There used to be a lounge, not that
21:31:36 ever go to lounges, called brothers too.
21:31:39 >>> I did want to add one of my other notes to let you
21:31:42 know this has been reviewed by urban design in
21:31:44 relation to the Westshore overlay and was found

21:31:47 consistent, and if you have any questions related to
21:31:51 that.
21:31:51 >>> The point I was going to raise, okay, these are
21:31:55 artistic pictures.
21:31:57 But the issue is, my clients are telling me that might
21:32:06 have been well to bulldoze this and start over, but
21:32:11 they are going to do a complete renovation.
21:32:13 When they start the renovation you will be able to
21:32:15 look through the entire hotel and see the interstate.
21:32:17 They are constrained by the fact that they are taking
21:32:19 it back, been there for 30-some years operating it, so
21:32:23 our opportunity to do certain things are constrained.
21:32:26 That's why we have been working hard to meet as many
21:32:28 of the code requirements as we can, but there are a
21:32:30 number of waivers which we are requesting and we are
21:32:35 in agreement with the changes.
21:32:38 And our architect is here if you have specific
21:32:42 questions about the treatments or some of her ideas,
21:32:45 she's happy to address you.
21:32:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The specific question I have, if
21:32:48 you are on Kennedy and you are driving past this, how
21:32:52 will this surface parking be screened?

21:32:57 >>> Cynthia Walton, 2800 Boulevard, Houston, Texas.
21:33:08 We are providing buffers.
21:33:10 And we are going to be doing -- the cars will be
21:33:14 screened so when the cars park the screens will be
21:33:16 high enough but not overbearing to see the
21:33:19 architecture.
21:33:21 As you look in the renderings that we are proposing,
21:33:23 that we are proposing a very contemporary, progressive
21:33:27 design, taking what is existing to give it more of --
21:33:37 this is something we actually are going to build.
21:33:41 At the same time we are also improving the court yard
21:33:43 area to be more open, and taking the designs all the
21:33:50 way around, and we are able to do simple things to
21:33:55 enhance to make the hotel very elegant, at the same
21:33:59 time very contemporary.
21:34:01 As you come from the airport you have something nicer
21:34:03 to look at.
21:34:10 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) I was wondering,
21:34:13 what's the additional -- where are the additional
21:34:19 rooms going to be?
21:34:20 Is it going up?
21:34:22 >>> There's not really additional rooms.

21:34:28 The additional space we are adding is a ballroom.
21:34:30 A new kitchen area for the cafe inside the hotel.
21:34:33 And we are adding expansion of an existing restaurant
21:34:37 that is going to be more of an upscale steak house for
21:34:42 MHI.
21:34:44 The tower, is 11 stories.
21:34:50 11th story is a ballroom.
21:34:52 And then the existing motel portion, 3-story, are to
21:34:56 be converted to shot begun suite.
21:34:59 So it will be one long hotel room of about 45 minutes.
21:35:03 So the goal is to be able to support Super Bowl and
21:35:06 that's why we have been working diligently to try to
21:35:09 get through this and get ready.
21:35:13 >>> The initial phase will have less rooms than they
21:35:16 have now.
21:35:17 The approval is to go up to ultimately what they have
21:35:19 now.
21:35:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are familiar with this concept
21:35:25 of green lodging?
21:35:27 >>> Uh-huh.
21:35:27 >> Any chance this is going to be joining that
21:35:29 concept?

21:35:30 >>> We are doing some aspects of it because our office
21:35:38 is real big on green, everything we do, all the
21:35:42 budgetary projects, and this will have a lot of
21:35:45 potential, and --
21:35:48 >> The reuse.
21:35:49 >>> Establishing a lot of -- it has a good chance.
21:35:56 And we are using native -- the shell stone for the
21:36:02 columns.
21:36:02 We are trying to stay with the vernacular of the area
21:36:07 for Tampa.
21:36:09 >> We encourage that.
21:36:10 Thank you.
21:36:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to close the public hearing.
21:36:12 >>> I would like to put into the record a copy of the
21:36:15 resumes of our experts.
21:36:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
21:36:17 All in favor to close the public hearing.
21:36:19 (Motion carried)
21:36:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move the following ordinance,
21:36:33 incorporate by reference the two-page document title
21:36:36 necessary revisions for approval, dated November
21:36:39 29th, 2007, associated with Z 07-9.

21:36:44 And Mr. Shimberg indicated his agreement with these
21:36:47 revisions.
21:36:48 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
21:36:50 vicinity of 5303 West Kennedy Boulevard in the city of
21:36:53 Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section
21:36:54 1 from zoning district class PD planned development
21:36:57 hotel multifamily residence to PD, planned
21:36:59 development, hotel, providing an effective date.
21:37:01 >> I have a motion an second.
21:37:02 (Motion carried)
21:37:05 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
21:37:07 Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:37:09 20th at 9:30 a.m
21:37:10 >> Ms. Feeley, number 24 and 25 are related.
21:37:31 It would be the request to have them both heard
21:37:33 together?
21:37:34 >>GWEN MILLER: We already opened them.
21:37:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Make it clear that council is
21:37:39 contemplating both 24 and 25.
21:37:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead, Mr. Cook.
21:37:42 >>JAMES COOK: Land Development Coordination.
21:37:44 I have been sworn.

21:37:46 Petitioner is requesting to vacate an L-shaped
21:37:48 alleyway lying north of Columbus drive south of
21:37:51 17th Avenue, east of 50th street, west of
21:37:54 51st street.
21:37:56 To the Elmo.
21:37:59 Interstate to the north.
21:38:00 Columbus to the south.
21:38:03 17th Avenue to the north.
21:38:06 Highlighted in red.
21:38:08 L-shaped.
21:38:09 A shot of the alleyway looking south from 17th
21:38:18 Avenue.
21:38:18 Alleyway looking west from 51st Avenue.
21:38:24 A shot of the alley looking east towards 51st.
21:38:28 I have a couple shots of petitioner's property.
21:38:32 Looking north from Columbus drive.
21:38:36 Also looking north from Columbus drive.
21:38:40 Looking south of 17th.
21:38:46 This is looking south to 17th.
21:38:49 You can see from the grid map in this area, there are
21:38:54 a couple of alleys.
21:38:57 The western portion to vacate 1967 creating almost an

21:39:06 L-shaped alley.
21:39:07 This one was vacated in 1987.
21:39:12 Although the east-west is still open.
21:39:19 Staff has no objection to this vacating request.
21:39:28 >> The associated rezoning with this vacating Z 07-98
21:39:38 is a request from CI to PD development.
21:39:43 There are five waivers being requested, one section
21:39:45 27-130 to reduce the required 15-foot landscape buffer
21:39:49 with a 6-foot masonry wall adjacent to the residential
21:39:52 zoning on the east side of the property to a 15-foot
21:39:55 landscape buffer with a 6-foot PVC fence.
21:39:59 Second waivers to reduce the required drive aisles on
21:40:03 26th to 24 feet.
21:40:05 Third is section 20.5-13 to increase the maximum sign
21:40:10 height from 30 feet to 80 feet.
21:40:12 You will see what I provided to you was the signage
21:40:17 analysis that they performed.
21:40:20 Waiver 4 is for section 20.1 to allow for additional
21:40:24 wall signs, both sides of the building, that do not
21:40:27 have street frontage.
21:40:28 I also provided you with sign annal plan.
21:40:36 And the last to increase the height of the building

21:40:38 from 45 feet to 50 feet 8 inches.
21:40:42 Petitioner is proposing to rezone the property to
21:40:44 construct 121-room hotel.
21:40:47 The four-story building will have ingres and egress
21:40:51 off of Columbus drive, and a total of 1233 parking
21:40:55 spaces are required and 125 are being provided.
21:41:06 Let me find the pictures.
21:41:07 The site is located on what I believe is now old
21:41:21 Columbus, and 51st street.
21:41:33 Residential multifamily along Columbus, RM-16.
21:41:38 CI zoning.
21:41:41 And a gas station at the corner of old Columbus and
21:41:45 also sandwich shop.
21:41:50 I'll show you a picture of that.
21:41:55 Here's a picture of the site looking north toward the
21:41:59 interstate.
21:42:02 Another picture.
21:42:05 Several clusters of trees out on the site.
21:42:11 Here's a view toward I-4 from 17th.
21:42:14 This is the portion that is requested to be vacated as
21:42:17 part of this petition in relation to this petition.
21:42:22 On 17th there are two single-family homes.

21:42:32 Picture of one.
21:42:35 A picture of another one.
21:42:42 That view looking north on 51st toward the
21:42:47 interstate.
21:42:50 And this is at that intersection.
21:42:54 It's a very large site.
21:42:57 I wanted to give you.
21:43:03 The site is not located in any overlay district.
21:43:13 Therefore there are no additional standard.
21:43:15 Staff has reviewed against the code of ordinances and
21:43:19 found it consistent.
21:43:19 You see on my staff report located on page 2 and 3 is
21:43:22 an evaluation of the PD criteria.
21:43:25 There are two notes that need to be added to the site
21:43:28 plan.
21:43:29 One related to the turn-around that must be approved
21:43:33 by transportation division.
21:43:34 And one related to stormwater technical standard that
21:43:38 needs to be added.
21:43:45 Staff is available for any questions.
21:43:52 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
21:43:53 I have been sworn.

