Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


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.


17:03:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The Tampa City Council will now come

17:03:26 to order.

17:03:31 We have roll call.

17:03:37 [Roll Call Taken]

17:03:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

17:03:42 Our first item of business is Item Number 1.

17:03:44 Anyone from the public wish to address City Council on

17:03:46 item one?

17:03:50 The Building and Zoning and Preservation Committee

17:03:52 under Chairman Caetano.

17:03:55 Anyone wish to address?

17:03:58 Okay.

17:04:01 Councilman Caetano, do you want to move that item or

17:04:03 Councilman Miranda?

17:04:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move the resolution Number 1.

17:04:07 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I move the resolution --

17:04:08 [Inaudible]

17:04:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

17:04:12 Seconded by Councilman Miranda.

17:04:16 All in favor signify by saying aye.

17:04:16 Opposed.

17:04:17 Okay.

17:04:20 Now we move to our public hearings.

17:04:24 Items -- let's just open all the public hearings.

17:04:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Chairman, under your orders, under

17:04:28 your watch here, we move to open all the public

17:04:32 hearings set from 5:01 tonight.

17:04:36 Running through the ones at 6:00, Item 14; however, we

17:04:39 do have some that more than likely will be taken out of

17:04:43 order and some that will be dismissed from the hearing

17:04:43 tonight.

17:04:46 >> Mr. Chairman, if you can, if you can just open the

17:04:50 -- the 5:00 hearing, if you can.

17:04:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and -- second.

17:04:54 >> Second.

17:04:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

17:04:59 All those in favor signify by saying aye.

17:05:00 Opposed?

17:05:01 Okay.

17:05:02 Mr. Griffin.

17:05:06 >>STEPHEN GRIFFIN: Good evening, Councilmembers,

17:05:07 Stephen Griffin, Planning Commission staff.

17:05:10 Tonight, Councilmembers, you will be holding your

17:05:12 adoption public hearings for two privately initiated

17:05:15 plan amendments that were part of the March 2010

17:05:17 amendment cycle.

17:05:20 This evening, staff will present the amendment

17:05:24 requests, the findings and the recommendations of the

17:05:25 Planning Commission.

17:05:28 We held two public hearings on these items, the first

17:05:31 one was on July 28, 2010.

17:05:35 The second was August 9, 2010.

17:05:39 After hearing these items and taking public comment,

17:05:42 City Council will vote to adopt or not to adopt each

17:05:45 item separately.

17:05:48 The second and final public hearings for these proposed

17:05:52 amendments is scheduled for August 25, 2010 at 9:30

17:05:52 A.M.

17:05:58 Mr. Tony LaColla will be the presenter for the Planning

17:05:59 Commission on both of the amendments this evening.

17:06:09 I will have him present the first item for you.

17:06:14 >> Good afternoon, Council, Tony LaColla, Planning

17:06:15 Commission staff.

17:06:16 Tonight, I am here to talk about Tampa Comprehensive

17:06:19 Plan Amendment 10-03.

17:06:24 This week, the Planning Commission found the amendment

17:06:27 consistent with the Tampa Comprehensive Plan.

17:06:33 The request is a privately initiated -- it is a

17:06:38 privately initiated small-scale request, .24 acres on

17:06:40 Roland Street and Sterling Avenue near the intersection

17:06:42 of Dale Mabry and Kennedy Boulevard.

17:06:46 The request has been initiated to allow for UMU-60, a

17:06:48 high-density mixed land use.

17:06:52 The current category is an R-20 designation a

17:06:57 medium-density residential land use.

17:07:01 It is a small-scale -- the original proposal was for 75

17:07:01 feet.

17:07:03 The north side of the five parcels.

17:07:06 That was this -- that has been scaled back to just 35

17:07:07 feet.

17:07:10 The applicant scaled that back to reduce the impact on

17:07:14 the neighborhood.

17:07:16 This is the area.

17:07:18 You will see Kennedy Boulevard here.

17:07:20 This is looking from north to south.

17:07:23 Kennedy Boulevard, Dale Mabry Highway, Roland Street

17:07:29 and Sterling Avenue.

17:07:30 These are the parcels that are affected.

17:07:34 You will see a single-family home moving a little bit

17:07:37 to the east there is a vacant parcel.

17:07:41 You will see more vacant parcels and the site looking

17:07:44 from east to west.

17:07:46 This is the south side of Roland.

17:07:48 You will see an apartment building and single-family

17:07:56 homes located south of Roland Street.

17:08:00 The comprehensive plan builds on seven distinct

17:08:02 properties.

17:08:05 Two for this amendment.

17:08:11 The builds upon these strategies as growth is steered

17:08:12 toward appropriate locations.

17:08:15 The amendment is located within a mixed-use corridor

17:08:18 village, which the comprehensive plan describes as one

17:08:21 of those specific location where is we want to focus

17:08:21 growth.

17:08:24 The plan amendment is also focused within the South

17:08:25 Tampa Planning District.

17:08:27 There are several opportunities in this district.

17:08:36 One is maintaining neighborhood stability development

17:08:40 and infill through sustainability and mobility.

17:08:42 Medium-density residential does not fully support the

17:08:46 mixed use development envisioned for the site.

17:08:51 UMU-60 designates areas suitable for multifamily and

17:08:52 Commercial development.

17:08:54 The amendment will allow future consideration of

17:08:58 additional square footage that could be utilized to

17:09:00 maximize mixed use development in the area.

17:09:02 Development will be guided by zoning regulations and

17:09:06 review which will take place once a specific project is

17:09:14 determined.

17:09:16 Here is an area view of the area, Roland Street to the

17:09:20 south, Dale Mabry to the north is Tampa common, the

17:09:23 southernmost terminus of the Westshore business

17:09:24 district.

17:09:26 Notice to the neighborhood association and parcels

17:09:30 within 250 feet have been provided, the neighborhood

17:09:34 association in the area is the Bon Air neighborhood

17:09:37 association, B-A-N-A, BANA.

17:09:41 The R-20 designation, Residential-20, 20 units per

17:09:42 acre.

17:09:46 The area in purple or lavender an urban mixed use-60

17:09:52 designation and areas -- Dale Mabry the community mixed

17:09:55 use and to the north you have residential mixed-use

17:10:00 designation and some Residential-35 in the area as

17:10:00 well.

17:10:04 This is -- once the change takes place, you will see a

17:10:07 small sliver about 35 feet up the north side of those

17:10:08 five parcels will be affected.

17:10:14 That will become a community mixed use -- sorry, Urban

17:10:16 Mixed Use-60 designation.

17:10:19 Agency comments were received from several agencies

17:10:21 throughout the community including the MPO, City of

17:10:24 Tampa, school district of Hillsborough County, the

17:10:26 Environmental Protection Commission, and HART.

17:10:33 There were no objections to this plan amendment from

17:10:36 any of these agencies, the planning issues identified.

17:10:39 Beside the project could have some negative

17:10:42 neighborhood impact; however, there is an R-20

17:10:46 designation which would separate and create a buffer

17:10:49 between the interior of the neighborhood and Kennedy

17:10:50 Boulevard.

17:10:53 This would provide a smooth transition into the

17:10:55 neighborhood and help preserve and enhance the

17:10:58 neighborhood, the proposed amendment is located within

17:11:03 a mixed use corridor village along two major

17:11:06 transportation corridors with adequate facilities and

17:11:08 public transportation.

17:11:11 As I mentioned before, there are strategies identified

17:11:13 in the comprehensive plan.

17:11:16 Each district is unique, and the assets within the

17:11:20 district should be capitalized upon and strengthens.

17:11:24 The south Tampa planning district emphasizes mixed use

17:11:26 villages and corridors that can accommodate additional

17:11:29 Commercial and residential uses as well as provide

17:11:34 additional employment opportunities.

17:11:36 The comprehensive plan calls for redevelopment of major

17:11:40 corridors such as Kennedy Boulevard and Dale Mabry and

17:11:44 mixed use boulevards that are pedestrian friendly and

17:11:46 provide for high-density housing.

17:11:52 The amendment furthers goal 16 of the comprehensive

17:11:52 plan.

17:11:55 It supports the development of transit along that

17:11:58 boulevard.

17:12:01 The plan amendment proposal will help further the

17:12:04 comprehensive plan by promoting higher density infill

17:12:08 development on an underutilized site, thus promoting

17:12:13 compact development.

17:12:14 Scale and character is important to sustaining

17:12:18 communities in Commercial areas such as business

17:12:21 centers by aiding the transition between uses into the

17:12:21 neighborhood.

17:12:25 The land use designation allow for -- allow -- sorry,

17:12:29 the land use designations around the site allow for

17:12:31 adequate and sensitive transition into the

17:12:35 neighborhood.

17:12:40 The Planning Commission found the plan amendment

17:12:45 consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of

17:12:47 the Tampa Comprehensive Plan and we recommend approval.

17:12:48 Thank you very much.

17:12:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

17:13:00 Petitioner.

17:13:03 >> Good evening, my name is Jim Micas.

17:13:08 My office is located at 3716 West Roland right behind

17:13:11 the CVS, the property in question is owned by my

17:13:16 entity, Synexis Land Company.

17:13:20 You may know it more famously as the location where the

17:13:24 fate cafe has been conducted for the last nine years.

17:13:27 I bought -- I bought the property that faces on Kennedy

17:13:34 in 2001 and '02, and then acquired in 2002 and '03 the

17:13:38 lots that are located on Roland, comprising a total

17:13:46 site of 2.1 acres, with 340 feet on Kennedy, 270 feet

17:13:51 deep on Sterling, and 310 feet on Roland.

17:13:57 The purpose for our initial request to -- to move the

17:14:02 UMU-60 line back somewhat into the residential lots

17:14:10 that abut was that the UMU covers 135 feet of depth

17:14:12 along Kennedy.

17:14:16 That presented a problem in terms of building anything

17:14:21 but -- but a project that would have no structured

17:14:23 parking and into multistory.

17:14:28 The intention by -- in working with different comments

17:14:32 that I received from both city planners and the plan

17:14:36 commission is that it would -- we should do something

17:14:40 to maintain at least a buffer with the residential.

17:14:44 So I initially submitted a request that we move the

17:14:51 UMU-60 line approximately -- or a full 75 feet onto the

17:14:55 lots -- the 135-foot-deep lots.

17:14:59 After the first hearing with the plan commission, the

17:15:05 -- I adjusted that 75-foot request to 35 feet so that

17:15:12 the total UMU depth along Kennedy including the 35 feet

17:15:18 that would be added now will allow 170 feet of UMU

17:15:22 leaving 100 feet of RES-20.

17:15:26 It allows us to design something that could have a

17:15:31 parking structure, whether it is one story or -- and

17:15:36 possibly do some multistory along Kennedy.

17:15:41 I believe the -- the recitation by the planning staff

17:15:45 appropriately showed that it does not intrude into the

17:15:47 neighborhood by a significant amount.

17:15:49 There has been -- there has been appropriate

17:15:55 consideration for the -- for the residences to somewhat

17:15:57 prep you.

17:16:00 There have been -- there has been discussion with the

17:16:06 homeowner association that address these issues that

17:16:11 are -- they really are plan commission or City Council

17:16:12 comp plan issues.

17:16:14 They are city zoning issues.

17:16:18 There will be -- I cannot go forward and build a new

17:16:20 project here without complying with your zoning

17:16:24 process, which means either coming back for a PD or

17:16:28 coming back for some form of special use for parking or

17:16:29 something of that nature.

17:16:33 In any event, before we break ground on anything, we

17:16:35 come back to you.

17:16:43 And at that time, you are going to -- the neighborhood

17:16:46 will have an opportunity to ask for certain things.

17:16:52 I have agreed in an E-Mail that has been that the

17:16:55 planning staff has been privy too and I agreed to -- 13

17:16:58 items that I agreed with the neighborhood association

17:17:02 that I would do in -- when we get to the zoning stage.

17:17:05 And that those could be incorporated into whatever

17:17:09 approval the City Council ultimately gives for a PD or

17:17:14 for a special use, including things such as no -- no

17:17:19 access of any Commercial onto Roland.

17:17:22 No on-street parking on Roland.

17:17:26 If we -- if we do do a structured parking, that the

17:17:30 structured parking be camouflaged in a way that it

17:17:32 would blend in with the building, and a lit New Year's

17:17:35 Eve other items that I have absolutely no problem

17:17:38 committing too, but those are to be committed to on the

17:17:42 zoning stage, before I can build anything.

17:17:46 And if -- so our issue is addressed and raised by the

17:17:49 homeowner association, I would ask the opportunity to

17:17:51 address those questions, but I do ask you to respect

17:17:57 what the planning commission has decided, and approve

17:18:00 the request that I have made for 35 feet.

17:18:01 Thank you.

17:18:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

17:18:15 Anyone from the public wish to speak to City Council on

17:18:18 Item 2 of this plan amendment.

17:18:20 Come forward and line up please.

17:18:20 Come forward.

17:18:22 State your name and address.

17:18:27 You have three minutes.

17:18:29 You may come forward, the first speaker.

17:18:36 Just come on down.

17:18:38 >> Good evening, Council.

17:18:39 Welcome new Councilmembers.