21:43:57 The subject property which is about 2.4 acres is
21:44:00 located just to the south of the interstate, right off
21:44:02 of 50th street, Columbus.
21:44:06 The reconfiguration of the on-off ramp is significant
21:44:12 corridor for many of the vehicles that will be coming
21:44:14 into the City of Tampa, into Hillsborough County, and
21:44:18 to points to the north, connected to Temple Terrace to
21:44:22 the north. This is also going to be used as exits for
21:44:26 Busch Boulevard.
21:44:27 It will provide a connector.
21:44:40 The portion in question is comprised of three land use
21:44:44 categories, residential 10, which is CMU 35, and AC
21:44:51 24, located along Columbus drive.
21:44:56 As one goes farther back, down to residential 10.
21:45:00 Also have a land use category of residential 20, to
21:45:02 the south of Columbus drive, to the east of 13th
21:45:07 street.
21:45:10 What's interesting is on the site plan, the applicant
21:45:12 is actually put the uses for the actual site correctly
21:45:18 on those parcels that have the correct lane use
21:45:23 designation for the commercial 24-inch, so they are
21:45:26 complying with whatever the F.A.R. cap limits are and

21:45:29 they do not exceed, they are within the proposed
21:45:34 F.A.R.
21:45:37 I do believe that the northern beach is going to be
21:45:42 used for parking.
21:45:45 There's the aerial to give you a also more perspective
21:45:49 on the area.
21:45:54 Ms. Feeley has done a good job of telling what you the
21:45:56 uses are.
21:45:58 It's also -- there are additional hotels on the area
21:46:02 on the west side.
21:46:05 The south side of the interstate.
21:46:07 But on the west side of 50th street.
21:46:09 So there are hotels in the area.
21:46:11 As I said before, this is an area that is in close
21:46:16 proximity to a lot of significant regional attracters.
21:46:19 Busch Gardens, hard rock, not far from the area, and
21:46:23 of course the municipalities of Temple Terrace located
21:46:25 to the north and Adamo drive located to the south.
21:46:28 Most of this block, I think the majority of all of
21:46:31 this block right here, is all vacant land.
21:46:33 And as far as what the existing uses are.
21:46:37 This was formerly a restaurant that was operated

21:46:41 several years back.
21:46:42 I don't remember which restaurant that was.
21:46:47 Planning Commission staff had no objections, found the
21:46:53 proposed request consistent with the comprehensive
21:46:54 plan.
21:46:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
21:46:55 >>> Mike Peterson, representing Terry A. foster, we
21:47:10 are certainly supportive of the rezoning.
21:47:12 I wanted to make clear that just in case off problem
21:47:14 with the rezoning we still want to you consider the
21:47:17 vacating separately, staff point out, when you saw
21:47:26 there as pictures, these are unimproved platted
21:47:33 rights-of-way.
21:47:34 All we are doing is extending some vacating, that
21:47:36 started in 1967.
21:47:38 You will notice in the staff report there's no
21:47:40 objection, and we received no comments or
21:47:44 communications of opposition.
21:47:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's see if we have any opposition.
21:47:49 Anyone here to speak on item 24?
21:47:51 Come up and speak.
21:47:54 25, okay.

21:47:56 We are on 24.
21:47:57 >> Yes, 24 and 25.
21:48:00 >>GWEN MILLER: 24 first.
21:48:02 Do you want to go 24, too?
21:48:04 Okay.
21:48:04 Now we go to 25.
21:48:09 24?
21:48:09 Come up and speak on 24 then.
21:48:11 >>> While we agreed to hear them together, because
21:48:13 there may be points, if we could get a separate vote
21:48:16 on 24.
21:48:17 >>GWEN MILLER: He wants to speak on 24.
21:48:21 >>> Gilbert Ortiz, I live at 5022 east 17th
21:48:26 Avenue.
21:48:28 I have a picture of the house.
21:48:31 The lady has a picture of the house.
21:48:33 This is a family -- it's a brand new house.
21:48:35 We just moved there.
21:48:37 Because it's a nice neighborhood.
21:48:39 And we want -- this beautiful, quiet, residential
21:48:47 area.
21:48:49 And a month ago they decide to build.

21:48:57 And we are against.
21:49:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Now petitioner for number 25.
21:49:11 >> Abbey, can you show us on a map where those two
21:49:14 houses are?
21:49:15 >>> Yes.
21:49:17 Actually on the aerial, double checked it, this was
21:49:21 the 2006 aerial, it's a new built not showing on the
21:49:26 aerial but this is his parcel immediately adjacent to
21:49:29 the triangle right there.
21:49:31 So there should be one house here and one house here.
21:49:34 >> And the little triangle according to the site plan
21:49:37 is going to be used for a park.
21:49:38 >> This is the retention pond, yes.
21:49:41 Because that is the R-10 land use portion of the site.
21:49:44 Cot not vice-president a structure in it.
21:49:45 Because it would -- the uses are R-10.
21:49:52 >> I got distracted.
21:49:53 I wasn't sure if he was in favor or against.
21:49:57 He was against?
21:49:58 >> He was against it.
21:50:09 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
21:50:09 Petitioner for number 5 for the zoning.

21:50:14 >>> Bob Smith.
21:50:17 2200 Lucent way, Maitland, Florida.
21:50:25 I represent an employee -- and employed by liberty
21:50:29 investments, a franchise owner of a franchise hotel
21:50:33 franchise for this location.
21:50:34 What I would like to do this evening is explain just a
21:50:36 little bit about our hotel, and people that are here,
21:50:40 to explain the consultants from signage, from traffic,
21:50:45 and the other use experts that wave here.
21:50:52 As Abbye said, we have 121, proposing a 121 room
21:50:57 hotel, 4 stories, have an image here of the billing we
21:51:11 built in oral.
21:51:15 It's a new concept, from Wichita, Kansas.
21:51:20 They are going to build about 650.
21:51:22 We have franchise purchase of about 106 of these
21:51:26 hotels to build around the country, from liberty
21:51:30 investments.
21:51:35 This petition is for rezoning to a PD, as Abbye has
21:51:40 said, we are placing the building on a location of the
21:51:43 property that is presently zoned for that.
21:51:49 The 4-story building is a prototypical building, a
21:51:55 wood frame building, gable roof, we are operational

21:51:59 standard is a weekly stay, extended-stay hotel.
21:52:06 Our guests, when they check in, are asked to provide
21:52:12 identification, credit cart check, weekly.
21:52:17 They are asked to re register so that on a weekly
21:52:21 basis they are not extending the residential stay.
21:52:25 It's a weekly only.
21:52:29 >> Could you say that again?
21:52:31 >>> It's the concept of value plans is an extended
21:52:34 stay hotel on a weekly basis.
21:52:37 This is not a daily or single-night hotel similar to a
21:52:42 Marriott or Sheraton but a weekly stay.
21:52:46 But we have been asked, or when our guests check in,
21:52:50 on a weekly basis, they reregister.
21:52:53 So that it doesn't -- so that our guests don't stay
21:52:58 for an extended period of time, weeks and weeks at a
21:53:00 time.
21:53:00 They reregister, and check back in to the hotel.
21:53:06 What that does then is, from an extended-stay
21:53:09 standpoint, it limits the guests from becoming
21:53:13 residents of a hotel and a daily would check in on a
21:53:23 weekly basis, they could stay indefinitely.
21:53:25 We actually have them check out and recheck in on a

21:53:31 weekly basis.
21:53:31 >> But they could do that multiple times.
21:53:33 >> Correct.
21:53:34 On a weekly -- on a daily.
21:53:36 >> So what does that accomplish?
21:53:37 >> What it accomplishes is, from an owner standpoint,
21:53:42 we don't want guest to stay as an indefinite tenant.
21:53:52 >> Evictions and that right of thing.
21:53:55 They don't have any right of tenancy.
21:53:56 >>> Correct.
21:53:57 What we have this evening is a number of people here
21:53:59 to address the waivers that we have asked from signage
21:54:03 to zoning to traffic.
21:54:05 The first person I would like to introduce is Carl
21:54:09 Clemonson, site service, who will discuss the signage
21:54:14 we are asking for, for the building, signage and pylon
21:54:18 sign.
21:54:26 >> It appears we have at least one person in
21:54:28 opposition.
21:54:29 Have you had a chance to talk to your future proposed
21:54:31 neighbors?
21:54:32 >>> We have not had a neighborhood meeting.

21:54:33 We have had a couple of telephone calls in the last
21:54:37 few days, that our zoning professionals have talked to
21:54:41 on the telephone.
21:54:43 They have queried what is going in, what's the name of
21:54:46 the hotel, what kind of use it is, the usual type of
21:54:50 what's going there.
21:54:52 We have talked with them.
21:54:53 But we have not had a neighborhood meeting.
21:55:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Specifically you requested a waiver
21:55:06 of the buffer and the masonry wall to a PVC fence,
21:55:13 this is adjacent to the neighbors to the east.
21:55:15 Why did you want to do those PVC fence rather than the
21:55:19 masonry wall?
21:55:20 >> I personally feel that a masonry wall is more of an
21:55:23 industrial-type look, that a fence would be more of a
21:55:26 residential look, keeping in form with the area
21:55:32 surrounding the property, would have a little softer,
21:55:38 more residential feel than a masonry wall.
21:55:40 >> You are going to have a 4-foot -- not a 4-foot, a
21:55:44 4-story hotel.
21:55:45 I would say that's a pretty commercial use.
21:55:47 The reason that we require masonry walls is because

21:55:52 although it requires a greater investment on your
21:55:55 part, it better protects the neighbors in terms of
21:55:58 privacy and in terms of long-term maintenance.
21:56:01 That's why we prefer the masonry wall.
21:56:06 >> Yes.
21:56:07 We can put a masonry wall in there for this
21:56:10 application because of the residential area, we
21:56:11 thought that a fence would have a softer more
21:56:15 residential feel.
21:56:16 If it's the will and pleasure of the council that we
21:56:18 put in a masonry wall, we can certainly do that.
21:56:21 >> I think what we would probably do is ask the
21:56:23 neighbors how they feel.
21:56:24 The other specific question I had is you are asking
21:56:26 for additional waivers to put up additional signs,
21:56:30 higher signs, and a very right, what I would consider,
21:56:41 you know, well, to attract attention.
21:56:46 Why do you feel that you need those additional signs
21:56:49 and additional Heights?
21:56:50 >>> I can briefly address that.
21:56:51 Mr. Clemmens can probably elaborate more intently on
21:56:54 that.

21:56:55 The neighbors, the establishments across the street,
21:57:00 as well as the Howard Johnson, have signs about 80
21:57:05 feet tall in that area.
21:57:07 Actually, significantly larger, as you will see in his
21:57:11 exhibit, we have imposed, or superimposed through
21:57:18 computers our signs at 80 feet high at the exact
21:57:23 square footage that we were requesting which are
21:57:26 significantly smaller than the Sunoco and Howard
21:57:31 Johnson hotel right down the street.
21:57:33 We were asking for a similar type signage as
21:57:38 businesses right next door.
21:57:49 >> I am site enhancement services.
21:57:52 We are the sign agents for the hotel.
21:57:55 At this particular property we conduct add detailed
21:57:57 survey of the site, to determine the signage that we
21:58:00 would need to be successful in the corridor.
21:58:03 Kind of going back to your point the biggest issue we
21:58:05 had is visibility off of I-4, being that the motel is
21:58:09 going to be attracting motorists from outside of the
21:58:12 community, and I-4 is going to be the main artery for
21:58:15 that.
21:58:15 We have some pictures of the site here.

21:58:19 And this is taken from our site facing towards I-4 and
21:58:23 kind of gives you an idea of the significant hardship
21:58:26 that is imposed on this property, due to the overpass
21:58:29 of I-4.
21:58:31 We conducted a flag test at the site which is where we
21:58:34 think a crane would lift a 4 by 8 feet piece of
21:58:38 plywood so we can see how tall we need to place the
21:58:40 sign.
21:58:42 We can also see the scale.
21:58:45 In doing so, we scaled the height of the overpass very
21:58:48 close to our site, is approximately anywhere between
21:58:51 38 and 40 feet in height, which would completely block
21:58:55 any of our signage, given that 35 feet is what is
21:58:59 allowed per code.
21:59:00 So the overpass renders it basically useless.
21:59:03 This is another picture of the overpass.
21:59:05 It kind of gives you an idea of how the Howard Johnson
21:59:08 sign is set up.
21:59:09 Howard Johnson sign is a little closer to the exit.
21:59:13 So a little additional bit of visibility.
21:59:18 We are set back a little further.
21:59:19 Hence why we are asking for the height that we are.

21:59:22 These pictures really kind of bring home the point.
21:59:25 As you can see, in the top, the flagging we conducted
21:59:30 the top of that sign is at 50 feet, which given that
21:59:33 we are asking for 80 feet at the top of our sign, our
21:59:37 sign will be completely blocked.
21:59:38 This is superimposed.
21:59:41 Again, we are able to scale using the flagging, and we
21:59:45 can superimpose what the sign would look like in the
21:59:47 corridor.
21:59:48 As you can see, sizewise we are actually 50 feet under
21:59:54 the code at the site.
21:59:55 The wording the size fits perfectly and with the rest
22:00:05 of the corridor.
22:00:06 Billboards, Howard Johnson, and the abandoned sign is
22:00:10 also at 80 feet at height fits right into the
22:00:13 corridor.
22:00:13 So we are not asking for anything that isn't
22:00:15 preexisting in the corridor already.
22:00:19 Here is another photo of the site.
22:00:21 And here is the sign at 60 feet, barely visible above
22:00:24 the overpass.
22:00:26 Here is the superimposed.

22:00:28 You can see the other signage in the area fits
22:00:30 perfectly in line with all of that so all we are
22:00:33 asking for in regards to the height waiver is to be
22:00:37 visibility that is afforded to other businesses in the
22:00:39 corridor.
22:00:44 And to give perspective here is another picture
22:00:46 heading west on I-4.
22:00:48 Again you can see the gas station signs, the Howard
22:00:50 Johnson signs, the billboard, and abandoned sign right
22:00:55 in this area.
22:00:57 Also some street blockage on that site.
22:01:07 In regards to the wall signage we were asking for the
22:01:11 complexity of the corridor.
22:01:12 They were 17, old Columbus, so there's multiple --
22:01:19 because our free standing signs are going to be
22:01:21 oriented to the highway the building signs will allow
22:01:24 our motorists way finding tools, once they make the
22:01:28 actual and are trying to identify the building.
22:01:31 That's why we are asking.
22:01:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you all rent by the night or by
22:01:35 the week?
22:01:36 >>> I will turn that back over to Mr. Smith to answer

22:01:38 any of those questions.
22:01:39 But any questions in regard to signage, I would be
22:01:41 more than happy to answer.
22:01:43 >> Well, if you rent by the week, I mean, then that's
22:01:48 a different client, and, I mean, are they going to
22:01:52 necessarily be speeding by on the interstate, say, oh,
22:01:55 I think I'll spend next week there.
22:01:59 >>> Well, impulse purchases might not thereby but in
22:02:02 regards to the signage people should be familiar with
22:02:05 the corridor so they need the way finding tool.
22:02:07 >> But we are talking about impulse versus speeding
22:02:10 down the highway.
22:02:11 Do you rent by the night?
22:02:12 >>> We do not rent by the night.
22:02:15 We rent only by the week.
22:02:16 And to answer your question, on the visibility of the
22:02:20 sign, or the identification of the sign, the franchise
22:02:26 identifies that nearly 100% of our guests come from
22:02:30 the sign.
22:02:31 It's very important for us to have the sign.
22:02:34 They do see the sign.
22:02:35 They come in.

22:02:36 And rent our room.
22:02:43 >> It's nothing personal at all but I have a real
22:02:45 thing with signs and I just feel like, you know,
22:02:49 you're asking for many big waivers.
22:02:51 >>> We are asking for a sign that would be -- because
22:02:54 of the hardship of the embankment of the freeway, we
22:02:57 have to have it high enough to be able to be seen from
22:03:00 both east and westbound lanes.
22:03:04 If you look at it from right at the guardrail, the
22:03:07 closest, yes, you can see that, much shorter.
22:03:10 But if you get on the other side, on the westbound
22:03:13 lane, motorists need enough time to react when they
22:03:19 see the sign to go off on the ramp in order to see
22:03:22 that sign.
22:03:23 Similar to the SUNOCO and the Howard Johnsons.
22:03:27 >> I'm just saying that your clients -- somebody needs
22:03:29 gas like that, somebody doesn't necessarily need a
22:03:32 place to stay for a week as they are going down the
22:03:35 interstate.
22:03:35 I would think that your clients would have an idea
22:03:37 that that's what you all have.
22:03:40 >>> But as I said, the value-placed franchisor has

22:03:47 done many studies and nearly 100% of our tent ants are
22:03:51 or guests do come from the sign.
22:03:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: There's a --
22:03:59 >>CHAIRMAN: Wait your turn.
22:04:00 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: There's a motel similar to this
22:04:03 in Brandon, I believe, where you can only rent by the
22:04:05 week.
22:04:06 And as far as Ms. Saul-Sena says, an impulse, a guy
22:04:10 doesn't drive by and say, oh, I think I am going to
22:04:13 stay here tonight because he sees the sign.
22:04:15 But most of the people traveling are looking for your
22:04:17 sign, also.
22:04:18 >>> Correct.
22:04:19 >> Because eights tool to get them off the highway.
22:04:21 >>> Correct.
22:04:22 >> And there's one in Brandon.
22:04:24 You cannot rent by the day.
22:04:26 It's strictly a weekly thing.
22:04:29 A lot of business people who come here are going to
22:04:31 stay for a week instead of staying -- it's a lot
22:04:36 cheaper, more economical.
22:04:39 >>> We do have other people here on the team, zoning

22:04:42 and engineering and law, that can answer any of your
22:04:44 questions, if you desire.
22:04:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Let us hear from the public.
22:04:49 Then come back to you.
22:04:50 Is there anyone in the public that wants to be speak
22:04:52 on item 25?
22:04:53 Come up and speak now.
22:04:55 >>> John Dorsch. I live at -- reside at 5120 east
22:05:03 20th Avenue.
22:05:05 I have interest in this property.
22:05:06 My mom used to live right next door to this gentleman
22:05:13 initially.
22:05:14 Right now as that gentleman looks out his back door he
22:05:17 sees the south wall of the interstate.
22:05:22 They are proposing of putting in a 50-foot wall, would
22:05:31 be his south door.
22:05:32 Right now a 50-foot wall would be the hotel they are
22:05:34 putting in.
22:05:36 So he's got a wall in the back.
22:05:38 He's got a wall in the front.
22:05:40 The other thing I was concerned about was the access.
22:05:44 And I'm not sure I'm for or against it.