17:18:42 My name is Bill.

17:18:51 I reside at 3707 west Cleveland in the area of Bon Air.

17:18:56 At the planning meeting this Monday on the 9th, Mr.

17:19:00 LaColla said, quote, the association had a lot of

17:19:03 issues with the building height.

17:19:06 That is not what we are discussing here today.

17:19:09 It is land use.

17:19:12 It is true, the biggest issue we have is the potential

17:19:15 size of this building.

17:19:19 In looking at -- and if that's the case, I was looking

17:19:26 at the um-60 defined on the Planning Commission's web

17:19:26 site.

17:19:29 This is from the web site and I have it and I will give

17:19:30 it to you.

17:19:33 Chapter 3, structure and growth for livability.

17:19:35 Urban design and land use.

17:19:37 Urban mixed use city form guidelines.

17:19:42 UMU-60 states, building height that generally range

17:19:46 from 4 to 10 stories.

17:19:49 Taller heights are acceptable if supported by contacts

17:19:53 in market.

17:19:56 It seems height is part of what they are proposing for

17:19:59 you all to sign on to tonight.

17:20:03 Therefore, if Council were to approve this land use,

17:20:07 um-60 amendment, could the petitioner present a zoning

17:20:10 site plan with 10-story building for Council?

17:20:14 Could it be approved assuming he met all the other city

17:20:15 regulations.

17:20:18 If the answer is possibly because it is ten stories,

17:20:22 then the answer is, it does have an effect on what we

17:20:25 are doing here month terms of um-60.

17:20:28 We don't -- we want this site developed.

17:20:29 Make no mistake about it.

17:20:31 We have had many meetings.

17:20:33 Not one person I have talked to in the organization

17:20:35 that doesn't want this developed.

17:20:40 It is just not a ten-story building.

17:20:43 Yesterday I provided Council -- I don't know how many

17:20:47 of you may have seen it by now, a documents with tons

17:20:48 of reasons for denial.

17:20:49 I hope you have time to read it.

17:20:52 I would like to put it on the record tonight.

17:20:54 Denial reasons including existing traffic condition

17:20:58 forcing traffic into our neighborhood, piercing a

17:21:01 residential neighborhood, destabilizing what is very

17:21:05 stable at this point in time in terms of a

17:21:05 neighborhood.

17:21:07 If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer

17:21:08 them now.

17:21:11 If not, I would like to put this on the record.

17:21:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, sir.

17:21:14 >> Thank you.

17:21:18 Give it to this gentleman right here.

17:21:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the issue you are referring to is

17:21:21 the height?

17:21:22 >> Yes, sir.

17:21:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Which staff may want to address that

17:21:26 before everybody come up.

17:21:29 I think that before anything is done, pretty much it is

17:21:32 a plan amendment, and it has to come back for rezoning

17:21:37 as I understand, it don't matter.

17:21:39 They have to present a plan, a PD or something before

17:21:41 City Council and it could be denied or whatever.

17:21:42 But go ahead.

17:21:44 Could you speak to --

17:21:46 >> That's correct, any type of changes to the height

17:21:49 amendment will have to come back as a rezoning,

17:21:50 potentially a PD.

17:21:54 Current zoning on the parcel on the north parcel along

17:21:58 Kennedy Boulevard is a cg which is a 45-foot height

17:21:58 limit.

17:22:03 On the R-20, currently an RS-60 which is a 35-foot

17:22:04 height limit.

17:22:07 Those are the current height limits for those

17:22:07 particular parcels.

17:22:10 Anything higher than that will have to come back before

17:22:11 City Council.

17:22:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.

17:22:12 Okay.

17:22:12 Thank you.

17:22:16 Next speaker.

17:22:17 >> Good evening.

17:22:19 I am Martha Jean Lorenzo.

17:22:22 I live at 3612 west Cleveland street, and I have been

17:22:24 there for about 33 years.

17:22:29 I am also a Tampa native, and so I can appreciate all

17:22:34 of you and Planning Commission staff want Tampa to be

17:22:37 as wonderful and great as it can be.

17:22:41 I want to you know Bon Air neighborhood, we are not

17:22:49 against improvements, we are not against developments.

17:22:52 We just don't approve of the mass in density that this

17:22:54 development is going to bring, and of course slowly

17:22:58 start eroding our stable neighborhood.

17:23:01 I have been going over the comprehensive plan, which I

17:23:05 know is -- seems like it is the key here.

17:23:14 And Goal 22 in your policy 22.1 says that the plan

17:23:18 should expect the intrinsic character and assets of

17:23:20 individual neighborhoods.

17:23:23 Not just our neighborhood Bon Air but, of course,

17:23:25 everyone in this city.

17:23:31 It also talks about in policy 1.4 -- about

17:23:33 compatibility.

17:23:37 Some elements affecting compatibility include the

17:23:43 following, height, scale, mass, vocal structures,

17:23:47 pedestrian or vehicular traffic, circulation, access,

17:23:52 and parking impacts, landscaping, lighting, noise, and

17:23:53 architecture.

17:24:00 Compatibility does not mean the same as, rather it

17:24:03 refers to the sensitivity of development proposals and

17:24:12 maintaining the character of that existing area.

17:24:14 Another objective that is appropriate for this issue

17:24:17 objective 16 called neighborhood protection.

17:24:20 The neighborhood is the functional unit of community

17:24:21 development.

17:24:28 There is a need to protect existing neighborhoods and

17:24:30 communities and those that will emerge in the future.

17:24:32 To preserve and protect.

17:24:35 And that is what we are all here for asking you

17:24:36 tonight.

17:24:40 We have spent, I can't tell you, Bon Air has spent

17:24:44 hours and hours and days and weeks trying to be as

17:24:48 objective as we can, because we -- we agree with

17:24:52 development, but we want to you know that we just feel

17:24:56 if you okayed this increase, that we are really going

17:24:58 to be hurt.

17:25:00 Bon Air neighborhood has been around.

17:25:04 It is a small, middle-class group of homes.

17:25:10 We recently have had homes built in the $400,000 to

17:25:12 $600,000 range though.

17:25:15 And that is unusual for a neighborhood, but that is

17:25:18 because we are becoming a prime hot spot to live.

17:25:22 We are close to everything that is -- just seems to be

17:25:24 a little more important in Tampa.

17:25:26 We are close to the airport, schools.

17:25:27 It is just thriving.

17:25:30 We are -- we are enjoying a wonderful life there.

17:25:35 And from what I have been told, once something like

17:25:38 this goes up, you are going to put about 1,000 cars a

17:25:42 day more and trucks coming through our streets.

17:25:44 Now my children are grown and they are gone, but there

17:25:47 are a lot of little children still around there who

17:25:52 want to enjoy -- enjoy having a viable and healthy life

17:25:53 there.

17:25:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

17:25:56 >> So please object, thank you.

17:25:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

17:25:59 Next speaker.

17:26:01 I see this gentleman standing -- are you waiting to

17:26:02 speak, sir?

17:26:03 Okay.

17:26:08 >> My name is Mike House, and I live at 3606 West

17:26:09 Cleveland Street.

17:26:12 I lived in Bon Air for ten years and developed there

17:26:14 and put additions on my home.

17:26:17 One thing I want to ask for everyone from Bon Air who

17:26:24 is opposed to this project, will you please stand up.

17:26:26 These are residents that spent a lot of time and

17:26:28 concern about this project going into our neighborhood.

17:26:33 I have a couple of pictures I want to show you.

17:26:36 This is Kennedy Boulevard and Himes.

17:26:39 This at lunch.

17:26:41 In this neighborhood is bordered by Kennedy and Dale

17:26:44 Mabry and Kennedy and Himes, two of the busiest and

17:26:45 worst intersections in the city.

17:26:48 If you traveled that way, you know what it is like.

17:26:50 A typical example of one of the streets in our

17:26:51 neighborhood in is out in front of my house.

17:26:53 You can see how narrow the streets are.

17:26:57 You park one car on one side and the other, if they are

17:27:00 right next to each other they can't get through.

17:27:02 An example a car on one side and a truck on the other.

17:27:05 The car has to kind of weave through there.

17:27:07 We already have a traffic problem and it is a big deal

17:27:11 for us.

17:27:13 We saw the pretty picture and nice development that

17:27:16 will go on Kennedy that they proposed.

17:27:18 Think of all the cars that will be generated that and

17:27:22 the access to get on to Kennedy Boulevard and on to

17:27:23 Dale Mabry, you can't.

17:27:26 I drove up that way and you can't get on to Kennedy

17:27:29 sometimes, you can't get on to Himes, you can't get

17:27:30 into Dale Mabry.

17:27:31 those cars will filter back through our neighborhoods

17:27:37 and this is one of our major concerns.

17:27:38 This is Himes at noon.

17:27:41 The traffic coming down Himes sometimes pulling out on

17:27:42 Cleveland to get back on to Himes.

17:27:43 Already backed up.

17:27:45 It is already a major traffic problem.

17:27:48 And you are talking about adding hundreds if not new

17:27:54 cars coming in through our neighborhoods as an outlet

17:27:55 throughout area.

17:27:58 And this is my biggest concern in is my daughter.

17:27:59 She is four and a half.

17:28:03 And we are looking for a place to provide a safe

17:28:04 neighborhood for our family.

17:28:06 There are families that are in that neighborhood, and

17:28:08 it is a growing -- you know, growing neighborhood.

17:28:11 The value of our homes could go down, and we are

17:28:13 worried about the -- you know, the safety of our

17:28:14 family.

17:28:15 And just think about it.

17:28:16 You know where you live.

17:28:19 Would you want this project up around the corner from

17:28:21 your house and all these cars coming into your

17:28:22 neighborhood?

17:28:23 I don't think that you would.

17:28:24 Thank you.

17:28:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.

17:28:35 >> Hi, Loretta Fazio, 3604 West Cleveland.

17:28:38 And the main issue here is the allocation of cost and

17:28:41 benefits for this project to our neighborhood, to the

17:28:45 petitioner and to the city.

17:28:48 And the bigger the cost, the most.

17:28:50 We are looking at one variable of traffic.

17:28:53 The bigger the project, the more traffic will be --

17:28:56 will have to bear more costs and have more benefits.

17:28:59 You also have another player, the city.

17:29:02 We again.

17:29:03 Only so shall we can support.

17:29:04 All two-lane roads.

17:29:06 Our roads in front of our streets are very narrow as

17:29:09 Mike just said.

17:29:10 Himes it two lanes.

17:29:12 Sterling is two lanes.

17:29:15 We are not dealing with tons of space to be able to put

17:29:16 extra cars.

17:29:20 So eventually if this is granted, the city will have to

17:29:24 pay the cost of remedying the issue because just

17:29:26 nowhere for the traffic go.

17:29:29 And the main concern is the Sterling and Kennedy where

17:29:33 they will be using this entrance at -- at least at this

17:29:34 point.

17:29:42 We were told there would be a right-turn lane heading

17:29:44 north waiting for funding.

17:29:45 It has been approved.

17:29:47 When that happens there will be a steady stream heading

17:29:51 eastbound on Kennedy.

17:29:55 No breaks for someone to use Sterling to get out to go

17:29:56 eastbound or westbound.

17:29:58 The only way they will go would be through our

17:29:58 neighborhood.

17:30:03 We are asking you again just to consider a fair

17:30:06 proportion of the cost and benefits to all involved.

17:30:08 Thank you for your consideration.

17:30:13 >> Thank you very much, next speaker.

17:30:18 >> Teresa Davis and I live at 3706 west Cleveland

17:30:21 street and I, too, am really concerned about the

17:30:23 traffic and I really ask you to deny this.

17:30:26 One of my big concerns is that the property is for

17:30:27 sale.

17:30:30 And if Council approves this, and the petitioner does

17:30:34 not develop the property prior to selling it, any

17:30:38 agreement that he has between Bon Air and himself would

17:30:42 be null and void and the new developer would not have

17:30:44 to abide by those.

17:30:46 And that is my concern.

17:30:49 Is that he is saying -- he will be willing to work with

17:30:54 the neighborhood; however, if he sells the property,

17:30:56 will the other developer be willing as well to work

17:30:56 with us.

17:31:02 So I just ask you to consider that and to side with our

17:31:02 neighborhood.

17:31:03 Thank you very much.

17:31:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much, ma'am.

17:31:09 Next speaker.

17:31:14 >> My name is Angelo Lorenzo, 3612 West Cleveland

17:31:15 Street.

17:31:18 I have been there since 1976.

17:31:23 And the entire time we have lived that the address, we

17:31:26 have always had problems with people cutting through

17:31:29 our neighborhood trying to avoid the intersection of

17:31:33 Kennedy Boulevard and Dale Mabry, which goes on to this

17:31:33 day.

17:31:37 As my wife stated earlier, our children are grown up,

17:31:40 and this problem is not an issue anymore, except for

17:31:45 the children that are growing up there now.

17:31:47 That does remain a problem.

17:31:51 The -- I -- I, too, am not against the development of

17:31:57 -- of the property that is -- is under discussion, but

17:32:01 I would like to take you back to the -- to the grid map

17:32:05 that Mr. LaColla put down on the overhead projector,

17:32:15 and if you recall, Azeele Street is Commercial from

17:32:19 Dale Mabry to Himes, and Kennedy Boulevard on the north

17:32:20 side of our Bon Air neighborhood is almost completely

17:32:25 Commercial from -- well, Dale Mabry to the bay to

17:32:27 downtown.

17:32:30 Which is -- results in tremendous traffic pressure on

17:32:33 our little residential neighborhood.

17:32:37 What -- what I foresee is -- is a worsening of that

17:32:44 problem unless the -- the development is treated

17:32:46 sensitively and our neighborhood is able to maintain

17:32:56 its single family -- single family spirit, which may --

17:33:00 may be lost over time, but if -- like taking you back

17:33:07 again to Mr. LaColla's grid map, we are squeezed in on

17:33:10 all four sides and it gets more difficult, and any hour

17:33:13 of the day, traffic is terrible there.

17:33:17 So I -- I would like to -- I would like for you all to

17:33:20 take that into consideration when you all make your

17:33:23 final decision about whether this should go on or not.

17:33:23 Thank you.

17:33:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

17:33:25 Thank you.

17:33:29 Next speaker.

17:33:31 >> Good evening.

17:33:34 I am Mary Joe Hathaway, President of the neighborhood

17:33:35 association.

17:33:40 And I live at 3705 West Platt Street, and have for over

17:33:41 53 years.

17:33:44 And I think I am going to stay until the end.

17:33:47 I would like to hand these in for each of you.

17:33:52 It is a petition that was generated --

17:33:52 [Inaudible]

17:33:59 -- that are opposed to this development.

17:34:03 I am going to share a note that I wrote to Mr. Miranda

17:34:07 today.

17:34:10 Get close and I am going to read it so all of you can

17:34:12 have my sentiments.

17:34:16 Again I have been a resident for quite some time and I

17:34:18 will stay there for the rest of my life.

17:34:20 It has been a wonderful area to live in and to raise

17:34:21 our children.

17:34:23 It has been very safe.

17:34:26 We have always had sidewalks.

17:34:28 And this was unusual in Tampa.

17:34:31 And it is close to downtown, grocery stores, the

17:34:34 airport, church, schools and so forth.

17:34:37 We would like it to remain as such and to have the

17:34:43 petitioner/owner/developer not be permitted to possibly

17:34:47 building a ten-plus-story building, which would be

17:34:50 allowed under the new zoning.

17:34:55 Thus, our plea to you is to vote against any land use

17:34:56 request.

17:35:03 The TAC PA 10-03 for the Kennedy Boulevard and Roland

17:35:05 Street properties.

17:35:08 Please note that we do want development there, but not

17:35:11 on a large grand scale.

17:35:14 I assume that you have read the Bon Air request that

17:35:18 was delivered to you and your fellow Councilmembers and

17:35:22 have reviewed the pictures of the heavy traffic problem

17:35:23 in this area.

17:35:27 I hope that there won't be more of an influx of traffic

17:35:30 through our residential streets with a huge building

17:35:31 being constructed.

17:35:37 The only way to stop this is for the Council to vote in

17:35:40 our favor for the save our neighborhood.

17:35:45 I thank all of you for representing us so well, and I

17:35:47 hope that you will vote again in our favor.

17:35:48 Thank you.

17:35:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

17:35:54 >> Good evening, I am Karen crest.

17:35:59 I reside the 153 vive lane in Tampa.

17:36:00 I do not live in Bon Air.

17:36:03 I came here to speak in support of community gardens

17:36:06 tonight, but I felt compelled to come up and I want to

17:36:10 make everyone aware that I am hearing traffic concerns,

17:36:11 traffic concerns, traffic concerns all over again and

17:36:16 there is a Transportation referendum on November 2.

17:36:18 I am involved with the Hillsborough moving forward.

17:36:21 I want people to know there is a potential solution for

17:36:24 traffic and is to vote yes for that penny sales tax to

17:36:27 provide mobility choices such as enhanced bus, light

17:36:28 rail and so forth.

17:36:30 I want people to keep in mind that there is a future

17:36:32 here that involves more than just people driving in

17:36:33 their cars.

17:36:35 Thanks.

17:36:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

17:36:44 Anyone else wish to address Council on item 2?

17:36:46 Any question Council at this point?

17:36:49 Okay, petitioner.

17:36:53 Petitioner, you have five minutes on rebuttal.

17:36:53 >> Thank you.

17:36:57 The issues that have been raised are ultimately zoning

17:36:57 issues.

17:37:00 The commitment that I make is going to be whatever in

17:37:04 the development -- whether it is PD, special use or

17:37:07 whatever, the conditions that the city will place, and

17:37:12 those will be what governs the development.

17:37:17 Doesn't matter if Jim Micas is the owner or George Bush

17:37:20 is the owner of it, those conditions are what you place

17:37:21 at the zoning level.

17:37:24 I have no problem of making certain that there is no

17:37:27 parking on Roland.

17:37:31 That I can't control anyways, that is the city or curb

17:37:32 cuts or whatever.

17:37:36 The height, putting into perspective the -- the request

17:37:41 to change of adding 35 feet to the existing depth of

17:37:48 135 feet means I get -- that would be 170 feet, in that

17:37:52 I can possibly fit a structured parking which might be

17:37:55 one-story or possibly two.

17:37:58 And then a building can be over that.

17:38:02 But the -- the addition -- the addition of the 10,000

17:38:10 square feet of UMU versus RES-20 is about 10,000 square

17:38:12 feet of additional building.

17:38:14 It isn't going to add to the building size.

17:38:19 What it does allow me to do, however, is to fit a

17:38:26 parking structure in 135-foot-deep UMU district on

17:38:26 Kennedy.

17:38:31 You can not fit a parking structure -- the width of a

17:38:35 parking -- back from Kennedy after you provide for a

17:38:36 setback.

17:38:39 You can not fit a parking structure on it.

17:38:43 And that is the primary reason for this additional 35

17:38:44 feet.

17:38:47 Allow something to happen.

17:38:51 The size of the building -- there is -- at -- if -- if

17:38:58 a 2.0 floor-area ratio on what becomes a total size of

17:39:01 about 57,000 square feet of UMU, that's -- that means

17:39:04 the building of maybe 110,000 square feet.

17:39:08 That is not going to be -- even if we went to the max,

17:39:12 and I don't think that we really can get anywhere near

17:39:14 the max based on the size of the parking structure that

17:39:15 might be done.

17:39:19 We are not in any way get up over -- probably not

17:39:22 getting over what the cg four-story limit is.

17:39:25 I am not going to have a problem committing to lower

17:39:26 heights.

17:39:30 I have said to the residents, there would be a height

17:39:31 limitation.

17:39:33 We are not going to get to ten stories.

17:39:36 When we address traffic, you will have a traffic study

17:39:40 if we go through -- your requirements on a PD.

17:39:44 We will -- we will require that a traffic study be

17:39:45 provided.

17:39:48 There was a reference to a development plan.

17:39:53 We -- we sent some renderings because the homeowner

17:39:55 association asked what could be developed, and so we

17:39:59 did a rendering of the maximum development that could

17:40:00 be possibly put on it.

17:40:03 That is not even -- that is not proposed.

17:40:07 Has not been submitted to the city, and that with the

17:40:11 reduction from 75 feet to 35 feet has to be at least

17:40:15 half the size of what was proposed on that.

17:40:18 So there really is no development plan.

17:40:19 I haven't come up with that.

17:40:22 Now I have to go back to the drawing board with a 35

17:40:25 foot versus a 75 foot number.

17:40:28 So no suggestion that I have -- that I have a

17:40:31 particular development planned absolutely in mind.

17:40:36 The concept also on compatibility.

17:40:41 You have to remember that I look -- my site looks out

17:40:44 across the street across Kennedy at a 11-story

17:40:47 high-rise and a 8-story parking structure.

17:40:52 So the compatibility issue one of transition.

17:40:54 My property becomes the transition to the residential

17:40:54 neighborhood.

17:40:58 An appropriate use of the front portion of the property

17:41:02 in accordance with the UMU-60 would be appropriate.

17:41:05 The planning staff also a found that.

17:41:07 An additional 35 feet is not going to create a

17:41:10 dramatically different building than -- than we can do

17:41:11 at this time.

17:41:14 But it does permit a structured parking.

17:41:25 Thank you.

17:41:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilmember Miranda.

17:41:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to speak to the

17:41:34 planning commission.

17:41:39 In the UMU-60, what else as he as a petitioner or him

17:41:44 or anyone else could have put there for consideration

17:41:46 by you good folks for lesser height.

17:41:49 In other words, can you -- can you tell us what other

17:41:52 zonings could have been available there, not zonings,

17:41:56 but for the future map, sale of land use comprehensive

17:42:00 plan that would have fit in for a buffer between the

17:42:04 north side and the south side of -- of Kennedy.

17:42:09 I believe he -- if I remember, that is the old church.

17:42:13 That is the old paint shop that sold paint.

17:42:17 The olden place that sold cloth for -- to make things

17:42:19 and so forth and so on.

17:42:21 If you want a curtain or so forth.

17:42:23 >> Are you speaking to just the 35 feet?

17:42:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am speaking on the whole thing in

17:42:26 general.

17:42:28 I don't want to focus on 35 feet.

17:42:31 There is a lot more than just 35 feet.

17:42:33 >> Another possible land use could have been community

17:42:35 mixed use-35.

17:42:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Which would have been what in

17:42:39 difference?

17:42:42 >> I don't have the F.A.R. numbers off the top of my

17:42:43 head.

17:42:48 I believe the F.A.R. for that is 2.0.

17:42:50 Do you have that?

17:42:54 Staff is going to take a look and see what the

17:42:57 comprehensive plan says.

17:42:59 The neighborhood association did ask that within that

17:43:03 buffer could you do some other type of land use.

17:43:06 Say you have the UMU-60 on the lots that border Kennedy

17:43:07 Boulevard.

17:43:14 You have maybe a CMU-35 in that 35-foot parcel -- the

17:43:18 five parcels and keep the R-20.

17:43:19 Planning Commission recommended against that because

17:43:22 you get this mismatch of different land uses and you

17:43:24 get a weird mix.

17:43:27 You want to try to keep as much consistency as possible

17:43:31 on the land use map.

17:43:36 Community Mixed Use-35 includes an F.A.R. of 1.0 but

17:43:39 with performance standards met, you can get up to a

17:43:41 2.0.

17:43:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This one is now 2 point what?

17:43:48 >> The max would be -- let me take a look to verify.

17:43:52 Urban Mixed Use-60 is 2.0 if -- performance standards

17:43:56 are met, you can possibly get to 3.25, but pretty

17:44:02 stringent.

17:44:08 CMU-35 urban use F.A.R.

17:44:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can understand the frustration of

17:44:15 what was said by the eight speakers about the traffic

17:44:15 problem.

17:44:20 You go from Himes, which is four lanes to the north of

17:44:21 Kennedy.

17:44:24 When you cross Kennedy becomes a two lane.

17:44:27 And then meanders all the way around.

17:44:32 You end up somewhere in plant high school and it

17:44:38 dead-ends and you got to go left and play football, one

17:44:39 of the two.

17:44:39 >> Correct.

17:44:41 Despite that fact, the current land use for the area

17:44:46 along Kennedy Boulevard is UMU-60, so a project could

17:44:49 be built there, and any project that does go there

17:44:51 could affect the neighborhood.

17:44:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any project that would be there

17:44:57 would have to carry their own ingress and egress,

17:45:01 mostly, I guess -- I don't know how but into Kennedy.

17:45:04 Is this the way it is focused into Kennedy?

17:45:05 Or left only?

17:45:08 >> Currently, it is focused on to Kennedy Boulevard,

17:45:11 and I believe the applicant has stated to the

17:45:13 association that he would maintain that.

17:45:17 There would be no ingress or egress from Roland Street

17:45:19 or Sterling.

17:45:21 Sterling perhaps.

17:45:24 >> Sterling already had Commercial access --

17:45:25 [Inaudible]

17:45:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Chairman.

17:45:29 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a question.

17:45:31 If the petitioner didn't come in with a rezoning.

17:45:32 What could he put there now.

17:45:33 Without a rezoning.

17:45:35 >> Without a rezoning?

17:45:38 The maximum height limit right now 45 feet, the parcels

17:45:40 along Kennedy Boulevard.

17:45:45 The five parcels on the south, the maximum is 35 feet.

17:45:48 He could do a smaller project perhaps.

17:45:51 He wouldn't have room to put in the parking facility,

17:45:53 the parking garage.

17:45:56 >>GWEN MILLER: So why is he rezoning, to put the

17:45:58 parking garage there?

17:46:00 Is that the purpose of the rezoning?

17:46:01 >> It could be.

17:46:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

17:46:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other question by Council?

17:46:08 Councilwoman Mulhern.

17:46:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I am sorry.

17:46:13 I walked in at the tail end of your presentation.

17:46:17 Is the petitioner -- I don't know if this is a question

17:46:25 for you or for Tony, but the black outlined area is,

17:46:29 what we are asking to rezone?

17:46:32 Or I mean to give the new land use or is it all --

17:46:34 everything along Kennedy?