22:05:48 And the reason being, I think it's good for the
22:05:51 economy.
22:05:54 I don't want to impose a great deal of any more of
22:05:57 your time.
22:05:58 But thank you again for your grassroots, your
22:06:01 opportunity for grassroots government.
22:06:04 Also, three retention ponds in that area right now.
22:06:10 They are wanting an additional retention pond right
22:06:13 next to the two adjacent properties there, and N back
22:06:18 of the hotel.
22:06:20 Right now we get to look out the front door and see an
22:06:23 open field there, which is really nice.
22:06:26 As opposed to a plastic sign, a 50-foot high motel.
22:06:33 The other thing I was concerned about was, I believe
22:06:36 you said there was an entrance and access, the egress
22:06:44 to the -- off of Columbus drive.
22:06:47 Is there going to be -- that whole area is residential
22:06:51 back there.
22:06:51 Is there going to be any exits to that residential
22:06:54 area in the back?
22:06:55 >> 28th street.
22:07:03 >> Which is going to be 17th Avenue.

22:07:05 Other thing I want to point out, too, there's two
22:07:07 hotels just on the other side of the interstate.
22:07:10 I don't know if you are familiar with it.
22:07:11 They really have unsavory reputation.
22:07:15 And those people, also, stay there for a week at a
22:07:19 time.
22:07:23 Just some points.
22:07:24 Like I said, I'm not sure if I'm for it, not sure I'm
22:07:27 against it.
22:07:28 Just some points I wanted to bring up.
22:07:30 Thank you very much for your time.
22:07:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
22:07:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait.
22:07:35 Before he goes.
22:07:36 I have two questions for you.
22:07:37 The first question is, would you rather have a PVC
22:07:44 fence or a masonry fence?
22:07:45 >>> Masonry fence.
22:07:48 Hotel, masonry fence.
22:07:49 >> If it went in.
22:07:50 And the other question, it appears from this drawing
22:07:54 that there is going to be access off of north 51st

22:08:01 street.
22:08:02 >>> North 51st?
22:08:05 That's access to residential area.
22:08:07 Right across from the sandwich shop, that's all
22:08:10 residential.
22:08:11 And that's a concern to me, because that 51st runs
22:08:16 east and west.
22:08:19 And that's all residential.
22:08:20 There's a lot of families there and a lot of kids.
22:08:22 >> And my other question, do you have a problem -- is
22:08:26 there a problem with flooding in this area?
22:08:29 >>> As a matter of fact, there is.
22:08:31 The ditch right there --
22:08:36 >> Yes, there's a ditch right there.
22:08:37 >> Exactly.
22:08:38 And there's another retention pond right on the other
22:08:40 side of that retention pond that the state put in N
22:08:43 there.
22:08:43 And right now, the water from that area drains over
22:08:51 towards that but there is standing water with heavy
22:08:53 rain. That gutter will fill right up to the top.
22:08:59 Thank you for your time.

22:09:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, too.
22:09:06 >>> Good evening.
22:09:10 I had a time coming here.
22:09:13 My name is ... and I live at 5104 17th Avenue, and
22:09:20 I don't want no more motel around the area.
22:09:23 It already declined 100% because we got one motel, we
22:09:27 got Howard Johnson on the north, and we have three
22:09:32 other motels behind Howard Johnson and Columbus.
22:09:36 And the other side of the interstate.
22:09:38 And the only thing we have is problems.
22:09:40 Because you got all these people coming down and
22:09:42 staying in these hotels, cheap hotels, and bring
22:09:47 crime, drugs, prostitutes, and I don't think it's good
22:09:50 for the area.
22:09:51 I bought property.
22:09:52 I got property in that area there.
22:09:55 I want to raise my kid over there write don't have to
22:09:57 worry about somebody breaking into my house anymore
22:09:59 because it's already the crime increase.
22:10:02 As soon as -- it was a hotel that was out of business
22:10:07 they already got it back in business and it's already
22:10:10 trouble.

22:10:10 You can check with the police department how many
22:10:13 times they have to go over there.
22:10:15 They don't have the time to -- I mean, they can go
22:10:20 someplace to build this hotel.
22:10:22 This area, we want to keep it the way it is, the
22:10:25 longer we are trying to revitalize the area, we are
22:10:27 trying to get the area to be properly oriented, they
22:10:35 get a view from everybody and I don't think that's
22:10:39 good for the area.
22:10:40 The economy is not there.
22:10:44 The hotel that is already there, we can do nothing but
22:10:47 it.
22:10:47 But somebody new has to change the way they want to do
22:10:51 business there. Because ware the ones that have to
22:10:53 live there, okay?
22:10:54 We are the one that is have to be responsible for the
22:10:57 kids.
22:10:57 And bringing more hotels, you are going to bring more
22:11:00 activity to people to come to the area, and nobody is
22:11:03 around it.
22:11:05 It's a bunch of nice little houses in the back.
22:11:07 And we don't want to change that.

22:11:08 So if there's any possibility, we don't want a hotel.
22:11:12 And thank you.
22:11:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
22:11:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I know the petitioner didn't meet with
22:11:22 the neighborhood association so I would like to
22:11:24 clarify the site plan.
22:11:28 Sitting in the audience.
22:11:33 Let me see if I can zoom in a little bit.
22:11:36 The ingress and egress for the site is off of Columbus
22:11:38 only.
22:11:39 There's no other access to the parking area for the
22:11:43 site, except for off of Columbus.
22:11:48 On 17th there is a turn-around that they are going
22:11:52 to put in -- thought there was access back there but
22:11:58 there would not be anyone entering or exiting the
22:12:00 parking lot for the hotel on 17th.
22:12:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, I'm looking at the site
22:12:05 plan and it shows a street that is coming in right
22:12:08 where your finger was off 17th.
22:12:10 >>> There is a street off of 17th but there is not
22:12:15 access to the hotel parking off of 17th.
22:12:18 You will see a dead-end turn-around.

22:12:22 And there's a sidewalk there.
22:12:24 5-foot concrete, sidewalk raised 6 inches above new
22:12:27 pavement that goes all the way around.
22:12:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where is the masonry wall being
22:12:34 referred to and the PVC fence?
22:12:37 >>> That is located on this part next to these two
22:12:42 residentially zoned lots.
22:12:44 Is where they require buffering for the -- it's called
22:12:53 out on the site plan.
22:12:55 Proposed 6-foot PVC.
22:13:02 It wouldn't be required for 27-130.
22:13:08 If would you like to require some sort of buffering.
22:13:14 >> Is the 15 fat waiver being requested?
22:13:18 >>> They are not wavering the -- waiving the 15 feet.
22:13:20 They are just waiving the height of wall.
22:13:24 They are saying instead of the 6-foot masonry wall,
22:13:27 6-foot PVC fence but also going to provide the 15 feet
22:13:31 as well as some sort of fencing.
22:13:34 Per your approval, either of the PVC or if you would
22:13:38 like them --
22:13:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: (off microphone) part of this
22:13:52 parcel, and RS-50 on another part.

22:13:58 So show us where the commercial intensive is.
22:14:06 >>> The commercial intensive as you can see here is
22:14:10 this green.
22:14:11 It's where the building is.
22:14:13 Where the building is going to go here.
22:14:15 >> And --
22:14:17 >>> the RS-50 is what is --
22:14:19 >> What kind of building or hotel?
22:14:21 Could they build a motel with commercial intensive
22:14:24 today?
22:14:25 CI?
22:14:26 >>> Only on the CI portion, yes, which is also the HC
22:14:32 24 land use underneath.
22:14:34 Yes.
22:14:35 But I guess given the other requirements of the site,
22:14:37 the parking, stormwater retention, the intensity of
22:14:45 what they are trying to build, the existing CI site
22:14:48 could not accommodate that amount of intensity.
22:14:51 >> The building that they want to put.
22:14:53 >>> The would not accommodate the parking and the
22:14:58 stormwater retention.
22:15:01 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Where is the drainage?

22:15:03 Is it going to go to that retention pond?
22:15:05 >>> Yes.
22:15:05 The north part of the parking.
22:15:07 >> So by putting a cement wall, it's going to limit
22:15:10 the amount of drainage, because that's going to have
22:15:13 to have a footer.
22:15:15 >>> It's a different place.
22:15:16 >> Yes.
22:15:17 In the northern part if you look on the northern part.
22:15:23 >> But there's no wall there.
22:15:24 >>> There is no wall in that area.
22:15:27 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The wall is behind the motel?
22:15:29 >>> The wall is located to the east of the hotel.
22:15:34 Sorry.
22:15:35 I don't like this as much as the Elmo.
22:15:39 There are two residentially zoned parcels here that
22:15:41 are currently vacant.
22:15:42 However, pursuant to 27-130, the wall would be
22:15:48 required along this area here, for those two
22:15:52 properties.
22:15:52 Not to be confused with the two that there are houses
22:15:55 on up here.