17:46:36 >> Only the outlined areas.

17:46:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Only the outlined area.

17:46:39 Okay.

17:46:41 My question for you is -- and you probably already said

17:46:43 this and I am sorry.

17:46:46 But do you own the property on Kennedy and the property

17:46:49 on Roland?

17:46:54 >> Yes, ma'am, it is a two-acre -- a 2.1-acre --

17:46:55 >>MARY MULHERN: So you own the --

17:46:57 >> The whole lot.

17:46:59 Not quite, almost a --

17:47:02 >>MARY MULHERN: So everything -- it is CVS, right?

17:47:05 >> Everything but the CVS, correct.

17:47:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Everything east of the CVS is yours?

17:47:09 >> Yes, ma'am.

17:47:12 >>MARY MULHERN: One existing house?

17:47:16 >> Correct, one existing house.

17:47:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?

17:47:24 Councilwoman Capin.

17:47:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

17:47:29 Now you stated there is Commercial exit from parking on

17:47:32 to Sterling now.

17:47:35 >> Yes, on the -- on the east side of Sterling directly

17:47:39 facing the property, there are two curb cuts from the

17:47:44 shopping center that is there on to Sterling.

17:47:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: On the east side.

17:47:49 Yeah, I remember -- I know which one that is.

17:47:51 One of my other questions is this.

17:47:55 I understand where Himes goes from four lane to two

17:47:58 lane, back in there, I know the area very, very well.

17:48:05 Also, on the north side of Dale Mabry, you have a very

17:48:10 large Commercial parcel, and it is residential between

17:48:14 Sterling and Himes.

17:48:14 >> Yes, ma'am.

17:48:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I have driven in there.

17:48:21 It's -- they only -- there is one access to Sterling

17:48:27 from that shopping center on the north side.

17:48:30 >> There is one -- there is one that has -- has -- has

17:48:36 a northbound entrance, but there is also entrances --

17:48:39 two entrances off for the -- for the option structure

17:48:43 and its parking structure that do not cross the median.

17:48:46 There is a median cut allowing you to go north on

17:48:48 Sterling and get into the Office Depot and Ruby

17:48:52 Tuesday's.

17:48:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Right.

17:48:58 And this is residential.

17:49:03 My other question was on -- the property.

17:49:04 The sale of the property.

17:49:09 Where -- you are stating until the re-- until you come

17:49:16 to rezoning that the point, the 35 feet that you are

17:49:16 proposing --

17:49:18 >> Yes, ma'am.

17:49:20 >> -- the limit, right?

17:49:22 Is that what we are --

17:49:26 >> The height limit on the -- on the 35 feet.

17:49:31 I have stated in -- in writing to the homeowner

17:49:34 association that would not be more than 35 feet;

17:49:38 however, even the zoning on it would not permit more

17:49:39 than 35 feet.

17:49:44 You would have to approve a change of over 35 feet.

17:49:47 Just like on Kennedy, you would have to approve a

17:49:51 change over 45 feet.

17:49:54 I don't really see how a building is going to be over

17:49:57 45 feet, but I can't calculate that right now, but I --

17:49:59 that is something you are going to ask me for a

17:50:02 limitation when I come back to you on the zoning side.

17:50:06 But right now, I can't come forward -- if you approve

17:50:11 this, I am still subject to the GC limitation of the 45

17:50:12 feet.

17:50:16 So I -- you are in control of the next step.

17:50:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understand.

17:50:23 So the property being for sale, this --

17:50:26 >> For sale and for lease.

17:50:28 I am open to many --

17:50:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Of course with the property.

17:50:31 >> Yes, ma'am.

17:50:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Right?

17:50:34 >> Whatever you approve, whoever would either be a

17:50:38 tenant of it or an owner of that would be subject to

17:50:39 the same --

17:50:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No exits on Roland would be per --

17:50:45 thank you, Julia.

17:50:49 >>JULIA COLE: Julia Cole, City of Tampa Legal

17:50:50 Department.

17:50:52 I think I need to make clear what has been discussed

17:50:54 about conditions between the neighborhood association

17:50:56 and petitioner.

17:50:59 You are in the comprehensive plan review process.

17:51:03 And you are looking at whether or not changing the land

17:51:07 use classification is appropriate with the parameters

17:51:09 that have been discussed and those are parameters that

17:51:15 would be considered if a zoning fades, but, be aware it

17:51:18 would not be appropriate to condition a land use map

17:51:18 amendment.

17:51:21 Just so I can explain that a little bit more, because I

17:51:25 feel this may come up again tonight, I don't have to

17:51:26 repeat myself.

17:51:29 There is no opportunity to either one of these

17:51:33 processes -- throughout land use process to condition.

17:51:35 There has been in the past a situation that came up

17:51:38 where we actually did place some conditions in the body

17:51:41 of an ordinance of a land use classification change,

17:51:45 matter of class face change and DCA filed a challenge

17:51:46 on that issue.

17:51:49 So I will say the one time we thought it was

17:51:50 appropriate, we tried it.

17:51:52 I recommend that we do it.

17:51:54 It wasn't the only reason they challenged us, because

17:51:58 it did become a part of that DCA challenge, and result

17:52:03 of that, my best legal advice to you is to not place

17:52:06 conditions on land use map amendments.

17:52:09 So the discussions that were had between the petitioner

17:52:11 and the residents, those are discussions between them.

17:52:13 There is nothing at this point through the process in

17:52:16 front of you that the city would have any opportunity

17:52:17 to enforce.

17:52:19 Thank you.

17:52:19 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

17:52:20 You have cleared that up for me.

17:52:23 That is exactly where I was wanting to head to.

17:52:27 Thank you very much.

17:52:29 >> I did want to mention this is also subject to the

17:52:32 Westshore overlay, the conditions you have now placed

17:52:35 recently with the Westshore overlay.

17:52:37 So we are subject to that as well in terms of how the

17:52:38 parking and whatever.

17:52:42 Okay.

17:52:44 Not on Roland, on Kennedy.

17:52:47 Any development on Kennedy is subject to the Westshore.

17:52:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern and Councilman

17:52:51 Stokes.

17:52:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

17:52:57 Originally -- I got these older -- the -- you -- you

17:53:07 had actually proposed a larger area, the 75 feet.

17:53:08 >> Yes, ma'am.

17:53:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Was there a point where you were

17:53:12 asking for a land use change that would have gone all

17:53:16 the way to Roland Street?

17:53:17 >> No, ma'am.

17:53:20 >>MARY MULHERN: About half of the lot at that point?

17:53:23 >> The Kennedy lots are 135 and the Roland lots are

17:53:24 135.

17:53:26 It would leave a 60-foot residential.

17:53:32 Now with the reduction, it now leaves a 100-foot size

17:53:34 which is basically the same size as the lots in carver

17:53:36 city, for example.

17:53:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah.

17:53:41 I guess -- so what is going to be left there, that --

17:53:45 what is the development potential for that.

17:53:49 What can go in the area on Roland Street if you were to

17:53:54 get this land use change.

17:53:56 >> At present until you approve something different, it

17:54:04 is exactly what you have right now you have RES-20 land

17:54:08 use and R-60 zoning.

17:54:12 I have to get your approval for anything different.

17:54:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand that.

17:54:14 But you own the land so --

17:54:16 >> What can --

17:54:18 >>MARY MULHERN: An idea --

17:54:21 >> I am reconsidering after the adjustment down from 75

17:54:24 to 35, and I am working on potential.

17:54:28 The suggestion -- you could even keep the existing

17:54:30 buildings and renovate the existing buildings and that

17:54:32 would be the use of that whole parcel.

17:54:34 There may be no buildings.

17:54:37 And, again, I don't want to condition, try to place

17:54:38 conditions on it.

17:54:41 But some of the suggestions is there be no structure

17:54:41 there.

17:54:45 >>MARY MULHERN: You are not answering my question.

17:54:49 I guess you don't feel that you need to, but when I

17:54:52 look at this, I look at -- so this is really a question

17:54:59 for either the Planning Commission or for our land use

17:55:02 people, we are taking.

17:55:06 You are asking to take this little ribbon of land use

17:55:15 change leaving a remainder that can't Raleigh have any

17:55:23 use with this existing land use as residential.

17:55:28 >> A 100-foot lot similar to lots I own on main street

17:55:31 and carver city, 100 feet deep.

17:55:33 >>MARY MULHERN: It won't be after you build --

17:55:35 >>, It will be.

17:55:37 It is a 135-foot-deep lot.

17:55:41 35 would now be added to the UMU, but 100 would be left

17:55:45 in the RES-20.

17:55:46 100 feet of depth.

17:55:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay this is my question for you

17:55:52 because when you look at the pattern of this

17:55:59 residential uses in the neighborhood, they are all

17:56:01 along Kennedy 135-foot lots.

17:56:04 I don't know if the ones on Roland are -- how deep are

17:56:05 those?

17:56:07 >> Those are 135-foot lots as well.

17:56:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

17:56:16 So we are -- I just think it is unusual that you would

17:56:17 -- you know.

17:56:21 >> On the remaining 100 feet, the designation would

17:56:22 remain Residential-20.

17:56:25 So you could build single-family homes or attached

17:56:32 homes on those properties if there is land available.

17:56:34 That puts a potential.

17:56:36 >> I am just wondering if you consider that still

17:56:45 compatible even looking at the lots across Sterling.

17:56:48 They are all 135 foot.

17:56:49 >> It could be compatible.

17:56:53 You will see in old Hyde Park village.

17:56:55 On one side you have town houses, behind the town

17:56:57 houses you have -- you have an apartment complex with

17:57:01 -- now condo complex with parking garage.

17:57:04 So that could be a use that goes there.

17:57:07 Town houses or single-family homes.

17:57:10 >>MARY MULHERN: That is anticipating another -- at

17:57:13 least zoning change because it wouldn't be single

17:57:15 family, right?

17:57:16 >> It could be single family.

17:57:19 It could be under the current land use.

17:57:22 That is a potential -- I am not saying that is what is

17:57:24 going to happen.

17:57:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Stokes.

17:57:30 >>CURTIS STOKES: Councilwoman Mulhern had the same

17:57:31 question about the remaining lots.

17:57:37 If we grant this remaining lots to be available

17:57:37 afterwards.

17:57:39 I'm looking on the south side.

17:57:43 Are those single family on the south side of Roland?

17:57:45 >> There is -- on the south side of Roland, working

17:57:48 from east to west, there is a single family and then

17:57:54 two lots of -- of apartments -- four apartments on two

17:57:58 lots and then three single family -- or four single

17:58:02 family homes and then my office which is Commercial

17:58:09 zoned and then the jiffy lube.

17:58:13 >> So the remaining five lots left on Roland will be

17:58:14 still compatible for a residential development at that

17:58:18 point?

17:58:20 If this is granted.

17:58:20 >> Yes, 100 feet.

17:58:24 The same size -- for example, as I keep saying carver

17:58:27 city is 100-foot-deep lots.

17:58:31 I use that as an example that you can reference.

17:58:32 >>CURTIS STOKES: All right, thank you.

17:58:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions from Council?

17:58:36 All right.

17:58:39 What is the pleasure of the Council?

17:58:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

17:58:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A second.

17:58:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

17:58:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

17:58:46 All in favor signify by saying aye.

17:58:47 Opposed?

17:58:49 What is the pleasure of the Council?

17:58:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, let me just say this

17:58:51 if I may.

17:58:53 If you look at Dale Mabry, and it has not been

17:58:56 discussed by either side, either the Planning

17:58:59 Commission or the neighborhood or the petitioner.

17:59:02 Dale Mabry a few years back from I think Cleveland to

17:59:10 Kennedy received an extra lane but it still backs up.

17:59:13 What happens when it backs up people make a right-hand

17:59:15 turn on Cleveland and a left on Sterling and then make

17:59:18 a right to Himes or further east.

17:59:24 I am confessing.

17:59:25 [Laughter]

17:59:26 >> So have I.

17:59:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Two out of five.

17:59:29 [Laughter]

17:59:39 So what I am saying is these are the things that I

17:59:40 remember most.

17:59:41 I understand the petitioner's plight.

17:59:45 I understand the 45-foot height on Kennedy and 35-foot

17:59:46 height on that.

17:59:49 And what he wants to do is extend further back that

17:59:53 zoning that he has now, 35 feet leaving the 100-foot

18:00:00 lots in the back for residential.

18:00:03 It is -- I am going it sit here for a second and gather

18:00:05 my thoughts and I thought I brought that up about Dale

18:00:09 Mabry and I will listen to other Councilmembers at this

18:00:10 time.

18:00:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What is the pleasure of the Council?

18:00:14 >>CURTIS STOKES: Chairman Scott, I am going to move

18:00:17 that we deny this request based on what we heard from

18:00:19 the neighborhood -- the neighborhoods.

18:00:23 The like the Councilman Miranda, I, too, like to

18:00:25 confess what I am going to --

18:00:25 [ Laughter ]

18:00:30 -- Mr. Lorenzo, the guy who drives through your

18:00:34 neighborhood making a left on Sterling as I make my way

18:00:36 down south Dale Mabry.