22:15:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The T two that are up there where
22:15:59 you just pointed there would be no visual buffering?
22:16:02 >>> Right.
22:16:02 There's no structure up there.
22:16:04 That's the retention pond.
22:16:05 And there's three large trees, that we can see the
22:16:08 protective radius of those trees there.
22:16:11 There would be no required buffer there.
22:16:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott?
22:16:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I'm very familiar with the area.
22:16:20 I live not too far from there.
22:16:27 28 years.
22:16:28 I will tell you that I was there and I remember when
22:16:31 the holiday INN and was very successful and all those
22:16:35 hotels, days inn have gone down because they all went
22:16:40 down and in order to bring them back up you have to
22:16:42 develop that, and I would say a good start is having a
22:16:45 good motel to help bring up those other motels that
22:16:48 are there.
22:16:49 Secondly, I will say that one reason there's a sign
22:16:54 there is because when they redid I-4 they raised the
22:16:58 height of it so that's why you need the sign to be

22:17:00 elevated so they can see it.
22:17:01 Okay?
22:17:02 And also, keep it in mind, if I were living there, I
22:17:06 would not want a wall.
22:17:07 I wouldn't want a wall behind me and in front of me.
22:17:10 I wouldn't.
22:17:11 That's just as simple as that.
22:17:13 You have Bacadda's, and they do a lot of business.
22:17:22 Sweetbay over there, which was Kash N' Karry, has a
22:17:27 lot of activity over there.
22:17:28 And even across the I-4, the other side there.
22:17:38 The one across from there, that's all that cheap
22:17:43 stuff, you know.
22:17:44 And you need a good quality kind of hotel, and
22:17:48 something similar to this that will help bring the
22:17:50 area back up.
22:17:51 Now the question I have, I know that the CRA go over
22:17:53 to 50th street.
22:17:54 Is this a part of the CRA area?
22:17:58 Does anyone know?
22:18:01 Does CRA go over to 50th street?
22:18:05 Community redevelopment area.

22:18:08 >>> I don't believe that it does.
22:18:21 >>> Jim gentry, speaking on behalf of the corner of
22:18:28 17th and 51st.
22:18:30 >> Which corner is she on?
22:18:33 >>> If you have an aerial view.
22:18:37 It's at the corner.
22:18:45 Her house is located right here.
22:18:46 Okay?
22:18:49 Rate on that corner there.
22:18:50 And there's a brand new house right here next to this
22:18:53 house.
22:18:57 That area is a retention pond.
22:18:59 It's always -- along 17th Avenue there, it
22:19:04 dead-ends, right there next to the interstate, or the
22:19:07 entrance there, I-4 going eastbound.
22:19:11 That's all going to be open and there's going to be
22:19:13 people.
22:19:14 And to me this is not a hotel.
22:19:15 This is an extended stay place for people to come and
22:19:22 park for a week or two or even more as I understand it
22:19:24 and there's going to be people in and out there, and
22:19:27 there's a crime problem out there already.

22:19:28 And I just think if we are going to increase more
22:19:31 crime and people, transients that are going to be in
22:19:35 there.
22:19:36 And I really hope that you all reject this proposal
22:19:39 for the residents in that area.
22:19:43 My mom is 80-something years old and cars have been
22:19:47 stolen and her car has been broken into, and it's
22:19:50 just, you know, I think it's not good for the
22:19:53 neighborhood.
22:19:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are there other houses to the, I
22:20:00 guess, north?
22:20:01 >>> Yes.
22:20:02 In fact her sister lives next door to her.
22:20:04 >> So this is an established residential neighborhood?
22:20:06 >>> Established residential neighborhood.
22:20:11 My wife stayed there.
22:20:14 When they tore a lot of stuff down, Bob Evans used to
22:20:17 be there.
22:20:18 And it's a good neighborhood, and I just don't feel
22:20:23 this is a place for it.
22:20:29 Thank you.
22:20:29 >>CHAIRMAN: Petitioner?

22:20:30 >>> If I may address a couple of the questions that
22:20:33 were raised.
22:20:36 Thank you, Abbye, for the construction on the access.
22:20:41 Bob Evans had two access points onto Columbus.
22:20:44 What we are doing is we are going to eliminate one of
22:20:46 those and have only one access point, significant away
22:20:50 from the intersection so it doesn't create any traffic
22:20:52 problems.
22:20:54 Another question that was raised is the pond.
22:20:57 The pond right now is a long low area.
22:21:02 What we are going to do is it's intended to be a dry
22:21:05 pond, immediate run-off water would run into that
22:21:10 pond, percolate down in.
22:21:14 In fact if it is high enough that we are protecting
22:21:16 the large oak trees that are there, we don't want to
22:21:18 lose those oak trees, we think it's very important to
22:21:21 the character of the neighborhood.
22:21:22 So the pond area there, along with the vacated
22:21:25 right-of-way, is going to be cleaned up and ponding is
22:21:29 going to be established there.
22:21:31 Probably the most important thing I want to address is
22:21:33 how we operate on hotels.

22:21:37 We have a clean and safe program.
22:21:39 Our clean and safe program requires our guests at
22:21:42 check-in to provide a government-issued
22:21:45 identification, whether driver's license, passport, or
22:21:48 the like.
22:21:50 We ask that so that we can identify and research the
22:21:54 guest that is are there.
22:21:56 We are we ourselves live in neighborhoods that we
22:21:59 wouldn't want unsavory people next to us, also.
22:22:02 What we do then is when they are checked in, our
22:22:06 manager that checks in, the person, first goes to the
22:22:10 computer, runs a background check based on the
22:22:14 driver's license, the identification that's been given
22:22:16 to us, so that any documented criminal or anyone who
22:22:26 has a crime that has been documented and can be
22:22:28 identified in the computer, this person is showing up
22:22:33 that has this are asked to leave.
22:22:36 We don't want that kind of person in our hotel.
22:22:39 Furthermore, what we do then is our operations
22:22:43 director, and our operations manager, work with the
22:22:46 local police department.
22:22:49 That driver's license is shared with the police

22:22:53 department.
22:22:54 We don't want people of unsavory character and nature
22:22:57 in our establishment.
22:23:00 We want clean, good, corporate users to come and stay.
22:23:05 The experience of our guest is foremost.
22:23:08 We want them to feel safe.
22:23:10 We want them to feel protected.
22:23:12 And they are staying in our hotel.
22:23:14 It's very important to us.
22:23:16 It's very important to our guests.
22:23:18 So we check them.
22:23:21 We require identification.
22:23:24 We share this information with the police department
22:23:26 so that they have it on record, so they can check
22:23:29 also.
22:23:31 Les brown, our director of operations, is very intent
22:23:33 on creating a relationship with the local police
22:23:37 department at each place where our hotels are built.
22:23:41 Very important for us.
22:23:42 So to answer the questions of the neighborhood, we
22:23:46 want good people.
22:23:47 We want good business people.

22:23:49 We want corporate people to stay in our hotel.
22:23:53 That have no record, that are good people.
22:24:00 If I can answer anything else, I would be more than
22:24:01 happy to.
22:24:02 >> other questions by council members?
22:24:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
22:24:09 Do you have this?
22:24:10 >> Yes, I do, sir.
22:24:11 >>> 209 value price.
22:24:15 >>: We just used that as an example.
22:24:20 That's in no way, shape or form a determination.
22:24:23 Actual cost. That was purely an example that we were
22:24:26 given for the initial package together.
22:24:28 >> So what does it mean?
22:24:30 >>> Pardon me?
22:24:31 >> What is it?
22:24:31 >>> What is the rate?
22:24:33 >> No, what does it mean?
22:24:35 >>> Oh, that will be the weekly rate of our hotel.
22:24:37 >>GWEN MILLER: An example.
22:24:41 >> I'm hearing two different things.
22:24:43 >>> That is the weekly rate. That will represent the

22:24:45 weekly rate of our hotel, whether it's in St. Cloud
22:24:51 it's 219 a week.
22:24:53 Here it is I believe 229 a week.
22:24:56 And we are looking at Bradenton, we are looking at a
22:24:59 couple on Fletcher, different areas.
22:25:02 >> So we are in the ballpark of $30 a night?
22:25:06 >>> Correct.
22:25:07 Correct.
22:25:07 >> Thank you.
22:25:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions?
22:25:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to vote on 25 separate.
22:25:22 >> Mike Peterson speaking primarily to agenda item 24.
22:25:25 Again, we didn't hear anyone speaking in opposition to
22:25:28 the vacating.
22:25:30 Because that's primarily just an internal matter
22:25:34 amongst a couple of the properties.
22:25:35 There's nothing there and the issues that turn out on
22:25:37 17th, it's basically a request, how they came
22:25:40 through our vacate wig we field in -- filed in advance
22:25:43 of the zoning being filed but then the rezoning
22:25:46 applicants agree to fix a problem for the City of
22:25:48 Tampa, because that is currently just a dead-end,