18:00:40 I think the traffic on that street will be too -- too

18:00:48 much if we allow the extra building of that size or

18:00:50 magnitude to be put there.

18:00:54 Right now around -- right now traffic backs up.

18:00:58 There is no way to get to south Dale Mabry from coming

18:01:05 -- I guess going that way on Kennedy.

18:01:06 Makes it just impossible to do that.

18:01:13 So I am going to have a motion to deny this request.

18:01:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman.

18:01:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I will second that motion and would

18:01:27 cite some places in the comprehensive plan.

18:01:30 Which was so kindly provided to us.

18:01:33 Policy 1.4 talks about compatibility of different uses

18:01:35 and activities.

18:01:40 And I just think that the fact of needing to make this

18:01:43 land use change -- change indicates that we are talking

18:01:45 about something that is not compatibility with the

18:01:55 current neighborhood, and we heard from a lot of the

18:01:57 neighbors and people who live in Bon Air for a long

18:01:59 time and young people who are raising children there,

18:02:03 and they don't feel this is compatible and they already

18:02:11 have problems with the intensity from existing land use

18:02:13 categories that have allowed the building to start to

18:02:20 encroach into their neighborhood and cause that

18:02:20 traffic.

18:02:26 I would also say -- policy 16.2, gradual transitions of

18:02:27 intensive uses.

18:02:30 I want to say this because this comes up a lot here

18:02:35 with this idea that we want which I very much support

18:02:42 that we need to get away from suburban land use and

18:02:45 zoning in the City of Tampa and move toward more urban

18:02:46 density.

18:02:48 But when we talk about transitions.

18:02:52 A transition is a slope.

18:02:53 It is a transition.

18:02:57 It is not going from a 10 foot or a six foot or an

18:03:02 8-foot building to tower over one-story back yard.

18:03:07 And if you look at bigger cities that do have the kind

18:03:11 of density and more mixed use and more multifamily

18:03:14 housing.

18:03:19 We are talking about, you know, big streets that have

18:03:21 maybe four-story buildings on them.

18:03:24 And then there is residential on the next block behind

18:03:24 them.

18:03:29 So your back yard may face up to a parking lot or a

18:03:33 garage for a department store or a hardware store or

18:03:34 something if you are in Chicago or if you are in New

18:03:37 York or anywhere else, you know, bigger cities that

18:03:43 have more -- that were built in the beginning with more

18:03:45 density in their housing area.

18:03:48 So when we are talking about making these changes and

18:03:52 transit-oriented development, transitions need to be

18:03:58 gradual, so I think this is not the answer.

18:04:02 And I think that Karen Crest came and talked about our

18:04:08 hopes we will have for rail, light rail, which, which

18:04:12 we all share here, but even when we do, that doesn't

18:04:16 mean that you have to go from, you know,

18:04:20 1,000-square-foot house -- single-story house to having

18:04:27 a 10-foot or an -- sorry, 10-story or 8-foot office

18:04:27 building.

18:04:30 For those two reasons and I am sure other things in the

18:04:32 comp plan, I am seconding --

18:04:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A motion by Councilman Stokes.

18:04:38 A second by Councilwoman Mulhern to deny.

18:04:41 All in favor signify by saying aye.

18:04:43 Opposed?

18:04:46 >> Motion carries unanimously.

18:04:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

18:04:54 [Applause]

18:05:01 Item 3.

18:05:13 >> Good afternoon, City Council, Tony LaColla, Planning

18:05:14 Commission staff again.

18:05:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Excuse me, as you all exit, please

18:05:18 hold your conversation down.

18:05:19 We are still in session.

18:05:20 Thank you very much.

18:05:22 >> Tonight I am here to present to you Tampa

18:05:27 Comprehensive Plan amendment number 10-04 for 906 and

18:05:29 919 south Orleans avenue.

18:05:31 The Planning Commission found this amendment consistent

18:05:38 with the Tampa Comprehensive Plan.

18:05:42 This is a privately initiated request on .99 acres

18:05:45 located near Bayshore Boulevard on the corner of South

18:05:47 Orleans Avenue and West Morrison Avenue.

18:05:48 The request has been initiated to allow for

18:05:50 redevelopment of a school site.

18:05:55 The current category of RES-10 which is a medium

18:05:58 density residential does not promote adequate

18:06:00 redevelopment of the site.

18:06:03 Two parcels again, small-scale plan amendment.

18:06:08 It is going from a Residential-10 to a public, semi

18:06:09 public land use category.

18:06:14 This is the plan amendment site and the two parcels.

18:06:17 St. Johns Episcopal church and day school and to the

18:06:23 south, single family residential home.

18:06:26 Residential neighborhood, typical two to three-story

18:06:26 home.

18:06:29 Many of the homes go about the 35-foot height limit.

18:06:34 You will see homes that are 35, 36, 37 feet.

18:06:36 You also are some larger towers.

18:06:45 The Seville, a 7 or 8 story condominium community.

18:06:48 This is street view level -- street level view.

18:06:50 St. John's church.

18:06:52 Moving further south you have the day school, the

18:06:54 southern end of the day school and then the single

18:07:01 family home on that second parcel.

18:07:06 The rear of the single-family home and the rear of the

18:07:07 day school.

18:07:11 The comprehensive plan builds upon seven strategies,

18:07:13 three distinct to this amendment, planning districts,

18:07:15 neighborhood, and economic prosperity.

18:07:18 The Growth Management solution invested within the plan

18:07:22 builds upon these strategies of growth and

18:07:24 redevelopment and steered toward appropriate

18:07:25 recommendations.

18:07:28 This is located in the Hyde Park neighborhood which is

18:07:30 considered a urban village, one of our Growth

18:07:32 Management strategies.

18:07:34 This is the central Tampa planning district.

18:07:36 There are several opportunities in this district.

18:07:41 One includes adequate mobility, ability to attract

18:07:43 private investment, the district's historical

18:07:47 character, infrastructure to support redevelopment, and

18:07:49 stable single-family neighborhoods that enhance the

18:07:51 district's housing choices.

18:07:54 This is the CPA site here.

18:08:00 You will see on the map.

18:08:03 The effect of the amendment, public semi public

18:08:06 provides for government buildings, public and private

18:08:09 schools, community centers, airports, public parking

18:08:11 structures and Transportation and utility facilities.

18:08:14 Will not allow for residential or Commercial

18:08:14 development.

18:08:17 The amendment would allow future consideration of

18:08:20 additional square footage on that particular site for

18:08:26 the school and for the church.

18:08:29 Public semi public is not uncommon in the City of Tampa

18:08:34 for public and private schools.

18:08:38 We have five other schools with Jesuit, Tampa Catholic,

18:08:42 sacred heart, villa Madonna and outside of the central

18:08:45 Tampa district, academy of holy names with the same

18:08:48 land use designation.

18:08:52 You can seat site here on an aerial view outlined in

18:08:54 the magenta color.

18:08:56 To the south is bayshore boulevard.

18:09:00 You have mainly single-family homes in the area and you

18:09:03 have old Hyde Park village to the upper left-hand

18:09:07 corner there.

18:09:10 This is land use for that particular area.

18:09:12 You will notice this area is all Residential-10 which

18:09:15 is the low density.

18:09:17 We have some areas with Residential-20, and close by

18:09:20 there is one -- not on the map but Residential-35.

18:09:25 The old Hyde Park village which is Community Mixed

18:09:25 Use-35.

18:09:28 This is the area where the proposed land use change

18:09:38 which would change to public-semi public.

18:09:42 Planning issues identified no maximum far or density

18:09:45 defined in this category; however, zoning regulations

18:09:49 and historic district guidelines do provide the

18:09:51 controls as it relates to the scale, mapping, setbacks

18:09:57 and height of the redevelopment project.

18:09:58 Agency comments were received from a variety of

18:09:59 different agencies.

18:10:03 The MPO, City of Tampa school district, EPC and HART.

18:10:06 The City of Tampa did have concerns over the lack of

18:10:13 far for this particular land use designation.

18:10:16 All the other agencies have no concern.

18:10:19 As stated before, there are three strategies which are

18:10:21 relevant to the Growth Management solution.

18:10:23 The planning district strengthening neighborhoods and

18:10:25 growing economic prosperity.

18:10:28 The proposed amount would help maintain a mixed use

18:10:31 urban pattern while enhancing the neighborhood and

18:10:37 meeting the needs of all ages including children.

18:10:41 Goals, objectives, policies which relate to this plan

18:10:41 amount.

18:10:43 Goal 16, urban villages.

18:10:48 Urban villages are livable communities contain a mix of

18:10:50 uses including school with development integrated and

18:10:52 in scale with the surrounding community.

18:10:55 This amendment site is within a historic urban

18:10:59 neighborhood in an urban village.

18:11:06 Policy 13.8, policy 15.1.5 talk about design review.

18:11:09 Well, the proposed land use category has no specified

18:11:15 maximum density, the parcels are located within Hyde

18:11:18 Park historic district with a secondary development

18:11:22 plan with strict design guidelines, the all-new

18:11:24 development and redevelopment achieve proper form and

18:11:27 function, the architectural review commission in the

18:11:31 City of Tampa will review any future projects to make

18:11:34 sure it is oriented and integrated and in scale with

18:11:35 the surrounding community.

18:11:39 Again design review policy 18.2, the local architecture

18:11:42 review commission oversees the design and development

18:11:43 of any redevelopment project and will ensure the

18:11:46 redevelopment on these parcels contain sensitive

18:11:52 designed site planning, including appropriate building

18:11:53 mappings.

18:11:56 Historic preservation is taken into consideration, and

18:11:57 any new development in Hyde Park.

18:12:01 Existing local Land Development regulations and

18:12:03 guidelines again protect the neighborhood against

18:12:06 development that could adversely affect historic

18:12:12 character of the area and neighboring structures.

18:12:18 Policies 22.17, objective 24.6, support of schools and

18:12:18 children.

18:12:21 The comprehensive plan calls for support of schools and

18:12:27 children by modernizing a 1950s school facility.

18:12:30 You will achieve that goal.

18:12:34 The Planning Commission found plan amendment TAC TAC

18:12:42 PA10-04 consistent with the comprehensive plan from a

18:12:47 low residential to public/semi-public.

18:12:48 That concludes my presentation.

18:12:49 Thank you.

18:12:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?

18:13:39 Petitioner.

18:13:41 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Councilmembers.

18:13:45 Mark Bentley, Tampa, representing St. John's church and

18:13:47 Episcopal Day School.

18:13:51 Before I get started -- actually before you start the

18:13:54 meter running on me, I would like to set up a couple of

18:13:56 graphics and handouts and like the Clerk to receive and

18:14:23 final some documents.

18:14:26 >> Good evening, Commissioner were Frank Capitano,

18:14:31 2929 West Knight, Tampa, Florida.

18:14:37 I am in my fifth year as trustee for the Episcopal

18:14:38 School Board and fourth year as the facilities

18:14:40 committee.

18:14:42 I have been working as co-committee over the past two

18:14:46 years and I am a proud parent of three boys that attend

18:14:47 St. John's.

18:14:51 St. John's church and day school is a thriving

18:14:55 Episcopal institution nestled in the heart of Hyde Park

18:14:56 district.

18:14:59 We are very much been a part of this community and

18:15:00 neighborhood.

18:15:02 Our parish day school located at south Orleans since

18:15:06 its inception will be celebrating its 60th anniversary

18:15:06 this year.

18:15:09 This campus today houses our lower divisions which are

18:15:10 grades 1-4.

18:15:15 More impressively, St. John's Episcopal church will be

18:15:19 celebrating its 100th anniversary in 2012 at the same

18:15:21 location.

18:15:23 To accommodate our school's growth over the last

18:15:26 several decades, we added two other campuses.

18:15:31 Pre-K and kindergarten located at 1002 Rome and middle

18:15:35 school division for grades 5-8 moved to 204 Plant

18:15:37 Avenue in 2001.

18:15:44 St. Johns mission is to provide students in K-8 with

18:15:49 superior education that have children in a secure

18:15:52 Christian environment for life-long spiritual growth.

18:15:55 These are not words just spoken.

18:15:59 We believe, we live and advance our mission.

18:16:02 We are proud of our accomplishments and successes,

18:16:05 National, state and regional awards.

18:16:11 Just last year our 3rd grade tied in the nation for the

18:16:12 world master challenge.

18:16:16 Proud of our reach traditions and histories and being a

18:16:17 south Tampa school.

18:16:19 However the fact is we live in a competitive

18:16:19 environment.

18:16:23 To remain best in class and true to our commitment over

18:16:24 the long term, it has become necessary to address

18:16:26 various issues with our facility.

18:16:30 While working on our long-term strategic plan with our

18:16:33 accreditation, we identified that our property

18:16:36 possesses challenges and limits our ability for our

18:16:37 mission moving forward.

18:16:39 We are respectfully here tonight to seek your

18:16:40 recommendation for approval.

18:16:44 We hope to have your support that we may continue to

18:16:45 serve our community, our parishioners and students

18:16:48 while still being a good neighbor.

18:16:54 Thank you.

18:16:55 >> Mark Bentley.

18:16:58 I know you all have a long night so I will just get to

18:16:59 the heart of the matter here.

18:17:03 And in any event, as Frank mentioned, the 100th

18:17:04 anniversary next year for the church.

18:17:07 And it will be 60 for the school.

18:17:09 And over time, they have done great job of maintaining

18:17:13 the facility, okay, but it has become functionally

18:17:17 obsolete and needs significant renovations.

18:17:21 For example, the -- the parish hall.

18:17:25 They use one room for a grieving room, bridal room, and

18:17:28 a meeting room, and likewise, Frank mentioned, like

18:17:31 coming into the 20th century and being competitive,

18:17:34 what the school wants to do here basically is have

18:17:38 computer labs, media center, science labs, and I will

18:17:40 show you in a second the outdoor facility is on the top

18:17:41 of a roof.

18:17:44 That is something you probably see in downtown

18:17:45 Manhattan.

18:17:47 But not the City of Tampa.

18:17:52 Tony LaColla did an excellent job in that staff report.

18:17:56 18 pages long and he covered all the issues and all the

18:17:59 smoke cleared he came up with the finding or staff that

18:18:01 the plan amendment was consistent with all the goals,

18:18:04 policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan.

18:18:06 Likewise the Planning Commission after lengthy

18:18:09 discussion unanimously recommended Tampa City Council

18:18:13 by resolution that it, likewise, approved the plan

18:18:13 amendment.

18:18:17 So kind of a positive streak going right now.

18:18:19 So -- let me just show you a couple of things related

18:18:25 to the school.

18:18:26 Here is the church.

18:18:29 It is designated as a contributing structure in the

18:18:30 Hyde Park historic district.

18:18:33 The one that has been there 100 years.

18:18:35 Actually there was a church before.

18:18:36 It was called church by the sea.

18:18:39 In any event, there has been a church there for 100

18:18:41 years in some form or fashion.

18:18:42 Here is the school.

18:18:44 Bayshore boulevard is to the south.

18:18:46 Okay, there is north here.

18:18:48 Orleans is the street running north and south on the

18:18:50 western side of this school.

18:18:52 What you can see here is here again the church

18:18:53 sanctuary.

18:18:56 The parish hall in is where the students play.

18:18:59 And here is actually the school area and there is the

18:19:01 little cafeteria area here.

18:19:06 Like Tony mentioned, the height restriction right now

18:19:08 for the primary zoning in Hyde Park which is

18:19:10 residential-60 is 35 feet.

18:19:13 A lot of nonconforming homes there.

18:19:16 They have been there -- they predated zoning and some

18:19:20 in the magnitude of 36, 37 feet, the reason I brought

18:19:23 that up the school at its highest point is 23 feet.

18:19:27 So these houses are actually about 10, 15 feet higher

18:19:41 than the school at this point in time.

18:19:46 I just want to follow up on what Frank said here.

18:19:49 In terms of renovation St. Johns opened up two other

18:19:52 locations, one near the Publix on plant avenue

18:19:52 downtown.

18:19:54 And the game plan here is right now there are grades

18:19:57 1-4 at the school.

18:20:00 St. Johns would move the 4th grade over to the plant

18:20:01 campus, okay.

18:20:05 Then these enhancements would relate solely to 1-3.

18:20:09 Even though there would be minor expansion associated

18:20:12 with these new uses, media lab and things like that,

18:20:15 the actual population for the school would be reduced.

18:20:17 You are going to hear some concerns -- and you have

18:20:20 been peppered with a lot of E-Mails today and seems to

18:20:22 me one of the major issue is traffic impact, so

18:20:25 obviously there is a correlation between reduction in

18:20:27 student population and traffic.

18:20:29 And we are here on a plan amendment.

18:20:32 A lot of these technicalities.

18:20:35 I am going to talk about the three-stage process in a

18:20:37 minute, are those kind of issues in terms of height,

18:20:40 student population, setbacks and things like that are

18:20:44 dealt with not at this stage but the rezoning stage and

18:20:47 I think you although that there is not much we can do

18:20:47 here.

18:20:50 Pretty much straight and down and proposed plan

18:20:53 amendment consistent -- you can't propose any

18:20:54 conditions at this stage.

18:20:58 You are going to hear conditions for example -- as Tony

18:21:00 mentioned that the land use category we are pursuing

18:21:04 allow other uses like quasi government uses, wastewater

18:21:06 treatment plants, airports, things like that.

18:21:10 We would love to stipulate as part of this process as a

18:21:12 condition of approval the only uses that would be on

18:21:14 this property are a school, church, and related

18:21:17 residential facilities.

18:21:20 We can't do that, okay.

18:21:27 We can -- the next step, rezoning.

18:21:30 I'll also mention that 1994, the Tampa City Council

18:21:34 approved -- gave permission through a permit for the

18:21:38 school to have up to 430 students and or faculty.

18:21:42 When we get to around to the rezoning, that number is

18:21:43 going to be reduced.

18:21:46 To what extent, you all are going to dictate that and

18:21:50 based a lot, I think, on traffic impacts and things of

18:21:52 that nature.

18:21:54 So I would like to explain right now how we got here

18:21:58 and what we are trying to accomplish.

18:22:01 St. Johns, they have an accreditation process which

18:22:03 requires a master plan.

18:22:06 And the first step in the process, they approached the

18:22:09 city to determine to what extent they could expand the

18:22:13 facility and what limitations, if any, there would be

18:22:17 in response the city indicated because the school is

18:22:19 too big under the land use category, which is

18:22:24 Residential-10, which would allow 10 units per acre,

18:22:28 okay, but it has a building limitation size.

18:22:30 It is called floor area ratio.

18:22:33 So the city says because the school exceeds that right

18:22:36 now, you can't expand at all.

18:22:38 You can't do anything.

18:22:40 The only way you can cure this issue is to get the

18:22:45 appropriate land use plan designation which, as Tony

18:22:48 indicated, almost all parochial and secular schools

18:22:51 have is public, semi public.

18:22:54 It is specifically geared for these type of uses.

18:22:55 Okay.

18:22:57 There was another plan category we could have pursued

18:23:00 called community mixed use, but it is very, very

18:23:04 intense, and I don't think staff would have supported

18:23:07 it and we wouldn't be standing here tonight.

18:23:09 So what we are trying to accomplish through this

18:23:14 process is, number one, recognize the legal

18:23:18 nonconforming status of the school as it relates to the

18:23:19 comprehensive plan.

18:23:23 It is too big for the residential land use designation.

18:23:24 That is number one.

18:23:28 Number two, is to allow for the enhancement in minor

18:23:29 expansion, okay.

18:23:34 So that's what this is all about.

18:23:37 Also with respect to the actual zoning on the property,

18:23:41 like he said, been there 100 years.

18:23:43 I think the city enacted zoning in the 50s, something

18:23:44 like that.

18:23:47 So obviously it doesn't meet any of the setback

18:23:51 requirements, vegetation, landscape, height, things

18:23:52 like that.

18:23:54 This process would allow that to be rectified not

18:23:57 through what we are doing tonight but through the

18:23:58 rezoning process.

18:24:00 Step two.

18:24:05 And as Tony indicated, these other schools, academy,

18:24:07 Jesuit, et cetera, and I think it is real important,

18:24:10 and I heard some concern and saw some of these E-Mail

18:24:15 that's a public/semi-public is in this area of Hyde

18:24:20 Park it will set a precedent and speculation if St.

18:24:23 Johns sells the school an ACLF or high rise.

18:24:27 Public/semi-public does not allow any residential.

18:24:38 But back to my point regarding precedent -- just to

18:24:40 guide for us one second.

18:24:42 Here is the athletic facilities.

18:24:45 It looks like a prison yard, I guess could you say.

18:24:46 On the top of the roof.

18:24:51 But in terms of precedence, the Hyde Park.

18:24:55 I identified Gorrie Elementary and Wilson Middle

18:24:57 School.

18:24:59 This is Gorrie.

18:25:00 You see the blue.

18:25:04 That is public/semi-public.

18:25:07 Here is Wilson, public/semi-public.

18:25:11 So obviously those schools have been there a long time.

18:25:15 We are not setting any precedent and seems to work very

18:25:16 well in Hyde Park.

18:25:22 All due respect, all St. Johns is looking for same

18:25:26 designation and treatment.

18:25:29 Because the appropriate designation as staff will tell

18:25:33 you is the public/semi-public.

18:25:38 Then upon further investigation, we found out that when

18:25:43 the city updated its comprehensive plan in 1989, one of

18:25:46 its goals, I guess you could say, is to recognize

18:25:48 existing uses.

18:25:53 Say, for example, off 7-eleven on a corner somewhere

18:25:57 and at that wasn't Commercial but grandfathered in.

18:25:59 I guess could you say the city placed Commercial to

18:26:02 recognize the existing property rights and uses on the

18:26:05 property in 1989 going through this exercise to

18:26:06 recognize the uses.

18:26:09 As you can see most of these schools receive the

18:26:14 public-semi public designation.

18:26:16 Unfortunately St. Johns was overlooked.

18:26:17 It should have received.

18:26:30 It didn't, and that's why we are here tonight.

18:26:32 Here again two reasons we are here tonight to recognize

18:26:35 what's there to make it conforming with respect to the

18:26:37 comprehensive plan and allow to go to phase two to

18:26:39 rezone the property and deal with all these issues that

18:26:45 a lot of these concerned citizens are going to raise.

18:26:49 And secondarily to allow for final expansion.

18:26:56 Now we made contact with the neighbors in the Hyde Park

18:26:59 civic association in early March.

18:27:02 Couple of conversations, meetings, exchange of letters.

18:27:04 A lot of contact.

18:27:06 In any event they have been a pleasure to deal with,

18:27:09 they have been very reasonable and had some really

18:27:12 legitimate concerns because the dilemma is

18:27:18 public-semi-public category and Tony indicated no

18:27:19 limitation on size.

18:27:20 The floor area ratio.

18:27:21 Okay.

18:27:22 And there is a reason for that because it is dealing

18:27:23 with schools.

18:27:30 Not like Commercial development, but be that as it may,

18:27:34 the only assurance and St. John historically had a

18:27:36 wonderful relationship with the neighborhood, and any

18:27:40 time there was an issue of concern they attempted to

18:27:48 address that and that's my understanding.

18:27:52 with there was concern how big could this be.

18:27:55 We are in the middle of Hyde Park.

18:27:56 Two story radios right now.

18:27:59 Only so big you can make this, you got to go up one or

18:28:06 two stories, okay, that is the reality of it.

18:28:08 When we come to the zoning process the issues of

18:28:11 height, student population and things like that will be

18:28:22 addressed.

18:28:26 Public-semi-public no limitation on height or floor

18:28:28 area ratio.

18:28:31 Other uses beside the school could be there.

18:28:35 Realistically, no, you can't do residential or an ACLF.

18:28:37 You can't do a airport or a wastewater treatment plant

18:28:41 in the Hyde Park.

18:28:45 And also issue about expansion there will be increased

18:28:48 traffic impacts and I told you early on and commit

18:28:51 during the zoning stage student population authorized

18:28:54 for 430 is going to be reduced.

18:28:57 To what degree we will have that discussion some time

18:28:58 in the future.

18:29:03 And in response to all these concerns, here is the --

18:29:06 what he had to say is all of these issues like I

18:29:09 mentioned, two other processes that will take care of

18:29:12 that.

18:29:15 , And I know a couple of Councilmembers are relatively

18:29:20 new, and this might be your first exercise or maybe a

18:29:23 gut continue to from punishment and watch it on TV for

18:29:27 a few years.

18:29:28 Did she straighten you out?

18:29:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: She sure did.

18:29:40 >> Did she straighten out Mr. Stokes?

18:29:41 [Laughter]

18:29:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: These jokes will cost you pal.

18:29:48 [Laughter]

18:29:50 >> What was that, sir?

18:29:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: These jokes are costly.

18:29:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

18:29:56 >> Here we go.

18:29:57 A three-step process.

18:29:59 This is what we are doing tonight land use map

18:30:02 amendment which is very generic.

18:30:04 We got to go to phase two, rezoning.

18:30:08 During that process the city is very -- detailed

18:30:11 oriented and involves a lot of information, traffic

18:30:15 studies, elevations, plans, et cetera, et cetera, okay,

18:30:18 public hearings, all these people here who are

18:30:21 concerned of the neighborhood and HHPI, they will have

18:30:23 an opportunity to participate and certainly give them

18:30:27 all our information right up front before we can file

18:30:29 and have a series of public hearings where everybody

18:30:33 has opportunity to participate and give their comments.

18:30:36 Then being that the property is located in Hyde Park

18:30:40 historic district, the arc weighs in.

18:30:42 So another level of review and approval and that

18:30:57 relates primarily to design.

18:31:01 In terms of support -- one minute, Reverend, if you

18:31:03 don't mind.

18:31:03 [Laughter]

18:31:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: One minute.

18:31:07 >> We are dealing with a church, Reverend --

18:31:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know.

18:31:09 [Laughter]

18:31:11 I know.

18:31:13 >> In terms of support -- I know you have been

18:31:16 bombarded with all these E-Mails pro and con, but I

18:31:19 submitted petitions in support with 500 signatures,

18:31:21 numerous E-Mails and things like that.