22:25:52 alleyway and out of the way to give at decent
22:25:56 turn-around instead of a spot where people can go and
22:26:00 dump things off.
22:26:01 >>>: Just vacate that end of 17th.
22:26:03 >> Well, what happens, if you look at the agenda item,
22:26:07 17th, from there to the on-ramp, is already
22:26:11 vacated, from back in 1967 as is a portion internal to
22:26:17 ours.
22:26:17 What happens is at that point where 17th
22:26:21 terminates, there is an old portion that in fact the
22:26:24 city thought it vacated, didn't do properly, sold to
22:26:27 my client, and then in the process of our vacating,
22:26:31 asked us to include it to get that corrected for the
22:26:33 record, and then there's a horizontal portion of
22:26:36 another alleyway which we are extending from the 1967
22:26:39 vacating that goes out to 51st street.
22:26:43 So it's all internal, and you saw the aerials, saw the
22:26:50 graph and trees.
22:26:51 I do want to say something on behalf of the rezoning
22:26:54 itself, because my client does have an interest in
22:26:56 this.
22:26:57 Just bear in mind that we are talking about the

22:26:59 intersection of I-4, 50th street, and Columbus
22:27:03 Avenue.
22:27:03 And the way they have done this, they have oriented it
22:27:06 to Columbus and 50th street, not necessarily
22:27:12 trying to infiltrate or move into the neighborhood.
22:27:14 You have got to understand where we are and the type
22:27:18 of use we are talking about here with regards to
22:27:20 what's happening.
22:27:21 Thank you.
22:27:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close item 24 and 25.
22:27:25 Any questions?
22:27:27 We need to close the public hearing.
22:27:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close the public hearing.
22:27:30 >> Second.
22:27:31 (Motion carried).
22:27:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We are now on 24.
22:27:35 We have an ordinance for 24?
22:27:40 Vacating.
22:27:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Move an ordinance vacating closing
22:27:49 continuing abandoning a certain right-of-way all that
22:27:52 alleyway lying south of 17th Avenue north of
22:27:56 Columbus drive, east of 50th street and west of

22:27:59 51st street, in Florence villea, subdivision, a
22:28:02 subdivision located in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough
22:28:04 County Florida the same being more particularly
22:28:07 described in section 2 hereof providing an effective
22:28:09 date.
22:28:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and a second.
22:28:11 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
22:28:15 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent
22:28:17 at vote.
22:28:18 Second reading and adoption will be on December
22:28:20 20th at 9:30 a.m.
22:28:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 25.
22:28:28 Do you want to read that one?
22:28:29 What's the pleasure of 25?
22:28:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I was going to say, see, my opinion to
22:28:37 the neighbors, that the only way the area is going to
22:28:43 get redeveloped, get the crime out, you have to put
22:28:46 something quality.
22:28:48 There are about four hotels -- that's part of the
22:28:53 element.
22:28:53 That's part of the crime element.
22:28:55 Also you have to keep in mind, as you go further back

22:28:57 into the neighborhood, when I was county commissioner
22:29:01 I represented that area so I had several meetings out
22:29:03 there trying to get the sheriff involved, you know,
22:29:06 with the crime element over in that particular area of
22:29:09 the neighborhood.
22:29:09 So I'm very familiar with what goes on, what the area
22:29:13 is, and what the criminal element is.
22:29:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
22:29:18 I really appreciate your comments, Reverend Scott.
22:29:22 I don't disagree that something needs to go there.
22:29:25 I don't think -- I'm not going to support this
22:29:27 petition because I think what's being proposed creates
22:29:32 a real imposition on the neighborhood.
22:29:34 I think you can have another commercial establishment,
22:29:36 a restaurant, a store, something like that,
22:29:39 particularly a restaurant, that would be oriented more
22:29:43 toward Columbus, and would not -- I'm thinking about
22:29:47 cracker barrel, something like that, and would not
22:29:49 have the negative impact on the neighborhood. This is
22:29:51 going to be a very large, and draw in some extremely
22:29:55 ordinary -- extremely ordinary building, with a lot of
22:29:58 big signs.

22:29:59 And I just don't think that that's going to
22:30:02 contribute -- I won't be able to support this based on
22:30:09 compatibility with the surrounding -- I wish it were
22:30:14 something different.
22:30:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, would you read that,
22:30:18 please?
22:30:20 Please, no clapping.
22:30:21 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
22:30:23 vicinity of 5010 and 5018 east Columbus drive, 50201
22:30:29 east 17th Avenue, city of Tampa, Florida more
22:30:31 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
22:30:33 district classification CI commercial intensive, and
22:30:36 RS-50 residential single-family, planned development,
22:30:40 motel, providing an effective date.
22:30:41 >>CHAIRMAN: I have a motion and second.
22:30:42 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena, Dingfelder
22:30:51 voting no, and Mulhern absent at vote.
22:30:55 Second reading and adoption will be on December
22:30:56 20th at 9:30 a.m.
22:30:58 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item 28.
22:31:04 >>> Excuse me, I have a technical question.
22:31:06 If this were in the East Tampa area, would there be

22:31:09 any kind of design guidelines that they would need to
22:31:13 reflect?
22:31:17 Is that something the staff would know?
22:31:21 Staff?
22:31:22 If this were in East Tampa, there are, I believe, East
22:31:24 Tampa design guidelines.
22:31:26 So wouldn't this need to reflect --
22:31:32 >>> it's not in the East Tampa.
22:31:33 >>GWEN MILLER: East Tampa doesn't have an overlay.
22:31:38 That's not in East Tampa.
22:31:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess the question, though, should
22:31:42 be in the part with CRA.
22:31:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We are having a second hearing on
22:31:55 this, and you will have another chance to speak.
22:31:59 On the 20th of December, 9:30 in the morning,
22:32:05 right here.
22:32:05 And we apologize.
22:32:06 We thought your son-in-law was speaking for you.
22:32:10 So apologize for that.
22:32:14 But you can come back and speak to us again on the
22:32:18 20th at 9:30 in the morning.
22:32:21 Yes, ma'am.

22:32:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me finish.
22:32:24 I was saying, I know that the CRA, the Community
22:32:26 Redevelopment Agency, goes over to 50th street.
22:32:29 And I was raising a question, how far over, or did it
22:32:33 go past over to where it was, it's an important
22:32:36 question, because here again, economic development in
22:32:41 the area and also you can look about in terms of the
22:32:45 designs and all of that.
22:32:49 So that's very important.
22:32:50 The other thing I would point out is that a
22:32:52 restaurant -- see, what people don't understand, and
22:32:55 this is unfortunate --
22:32:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
22:33:02 I would ask that you not talk about that specific site
22:33:05 now, because you will have that opportunity on the
22:33:08 20th.
22:33:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
22:33:11 28.
22:33:31 >>> It's been a night of hotels and Euclidean
22:33:34 rezonings.
22:33:34 This is the last hearing of the evening.
22:33:36 Z 07-93, a Euclidean request.

22:33:39 It's located 9413 north Hartts drive, it is requesting
22:33:46 a rezoning from RS-60 to RS-50.
22:33:50 In order to create two fifty by 100 lots, this Terrace
22:33:56 Park subdivision was originally platted in 1987 with
22:33:59 30-foot wide lots.
22:34:01 The site is currently vacant.
22:34:03 Standard setbacks for the RS-50 are as follows.
22:34:06 20-foot front.
22:34:07 20-foot rear.
22:34:08 7-foot side yard.
22:34:10 No waivers can be requested or permitted with this
22:34:14 application.
22:34:15 And the proposed construction must adhere to all City
22:34:18 of Tampa regulations.
22:34:35 >> This is Hartts Drive here, Busch Boulevard to the
22:34:43 south, and temple height to the north.
22:34:49 There is a small pocket of RS-50 to the west of the
22:34:55 property.
22:34:56 And you will see that on the red-blue map that I am
22:35:01 about to show you.
22:35:02 Subject property is shown in green.
22:35:10 Subject property is shown in green.

22:35:18 Subject property is shown here in green.
22:35:24 You will see that the south end of this block, that
22:35:31 there are several RS-50 properties, and also that
22:35:34 cluster that I just showed you, the PD over on block
22:35:38 9.
22:35:39 Other than that the majority of the properties in this
22:35:42 area have been developed at the RS-60 standards and
22:35:47 given that original subdivision at the 30-foot lot,
22:35:50 it's mostly double lots.
22:35:52 You have 60 feet in width.
22:36:02 I'll show you some pictures.
22:36:03 When you drive down Hartts Drive and approach the
22:36:05 property, the road ends.
22:36:06 There is currently no surface road that services this
22:36:11 site, and I'll let the petitioner speak to that
22:36:14 further.
22:36:15 But that would need to be made in order for this site
22:36:18 to have access to a road.
22:36:25 This is the property to the west of that barricaded
22:36:30 roadway.
22:36:35 And this is the property to the east.
22:36:41 I adventure out to the site.

22:36:43 This is a drainage easement that's currently out here,
22:36:48 and you need to walk down Hart which is unimproved in
22:36:52 this segment and the property is located to the east.
22:36:56 Here is a picture of the property.
22:37:00 To the west are the rear, the back of the homes that
22:37:07 are on 46th street.
22:37:10 You will see some of the backs of those properties.
22:37:14 And then this is Heights looking south toward the
22:37:20 property.
22:37:24 Based on my analysis of the surrounding area and the
22:37:27 development pattern, I find this request to be
22:37:29 inconsistent with City of Tampa comprehensive plan and
22:37:32 applicable City of Tampa code.
22:37:36 I'm available for any questions.
22:37:45 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
22:37:46 I have been sworn.
22:37:49 The predominant land use category in the area is
22:37:52 residential 10, single-family detached.
22:37:58 As you can see residential 10 here, the site is
22:38:00 located to the north of Busch Boulevard.
22:38:04 We do have residential 20 down to the south and
22:38:10 residential 35, Tacoma.