18:31:23 And you will hear a lot of people speak in support

18:31:24 tonight.

18:31:26 So I won't even get into that.

18:31:28 So in closing the important points for your

18:31:31 consideration are, first of all, I think it is very

18:31:35 important that your professional planning staff and

18:31:38 Tony LaColla a certified planner by the American

18:31:39 planning association.

18:31:42 He and his staff has recommended approval.

18:31:45 That proposal is consistent with the comprehensive

18:31:45 plan.

18:31:49 Number two, a unanimous approval by the Planning

18:31:52 Commission passing a resolution requesting that you all

18:31:54 through the plan amendment that happened about a month

18:31:56 or so ago.

18:31:59 And then as I mentioned three-step process, all these

18:32:01 issues of concern I think you are going to hear about

18:32:03 will be dealt with in round two.

18:32:06 And then finally as we mentioned, all these other

18:32:09 schools have been granted the public, semi public and

18:32:13 St. Johns is looking for is similar treatment with

18:32:16 respect to how the other property owners were treated.

18:32:18 And I appreciate the extra time.

18:32:21 If you have any additional questions I will gladly try

18:32:25 to answer them and reserve time for rebuttal, Reverend.

18:32:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Your time is up.

18:32:28 Thank you.

18:32:28 >> Thanks a lot.

18:32:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You have five minutes on rebuttal.

18:32:36 Let me hear from Mr. Fernandez from the ARC.

18:32:40 You may want to address the issue of -- being

18:32:43 designated a historical site.

18:32:46 The reason I said that is because we got a lot of

18:32:48 E-Mails and a lot of issues that I think you can

18:32:50 address.

18:32:51 >> Good morning, Councilmembers.

18:32:54 Good afternoon -- or good evening.

18:32:58 This -- this application is actually scheduled before

18:33:00 the ARC on September 13.

18:33:03 It has not begun for the formal review.

18:33:07 Staff has been involved with working with both the

18:33:09 Planning Commission staff and the applicant and had a

18:33:11 number of meetings.

18:33:16 My -- my initial assessment as -- as the administrator

18:33:20 for the Architecture Review Commission is there are

18:33:23 components of the request, specifically the lack of a

18:33:28 defined far and density level that do cause me some

18:33:31 concern and cause me concern with the potential adverse

18:33:36 impact it could have of the historic district if -- if

18:33:39 -- if an intense development is added into that;

18:33:44 however, as Mr. Bentley said, there is a review process

18:33:47 which imbeds the Architecture Review Commission both

18:33:51 providing you with a recommendation for the rezoning,

18:33:55 and then subsequently reviewing any further additions

18:33:57 or changes to that property.

18:34:01 So that mechanism -- mechanism is in place.

18:34:05 In addition to the elements that were described by Mr.

18:34:10 LaColla in the Comprehensive Plan and Historic

18:34:14 Preservation ordinance that place within Chapter 27.

18:34:19 With that the one maximumization or intensification of

18:34:23 the density into the unlimited F.A.R. is a point of

18:34:27 concern; however, I think there are mechanisms in place

18:34:29 to provide comments to you and direction on that to

18:34:32 hopefully avert any type of negative impact to the

18:34:34 district.

18:34:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions of Council?

18:34:38 Okay.

18:34:40 Okay.

18:34:41 We will hear from the public.

18:34:45 Those who are in support may come to my left.

18:34:47 Those who are in opposition may come to my right.

18:34:48 Okay.

18:34:52 Those in support to my left.

18:34:55 >> Reverend, I don't want to have everybody to speak.

18:34:57 Can I have the supporters to stand up?.

18:34:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If you want to do that.

18:35:05 >> Through -- will you please stand.

18:35:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

18:35:13 Those in opposition to my -- to my right.

18:35:27 Those in opposition to my right.

18:35:31 Okay.

18:35:35 We will start -- we will start here to my right.

18:35:36 Yes, come forward.

18:35:39 We will alternate.

18:35:42 >> Good evening, I am Mary Lou Tuttle, and it has been

18:35:44 a long time since I have spoken before a board.

18:35:50 I live one block almost exactly from the church.

18:35:51 I love having the church there.

18:35:53 It is beautiful inside and out.

18:35:58 I used to go there for a little while, and I know they

18:36:00 are crowded.

18:36:05 But they are talking about Gorrie, Wilson.

18:36:10 These are on major streets surrounded by apartments and

18:36:12 condos.

18:36:17 The church is surrounded by nothing except homes.

18:36:21 When I worked for the county for 23 years, I would love

18:36:24 to get in my car and go by the bayshore because it is

18:36:26 such a beautiful drive.

18:36:26 Right?

18:36:29 I would go down the street, Watrous.

18:36:32 I couldn't get anywhere near because the cars were

18:36:36 stacked up going to the -- going to the school.

18:36:40 So I was like, okay, I will go down to Rome and go down

18:36:41 that way.

18:36:46 Well, the preschool, they were stacked up there.

18:36:50 And I could barely -- I mean after two or three times

18:36:53 of taking my life in my hands cross Rome and then get

18:36:54 down to bayshore.

18:36:56 And this was ten years ago.

18:36:59 And I don't think it has gotten any better.

18:37:05 And if you try to go home at about 3:00, forget it, you

18:37:06 know.

18:37:09 Watrous is not -- is not a wide street.

18:37:12 And I know they have done everything they could to be

18:37:15 good neighbors, and they have.

18:37:19 But to sign a blank check and say, oh, we will be back

18:37:20 with the details later.

18:37:21 Trust us.

18:37:22 We are a church.

18:37:23 I know they are a church.

18:37:24 They are a good church.

18:37:26 I love to hear the kids playing.

18:37:29 I know they are on top of a roof, which I thought was

18:37:32 so odd, but I love to hear them play in the afternoon.

18:37:34 I like having it there.

18:37:35 I think it is a real plus.

18:37:41 But I really -- before I am willing to say, okay,

18:37:42 change the zoning.

18:37:44 The zoning is so important.

18:37:47 Once it is gone, it's gone.

18:37:50 So I would appreciate you taking that into

18:37:50 consideration.

18:37:51 Thank you so much.

18:37:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, thank you.

18:38:04 >> I am father dug loss reamer.

18:38:06 I am president of the board of the school south Orleans

18:38:08 avenue.

18:38:11 Reverend, sir, Councilmembers.

18:38:13 After the land use commission several weeks ago, you

18:38:17 unanimously recommended this change -- excuse me.

18:38:19 I said to many of our neighbors who were present and

18:38:24 around me, this is not a win-lose situation for anyone.

18:38:27 St. Johns has been here for almost a century.

18:38:29 We haven't always been the best neighbor.

18:38:32 Of late, we have tried to be a far better neighbor and

18:38:34 I think we have succeeded and I think we won the good

18:38:37 will of many of our own neighbors.

18:38:38 There are a couple of issues here.

18:38:44 The first is that all zoning and land use philosophy

18:38:48 recognizes the intrinsic value of schools and churches

18:38:49 in neighborhood.

18:38:53 The second is that when we were overlooked two decades

18:38:58 ago in being -- having our land use designation

18:39:02 changed, that now means in the face of a major

18:39:06 catastrophe, if we were to be wiped out, we can not

18:39:09 rebuild even as we are now.

18:39:14 There is an aspect, of course, in terms of renovation

18:39:17 and some minor expansion that we will deal with later

18:39:20 and you have been reminded of the safeguards in place

18:39:20 to deal with that.

18:39:25 I simply want to say that St. Johns is committed to

18:39:27 being the best neighbor that we can be.

18:39:30 One thing that has happened as a result of all this is

18:39:34 that we have become closer to the elected leadership of

18:39:37 the neighborhood association, and we want to be as good

18:39:38 a neighbor as possible.

18:39:40 We value good architecture.

18:39:42 We value good neighborhood relations.

18:39:47 And I ask all of you simply to support us at this step,

18:39:49 realizing that there are other steps when we will

18:39:53 address some really legitimate concerns that the

18:39:56 neighbors have as we hope they will address some very

18:39:58 legitimate concerns that we have.

18:40:00 Thank you very much.

18:40:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, father.

18:40:08 >> Good evening, my name is Patrick Cimino, I live at

18:40:11 709 South Delaware which is the same neighborhood that

18:40:15 St. John's Episcopal church and lower school is in.

18:40:17 I guess -- I think it is clearly understandable that

18:40:21 the church and school want to upgrade their facilities.

18:40:24 I think my concerns are primarily with the process and

18:40:27 the comprehensive plan and how it deals with historic

18:40:28 preservation.

18:40:32 And sometimes I feel like the comprehensive plan,

18:40:39 calling it "comprehensive" is a bit an oxymoron.

18:40:42 You look at communities where there is benchmark

18:40:45 historic preservation being winter park.

18:40:47 Their comprehensive plan explicit.

18:40:50 Almost codified in what is allowed and what is not

18:40:50 allowed.

18:40:54 So I find this sort of layered steps of decision making

18:40:57 as one of my neighbors term it and I wasn't going to

18:40:59 say it, kick the can.

18:41:03 You go from here to zoning to ARC, and unfortunately

18:41:06 reality is, I have sat in this chamber more than once

18:41:08 and watched the recommendations of the ARC be

18:41:10 overturned.

18:41:12 So I am not confident in that process.

18:41:16 All I know is, and this is divorcing from any ownership

18:41:21 or other elements that are going into this, that this

18:41:26 is lessening quite a bit the limitations on the land

18:41:30 use in our historic neighborhood and we are a historic

18:41:31 neighborhood.

18:41:32 We are not a urban village.

18:41:35 I know they like to use that terminology.

18:41:38 But urban villages are not parcel by parcel.

18:41:39 They are a comprehensive picture.

18:41:43 I encourage you -- I know this is a limiting process.

18:41:45 This is the challenge you all have, and I would

18:41:48 encourage to you not support this change in land use

18:41:51 because I think it does open us up, and there is

18:41:53 precedent in Tampa.

18:41:58 It opens us up to a compromise of our -- compromising

18:42:00 our historic neighborhood.

18:42:01 Thank you.

18:42:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask you a question Mr. Cimino?

18:42:11 -- I guess -- and you don't have to answer this, but

18:42:13 maybe someone here opposing this could answer this or

18:42:18 more than one person tell us what, in particular, you

18:42:21 are afraid of with this land use change.

18:42:23 >> It's only because there is precedent previously

18:42:27 where there are changes in the city, and I know other

18:42:30 people are going to raise some of the examples that

18:42:34 once there is a compromise, it seems to be slow

18:42:34 downstream.

18:42:37 Now I know there is structure.

18:42:40 Albeit I wouldn't call it rigid structure, but I think

18:42:45 that is my biggest concern and one being the land which

18:42:48 was zoned years ago on bayshore which made it very

18:42:50 difficult for that neighborhood to have anything

18:42:51 changed.

18:42:55 And I know it was a different situation, but it is a

18:42:56 slippery slope.

18:42:58 >>MARY MULHERN: But with -- okay.

18:43:04 I guess with the public-semi-public, there is --

18:43:05 someone gave me a list.

18:43:09 This is helpful, of what can be -- what could happen

18:43:11 there.

18:43:15 >> There is one other uses undefined at the bottom.

18:43:17 >>MARY MULHERN: The undefined is what you are afraid

18:43:18 of.

18:43:18 >> As well.

18:43:21 Which is one of my concerns about a comprehensive plan.

18:43:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

18:43:26 Let's -- let's go back and hear -- because I think

18:43:29 during our discussion, a lot of that can be raised with

18:43:33 staff to clear up some of the misunderstanding, I

18:43:33 think.

18:43:34 Okay.

18:43:40 >> My name is John Hower, 1507 Bay Villa Place right on

18:43:42 edge of the ARC borders.

18:43:45 Both of my children went to St. John's.

18:43:52 We are in a -- I design 30 some years ago and when they

18:43:57 changed the land use, we could not replace the six

18:44:01 units that we had a hurricane or fire, this sort of

18:44:03 nature and this is what I am concerned about the

18:44:08 church, that they should be protected if a hurricane

18:44:12 came along and they lost some of their structures, that

18:44:15 they would be able to rebuild what they have there for

18:44:18 over 100 years or some less.

18:44:20 But this was a concern.

18:44:24 Also I might point out that both our children going to

18:44:29 school there, we found that -- that Orleans was one

18:44:31 way, which was easy to go in, drop the children off,

18:44:33 and exit.

18:44:36 You only had certain hours that -- that the streets

18:44:37 were busy there.

18:44:40 And I think there was a normal residential area most

18:44:44 hours of the daytime, so I am certainly in favor of St.

18:44:50 John's getting this developed.

18:44:50 Thank you.

18:44:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.

18:44:54 Thank you.

18:44:56 >> My name is Bill Place.

18:44:59 I live at 718 south Orleans avenue.

18:45:02 And I am right at the other end of the block from St.

18:45:03 John's.

18:45:06 I want to say first, I appreciate this process because,

18:45:10 you know, all those rules and guidelines do serve us as

18:45:14 well, except in situations like this, where I am trying

18:45:18 to bring maybe a little bit more of a -- a neighbor

18:45:20 perspective to this and what I see every day.