22:38:20 This is Tacoma.
22:38:24 This is the subject street in question.
22:38:27 It's interesting to access the site applicant is
22:38:30 actually going to have to improve the grade of this
22:38:33 particular portion of the street in question.
22:38:37 To go to RS-50 lot, but as far as the character of the
22:38:41 area, single-family detached residential uses, there
22:38:47 are a variety of different configurations.
22:38:50 There are houses that are actually built on larger
22:38:52 lots, in different configurations other than standard
22:38:55 RS-60.
22:38:56 If one were to see it, so that a lot of them don't
22:39:00 actually configure what the RS-60.
22:39:03 The 100 -- to the west of the site over here.
22:39:09 The overriding configurations in the area.
22:39:11 And I would point out there is also RS-50.
22:39:15 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
22:39:17 consistent with the comprehensive plan, particularly
22:39:19 those elements that deal with residential
22:39:22 redevelopments being nondestructive to minimally
22:39:26 destructive to adjacent areas, and also development
22:39:30 and redevelopment relative to adjacent uses similar

22:39:33 development.
22:39:34 Of course this will be consistent with that, as you
22:39:36 have single-family attached residential uses and is
22:39:39 also consistent with the housing unit which supports
22:39:41 in-fill residential housing, ensure residential areas.
22:39:45 Planning Commission finds the proposal request
22:39:49 consistent with Tampa comprehensive plan.
22:39:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
22:39:52 >>> I'm Jessel Craig, if just speaking on this
22:40:04 property, this is heavily wooded area.
22:40:08 As a matter of fact, we believe by coming in there,
22:40:13 and putting in these houses, it will actually improve
22:40:17 the property value in that area.
22:40:22 And we have seen evidence of dumping.
22:40:29 Also seeing that we have-the neighbor directly in
22:40:40 front of us, to the west of us, recently had to put in
22:40:45 place a fence.
22:40:46 The fence to secure his lot.
22:40:49 He had people entering his property from the back.
22:40:54 We have also seen that this drainage in that area.
22:41:00 Apparently, water back in that area.
22:41:11 By coming in and improving this area, putting in the

22:41:14 necessary improvements, the rights-of-way, it would
22:41:18 also improve the drainage.
22:41:19 I would also like to see that all the properties on
22:41:27 Hartts Drive itself would benefit from coming in,
22:41:30 properties to the north and south, and I have a
22:41:35 notarized letter here from a new neighbor.
22:41:38 I can pass it around to you.
22:41:40 Do you want me to read it?
22:41:42 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
22:41:43 >> Okay.
22:41:45 Again, we will comply with all code regulations.
22:41:58 We have no problems.
22:42:00 We don't have any waivers to request or anything like
22:42:02 that.
22:42:02 But we know from access, north, south, property
22:42:09 valuation around that area, heavily on this area.
22:42:17 At the end of the day what we are trying to do is
22:42:22 family friendly.
22:42:24 That's what I am looking for, that is conducive of
22:42:26 family.
22:42:30 We are all going to benefit from this.
22:42:34 Not doing anything that would impede anyone's land

22:42:39 value or anything like. That we are actually
22:42:41 benefiting everyone.
22:42:44 Unfortunately we have to do the road improvement, but
22:42:51 providing -- I have another family member who would
22:42:55 purchase that and double up with me and get the
22:43:00 project completed.
22:43:01 Apart from that I would like to also agree with the
22:43:04 Planning Commission, moving in this area would
22:43:09 actually increase infill housing, and I also think
22:43:16 that it's based on the requirements of having enough
22:43:21 square footage to get this thing executed.
22:43:26 I am asking you to kindly approve this application.
22:43:30 >> Mr. Craig, it is a beautiful piece of property, no
22:43:36 doubt.
22:43:36 One of the concerns I have, the report indicates that
22:43:38 there are two grand trees on the property, and with
22:43:41 the kind of zoning that you are requesting, would you
22:43:43 not be allowed to get any waivers, 20-foot setbacks
22:43:49 for those trees.
22:43:50 >>> I already have a building in question that took a
22:43:54 look at those.
22:43:55 We want those trees because it also adds value to the

22:43:58 property itself.
22:43:59 And we already have a floor plan that will be able to
22:44:02 work around those trees.
22:44:05 So that won't be a problem.
22:44:06 We are fully aware of that tree restriction.
22:44:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
22:44:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which side will you be coming in
22:44:20 from, in terms of this street?
22:44:22 >>> To be honest, I don't have any current
22:44:25 information.
22:44:25 We are currently working that out.
22:44:27 And it's just based on utilities, and whatever is
22:44:34 practical based on the requirements, and the
22:44:36 information that we get from the City of Tampa, we
22:44:38 will comply and execute.
22:44:40 >> Is there any part of Hartts Drive on your block
22:44:44 built, the street?
22:44:45 >>> No.
22:44:46 Nothing.
22:44:46 As a matter of fact, for me to improve my lot, or
22:44:50 lots, I would have to create right-of-way in front of
22:44:53 the properties to the north, or if I come from the

22:44:56 south, I have to create right-of-way to the property
22:44:59 to the south.
22:45:00 So they would also benefit from --
22:45:03 >> I want to nobody, how can you even afford -- two
22:45:08 houses, how can you afford to develop that whole
22:45:11 street with two houses?
22:45:12 >>> Well, we sat down, we contacted a couple of
22:45:15 neighbors, we are still working on one neighbor to
22:45:18 work with us on this, and this is exactly why we want
22:45:21 ton rezone because two homes are better than one.
22:45:23 My pocket isn't deep enough.
22:45:25 So providing that you can, I think it's going to be
22:45:30 tight, but it's feasible.
22:45:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
22:45:34 wants to speak on item 28?
22:45:36 Come up and speak.
22:45:45 >>> Mark Turner.
22:45:46 I own the property at 9409 Hartts Drive which is just
22:45:51 to the south of the property in question.
22:45:53 I am not in favor of the rezoning.
22:45:55 I think to some degree the city has been a bit myth
22:46:02 represented the layout of the RS-50 or the usage of

22:46:06 the property.
22:46:07 He's to go all the way to 47th street, or Temple
22:46:10 Heights, in order to see the mixed use area that they
22:46:15 are speaking of.
22:46:17 Other than a very few isolated RS-50 lots to the west
22:46:22 of Harts.
22:46:23 The picture that was shown, the street ends at Hartts
22:46:29 Drive and there was a fence there. I put that fence
22:46:31 up because there was indeed dumping that was going on
22:46:35 with the property.
22:46:36 And my concern is, first and foremost on that, very
22:46:39 pleased that we are trying to develop this.
22:46:43 I actually have in process a plan to build a home for
22:46:46 my family on my lot, which is dead-end of Hartts
22:46:51 Drive.
22:46:52 This is going to be a property that we live in, not a
22:46:56 property that we are going to flip for sale.
22:46:58 And I'm concerned about reducing the size of the
22:47:00 property requirement which in turn will more than
22:47:04 likely -- and I don't present to know what the plans
22:47:08 are ow -- but more than likely reduce the size of the
22:47:11 house that goes on the lot that it's going to be built

22:47:13 on.
22:47:14 And if that's done, just as a means to build and sell,
22:47:19 then there's not so much a personal attachment to the
22:47:25 long-term value or appreciation of the property.
22:47:30 It is true that the area is teetering on the verge of,
22:47:35 if you will, a safe, habitable, nice neighborhood, and
22:47:41 one which is really has duplexes, multifamily homes, a
22:47:47 very transient nature within that block.
22:47:50 So my focus, my concern is to have property built
22:47:54 there where the folks who build are going to live,
22:47:58 it's going to be a property that, you know, the
22:48:00 neighborhood will work together as a community.
22:48:04 I have owned my property for 30 years.
22:48:06 And there hasn't been a time really that we could
22:48:09 develop this property for fear of what was being built
22:48:14 around it, from a duplex and multifamily home
22:48:18 perspective.
22:48:18 So I don't believe that reducing the size of the lot
22:48:25 is consistent the way it is in place and the way the
22:48:28 property has been developed to this point.
22:48:29 I think while that may facilitate a cost benefit
22:48:33 analysis to build two or three houses to help pay for

22:48:38 the cost of the road, and I can certainly understand
22:48:41 and emphathize trying to make those decisions but as
22:48:47 one who will have a family member living in the area I
22:48:50 don't think making a smaller house that can be sold
22:48:55 and consistent with a nice house is consistent or what
22:49:01 we are hoping for.
22:49:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sir, how deep is yours?
22:49:09 >>> 09 feet.
22:49:09 >> You will build one house?
22:49:11 >>> That's right.
22:49:12 >> And you are going to have 90 feet.
22:49:14 >>>: That's right.
22:49:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
22:49:16 Petitioner, you can come back up for rebuttal.
22:49:21 >>> Again, I would like to -- at the end of the day
22:49:25 what we are trying to do here is create an environment
22:49:29 that everyone is going to benefit from, if we come
22:49:38 from the south, he's going to benefit from the
22:49:41 right-of-way, is going to benefit and also benefit
22:49:45 from the aesthetic value that we improve.
22:49:57 Working with -- I have reached out.
22:50:01 I'm willing to work with him.

22:50:04 Especially contributing to the core of this area.
22:50:07 But you have to understand the difference between
22:50:09 RS-60 and RS-50.
22:50:12 It's actually -- it isn't much.
22:50:20 The future values, we are conforming to that.
22:50:24 He's speaking about houses, a 1,000-foot difference.
22:50:30 I don't know how much that is in terms of the
22:50:35 setbacks, they are the same for RS-50 and RS-60.
22:50:39 The only difference is the square footage.
22:50:45 6,000 minimum.
22:50:47 All right.
22:50:48 If Mr. Turner is willing to work with us, fine.
22:50:51 But I have to just decide the course to some extent.
22:50:55 Again, another point that he mentioned is the fact
22:50:58 that he is going to be living there.
22:51:01 I will also be moving in.
22:51:03 My intent is not to build and sell.
22:51:06 I have another family member, quote-unquote family
22:51:10 member, who is also interested in split it up and have
22:51:14 two to execute this project.
22:51:20 The land value, the property value is going to
22:51:23 increase.

22:51:23 Utilities will be in.
22:51:26 Right-of-way would be improved.
22:51:27 I think it's a win-win for everyone.
22:51:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
22:51:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Craig, it appears that
22:51:35 according to the petition, you are the owner of the
22:51:38 property?
22:51:39 >>> Yes.
22:51:39 >> Or do you have --
22:51:42 >>> I own the property.
22:51:42 >> You bought it fee simple.
22:51:44 No option or anything?
22:51:45 >>> Yes.
22:51:45 >> And when you bought it, were you aware of the
22:51:49 zoning that was on there?
22:51:51 >>> Yes.
22:51:51 >> RS-60?
22:51:52 >> It was RS-60.
22:51:56 The problem is, though, going in, I didn't take into
22:52:00 consideration all the costs.
22:52:01 And after the fact found it was going to be this
22:52:06 expensive.

22:52:09 That was a family, and willing to help out.
22:52:12 This is a way to come up with a compromise to get it
22:52:15 done.
22:52:16 >> What family?
22:52:17 >>> Brothers and sisters.
22:52:19 So when I divide into, another family member,
22:52:24 financial standpoints to do the improvements, and that
22:52:27 kind of stuff.
22:52:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
22:52:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
22:52:36 >> Second.
22:52:36 (Motion carried).
22:52:37 >>CHAIRMAN: Do we have an ordinance?
22:52:57 >> Move to rezone property in the general vicinity of
22:53:01 9413 north Hartts Drive Tampa, Florida from zoning
22:53:07 district classifications RS-60 residential
22:53:10 single-family to RS-50 residential single-family,
22:53:14 providing an effective date.
22:53:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have a second?
22:53:17 >> Second.
22:53:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
22:53:20 Question on the motion?

22:53:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I feel badly that he bought into
22:53:26 something that sort of bit off a little more than he
22:53:31 can chew but I can't support it.
22:53:32 If you look at the red-blue-green map, I think it's
22:53:36 very important when staff does the analysis.
22:53:40 And this is why they do it.
22:53:43 And like what Charlie said a little while ago it's not
22:53:46 red and blue because they are Republican or Democrats.
22:53:48 It's what helps us with our zoning decisions.
22:53:52 And the staff recommendation against this is because
22:53:56 this entire map is red because this entire area is
22:54:00 conforming with the existing zoning.
22:54:04 It's conforming with the existing zoning.
22:54:08 All of a sudden we are going to throw in this last bit
22:54:14 and we know what happens when we do it.
22:54:16 It's a slippery slope.
22:54:18 And pretty soon the next property owner nearby will
22:54:20 say, well, he did it.
22:54:22 I want to do it too.
22:54:24 Pretty soon you have the whole thing flipping to
22:54:28 RS-50.
22:54:29 The F the neighbors would have wanted RS-50 they would

22:54:32 have been here long ago.
22:54:33 But I don't think that's the case. I think we need to
22:54:35 respect the character of the neighborhood.
22:54:37 Character of the neighborhood is large, large lots.
22:54:40 This gentleman came in front of us, has a it 0-foot
22:54:43 lot next door.
22:54:44 All the other neighbors have 60-foot lots.
22:54:46 And all of a sudden, you know, there's a motion on the
22:54:48 floor to consider splitting to 50.
22:54:50 I don't think that's right.
22:54:52 I don't think that's respectful of the neighborhood.
22:54:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The petitioner is a really nice
22:54:58 person, and I hate to not support this.
22:55:00 But the truth is that you have got a gorgeous piece of
22:55:04 property.
22:55:04 And it might be tough to do something with it now but
22:55:08 with those beautiful trees, neighbors with large lots,
22:55:13 when you having a large lot, ultimately it will be
22:55:15 worth a lot more.
22:55:17 And I feel like it's council's responsibility to look
22:55:23 at the big picture and what the context of the
22:55:25 decision is, in the whole neighborhood, and I feel

22:55:30 like it's our responsibility to respect the larger
22:55:32 lots which are the overwhelming pattern of the
22:55:38 neighborhood.
22:55:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I also feel that from what I saw,
22:55:45 the jungle, it's a pretty judge, it's a nice piece of
22:55:49 property, and although there's some RS-50 to one part
22:55:54 on another block, block 9, I believe it was, or block
22:55:58 10, there are none that I saw.
22:56:00 And therefore, I know that Mr. Caetano read to the get
22:56:04 this item on the floor and get moving one way or the
22:56:07 other.
22:56:07 But I will not be supporting it either.
22:56:11 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
22:56:13 Opposed, Nay.
22:56:16 >>THE CLERK: Motion did not carry with -- motion did
22:56:24 not carry with Saul-Sena, Miranda, and Dingfelder
22:56:26 voting no.
22:56:29 >>CHAIRMAN: We have to bring it back next week.
22:56:33 Unfinished business next Thursday.
22:56:36 10 a.m.
22:56:36 >>THE CLERK: The agenda item will be continued to next
22:56:40 Thursday's agenda at 10 a.m

22:56:43 For full council consideration.
22:56:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can, pursuant to rule
22:56:47 4-C, if it comes back under unfinished business the
22:56:50 public hearing is closed.
22:56:51 I will ask Ms. Mulhern to review the record.
22:56:54 There is no need for additional testimony.
22:56:56 And with that understanding it will just come before
22:56:58 council for a vote.
22:56:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Correct.
22:57:00 Okay.
22:57:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Take T clarify what the clerk said it
22:57:06 will not be at 10:00.
22:57:07 It will be under unfinished business on the agenda.
22:57:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you understand, Mr. Craig?
22:57:16 You have a vote of 3-3.
22:57:18 One member is not here.
22:57:19 She's going to review the tape and next Thursday
22:57:21 morning we will vote again.
22:57:31 If you don't want to come we can let you know how the
22:57:33 vote went.
22:57:36 Mr. David Smith would like to us set a workshop on the
22:57:38 TECO Fra franchise agreement on Thursday, December

22:57:42 13th at 1:30 p.m.
22:57:43 >> So moved.
22:57:52 >> Second.
22:58:02 >> Thursday, 1:30.
22:58:08 >> This franchise issue has been hanging around for
22:58:12 how long?
22:58:16 Any help on this?
22:58:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby will help us.
22:58:21 Mr. Shelby will help us out.
22:58:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if you wish -- on a CRA
22:58:29 night?
22:58:29 I believe do you.
22:58:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: December 13th, we have a
22:58:33 meeting that night?
22:58:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Morning workshop.
22:58:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Next week is December 6th.
22:58:43 It will be sufficient notice to set a workshop if
22:58:46 council wishes on the following week and allow
22:58:48 sufficient notice for the public.
22:58:49 If council wishes to -- I'll make an inquiry on behalf
22:58:53 of the chair to Mr. Smith.
22:58:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bring it back next week?

22:58:58 >>> Yes.
22:58:59 >> Can we defer?
22:59:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena suggested morning.
22:59:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's defer. I would ask Mr. Smith
22:59:12 why we can't wait until January.
22:59:14 This thing has been hanging around two years.
22:59:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Unless you wish to have it put on for
22:59:19 unfinished business next week to set the date.
22:59:21 Or just take it off the agenda.
22:59:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, according to the discussion this
22:59:25 morning, my understanding, we needed to have two
22:59:28 hearings before the first of the year.
22:59:30 That's what I recall.
22:59:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can wiggle that 13th around
22:59:39 to be here.
22:59:42 >> A long day.
22:59:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Not longer than today!
22:59:48 >> We didn't have an afternoon session today.
22:59:50 >> You didn't.
22:59:51 I did.
22:59:52 [ Laughter ]
22:59:54 >> Let's talk about it next week.

22:59:55 >> Let's talk about it Thursday.
22:59:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to receive and file.
23:00:00 >> Second.
23:00:01 (Motion carried)
23:00:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else to come before council?
23:00:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to go home.
23:00:07 >>CHAIRMAN: We stand adjourned.
The preceding 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 file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.