18:45:23 Every -- every day that school is in session, I see a

18:45:26 line of cars in the morning and in the evening.

18:45:30 That is probably because St. John's has done such a

18:45:31 great job of educating kids.

18:45:34 The school has grown and grown and grown, so they have

18:45:37 gotten to a point where there are so many going there

18:45:39 that the traffic issues are way different from when the

18:45:42 school was first built.

18:45:45 So my concern about all of this is simply -- and I

18:45:46 support the amendment.

18:45:49 If we can find some way to just keep them capped to

18:45:53 certain square footage or certain enrollment.

18:45:56 So that this thing doesn't grow so much bigger that we

18:46:00 have way more traffic problems.

18:46:04 I heard the words in their presentation "competitive."

18:46:07 Of course they want to be competitive, they naturally

18:46:08 want to grow.

18:46:10 The problem is this amendment will kind of take the box

18:46:14 that they are in now and make it this big, you know,

18:46:15 they can add floors.

18:46:16 They can add square footage.

18:46:19 It can get much larger.

18:46:22 And it will, because they are doing a great job.

18:46:26 So I would support this only if we can limit that this

18:46:29 thing doesn't go so much out of proportion.

18:46:33 I mean realistically, they are a Commercial enterprise.

18:46:34 They are a private school.

18:46:36 And they can and will grow.

18:46:40 If you set the precedent now, it is like setting a

18:46:44 court precedent saying, okay, the box is now this big,

18:46:46 that's what they can kind of fix into.

18:46:49 So I would ask you at this stage, let's not set a

18:46:54 precedent that says they can grow so big.

18:46:57 Let's say, yes, you can renovate, you can improve, but

18:47:01 let's keep it the same size.

18:47:04 So, one of my biggest -- I will tell you every day, I

18:47:07 see people going along in the SUVs and talking on the

18:47:10 phone and rushing to drop their kids and rushing to go

18:47:12 to work and we deal with that in our neighborhood and

18:47:16 -- I am not a not in my backyard kind of guy, but I

18:47:20 tell you a scary sight and a lot of traffic we get

18:47:21 through our neighborhood.

18:47:23 We get a lot from Hyde Park village as well.

18:47:25 So naturally, I would say that the majority of

18:47:29 residents in Hyde Park are going to be very afraid of

18:47:33 that school growing a lot from what it is at today.

18:47:39 Thank you.

18:47:41 >> I am Richard --

18:47:43 100 North Tampa Street.

18:47:48 I am the senior ward of St. John's.

18:47:52 I would like to boil this down to very simple fact.

18:47:54 We are a church that has been there for 100 years.

18:47:58 We have a church that has been there for 60 years.

18:48:00 Our comprehensive plan says we have to have houses

18:48:01 there.

18:48:02 It is residential.

18:48:05 We just want -- we just want a blessing for what we

18:48:06 have there right now.

18:48:11 And when we -- when we make changes, if and when we do

18:48:17 -- after we undertake a capital campaign and other

18:48:20 things we come back for the zoning process to -- and go

18:48:22 through that process to make sure that we do something

18:48:26 that is architecturally acceptable, that the neighbors

18:48:28 are happy with.

18:48:29 We are happy to work with the neighbors.

18:48:33 We love Hyde Park, and we want to continue to be good

18:48:34 neighbors.

18:48:36 Thank you.

18:48:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker to my right.

18:48:42 Yes, come on.

18:48:42 Yes, ma'am.

18:48:44 You are next.

18:48:45 You are next, ma'am, speak.

18:48:46 >> Okay.

18:48:52 Hi, -- I live -- I reside at 718 south Orleans avenue.

18:48:56 I want to say I am not completely against the rezoning

18:48:59 or the plans to upgrade the school to make it

18:49:01 competitive.

18:49:05 St. John's was there before I bought my house in 1997.

18:49:09 And I know it has been there for 100 years, and I

18:49:12 accept the traffic level that we have currently.

18:49:16 What I am concerned about, and don't disagree with --

18:49:23 with Mr. Bentley's assessment of them being similar to

18:49:30 -- St. John's being similar Gorrie elementary and

18:49:31 Wilson elementary school.

18:49:34 Wilson is located on Swann Avenue, totally different

18:49:36 traffic pattern, traffic count, as well as being next

18:49:42 to a lot of Commercial zoning -- zoned properties, same

18:49:46 with Gorrie Elementary School which is on south

18:49:53 boulevard next to a huge high-rise of ALF, law offices

18:49:54 and such.

18:49:57 St. John's on Orleans is next to all residential

18:49:58 property.

18:50:00 I would like to hear -- I don't know if this is the

18:50:05 right forum for it, but I feel like they needed to come

18:50:09 full -- full forward and say our plan, which they did,

18:50:14 is to decrease the grade -- the grade count size from

18:50:18 first through fourth to first through third.

18:50:21 I think that is great, but it doesn't mean that they

18:50:27 will not increase the grade count or class size so that

18:50:30 instead of grade level having 40 kids, that they can go

18:50:34 to 100 kid, so, therefore, we will have more kids and,

18:50:37 therefore, more traffic count than I am currently able

18:50:38 to accept.

18:50:41 So I would like to hear more from them, more details,

18:50:46 and hope that they boo have -- have come forward with

18:50:48 some details but I have not heard any of that.

18:50:50 That's why I am against it.

18:50:54 Thank you.

18:50:57 >> Good evening, my name is Brad Douglas.

18:50:59 I am an alumnus of St. John's.

18:51:01 And I have three kids that have gone through and I sat

18:51:04 on the Board of Trustees for six years.

18:51:08 Just finished my sixth year and head of the facility

18:51:13 committee and co-chair with Frank Capitano.

18:51:16 All of these concerns are good, valid concerns and we

18:51:18 have had a number of discussions with the neighborhood

18:51:21 association and they agree it has been a very positive

18:51:21 conversation.

18:51:24 All of their concerns that they are bringing up we can

18:51:26 address at the next process.

18:51:31 We talk about class reductions.

18:51:35 The impetus is we went to the strategic plan.

18:51:39 We had to put together a 5, 10, 15-year horizon for our

18:51:40 school.

18:51:43 This is something if and when it happens, it will

18:51:47 happen in 5, 10, 15 years and financing and our

18:51:48 pocketbook dictates.

18:51:51 We would like to work closely with these people.

18:51:52 We have talked about a class reduction.

18:51:57 Part of our strategic is to move one of our classes

18:52:00 over to the other campus next to Publix.

18:52:04 We have entitlement for 430 kids that the campus.

18:52:07 We talked to the association for reducing it around 280

18:52:08 to 300.

18:52:11 We want to work with them.

18:52:14 What is my biggest concern and when I sat down and

18:52:17 looked at it is the uncertainty whether we could

18:52:19 rebuild our school and more importantly our church.

18:52:22 And he thinks this is the right process.

18:52:25 We think this is the right forum to go ahead and get

18:52:28 this particular rezoning done on the land use.

18:52:31 It complies with the other schools in the neighborhood

18:52:34 as the appropriate designation from the land use

18:52:35 standpoint for church and school.

18:52:37 We will take it to the next step.

18:52:41 We will have to go through the PD process and go

18:52:43 through ARC and we are very open, willing.

18:52:44 We had previous discussion witness neighborhood about

18:52:46 how to address their concerns.

18:52:49 So I suggest you approve this, and I appreciate your

18:52:50 time.

18:52:55 Thank you.

18:52:56 >> Thank you, good afternoon.

18:52:57 Mike O'Brian.

18:53:01 I live at 821 South Orleans, which is three houses

18:53:03 north of the school and church.

18:53:06 And as some of the other neighbors have mentioned, we

18:53:09 are not necessarily opposed to the changes.

18:53:13 We are opposed to allowing the church and school to --

18:53:17 or allowing the church or school to stay relevant, it

18:53:19 is a matter of managing that growth.

18:53:22 And I would contradict Mr. Bentley and others from the

18:53:22 school.

18:53:25 There have been conversations, but obviously if those

18:53:27 conversations had been productive or those

18:53:28 conversations have actually been open communication,

18:53:32 you wouldn't see the line that you see to my left, to

18:53:33 your right here.

18:53:35 Because what you are really seeing is fear of what is

18:53:36 undefined.

18:53:38 There is a lot of uncertainty.

18:53:41 There is no plan that has been shared.

18:53:42 We heard discussions tonight about meetings with the

18:53:47 ARC, but no plans have been shared, no discussions, no

18:53:50 -- no review, and as a matter of fact during requests

18:53:52 for meetings, we have been told that people weren't

18:53:54 available during the summer.

18:53:54 That sort of thing.

18:53:57 So the neighbors I think are willing to support

18:54:04 allowing the school to do something, but we need some

18:54:07 sort of idea what they want to do and some commit

18:54:11 number writing others than litters suggesting what it

18:54:11 could be.

18:54:13 The other thing that school has brought up and several

18:54:15 members have brought up the lack of ability to rebuild

18:54:18 in the case of disaster and I don't know if that has

18:54:20 ever been actually verified.

18:54:23 And I would ask the city, someone from the city to

18:54:27 verify does the current zoning -- will they be allowed

18:54:29 to rebuild the current use or restructure because I

18:54:31 don't think that has really been clearly communicated

18:54:34 and the neighbors are under the impression we would not

18:54:36 block rebuilding what is already there and even

18:54:37 improving it.

18:54:39 Internal improvements are fine.

18:54:40 Even improvements to the building as long as there is

18:54:43 some sort of cap, but this undefined request.

18:54:46 It is the idea this he could put a six-story parking

18:54:49 garage in, and if it meant the ARC appearance

18:54:51 guidelines, then somehow we would end up with a

18:54:55 six-story parking garage in the middle of old Hyde Park

18:54:57 village is I think what the fear is.

18:55:01 Thanks.

18:55:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Want to address that now or come back.

18:55:07 >>JULIA COLE: Julia Cole, City of Tampa Legal

18:55:07 Department.

18:55:11 Thing was alluded to by your staff report and Mr.

18:55:12 Bentley's presentation.

18:55:14 But just to make you are clear, this parcel has been

18:55:18 developed in a manner that is from a F.A.R. and size

18:55:23 perspective in its comprehensive plan designation.

18:55:27 So it is considered a legal nonconformity, both to its

18:55:31 comprehensive plan designation and to its zoning.

18:55:34 If -- under our code, nonconforming uses, if they are

18:55:38 destroyed up to a certain percentage, they could not be

18:55:38 rebuilt.

18:55:41 They could not be redone.

18:55:44 So the first step because of the nature of this -- and

18:55:47 I will say, from my experience, frankly somewhat

18:55:51 unusual to find this level of a inconsistency with a

18:55:53 comprehensive plan designation.

18:55:55 Typically we see it with zoning, but a comprehensive

18:55:59 plan designation but in this instance that is the case

18:56:02 and in this instance the way our code is drafted, there

18:56:05 would be no opportunity for a nonconformity of this

18:56:09 magnitude to be able to reconstruct either under their

18:56:10 comprehensive plan or zoning.

18:56:11 Thank you.

18:56:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: At some point, I will have you come

18:56:19 back to -- you know, kind of reference the issue of the

18:56:22 whole -- the zoning there now or the comprehensive plan

18:56:23 status.

18:56:25 Maybe that got overlooked -- I mean later on you can do

18:56:26 that.

18:56:26 Okay.

18:56:27 We will come back.

18:56:29 Let's hear from the public and then --

18:56:31 >> hi, I am Betsy Graham.

18:56:33 3122 Lawn Avenue.

18:56:34 I am a church parishioner.

18:56:38 I am also a parent of three children at St. Johns

18:56:41 school and a Treasurer of the St. John's School Board.

18:56:43 I wanted to speak a little bit to the Council about the

18:56:46 growth that the school has already had, because thing

18:56:49 has been some concerns about our growth and the traffic

18:56:50 and all those issues.

18:56:53 We actually are at the end of a 10-year plan to grow

18:56:56 the school from 400 to 600 students.

18:56:58 But I think what is significant is that we will be

18:57:02 starting school next Thursday with 565 students, I

18:57:03 believe.

18:57:06 But fewer than 240 of those students will actually be

18:57:07 on the Orleans campus.

18:57:10 The rest are on the plant avenue campus and the Rome

18:57:12 campus.

18:57:15 240 is probably quite a few fewer students than were on

18:57:20 that campus ten years ago and future plans are to move

18:57:22 a grade off of the campus which is what we were talking

18:57:24 about tonight that could mean that the number could go

18:57:25 G down.

18:57:28 I wanted to make sure everyone was clear about the

18:57:31 actual number of students to than campus right now.

18:57:35 I think as both a parishioner and a parent, I see the

18:57:39 crowdings that we had even trying to accommodate the

18:57:41 size of the church right now, the science and art room

18:57:44 are the same classrooms which I think we all would

18:57:47 agree is not optimal from an education perspective.

18:57:50 My children this week participated in vacation Bible

18:57:52 school and because the school was busy getting to

18:57:54 school we didn't reason is a classroom and had to

18:57:58 divide the parish hall in half to hold our vacation

18:57:58 Bible school.

18:58:01 I think both the school and school needs to modernize

18:58:04 and renovate and add, perhaps, a small amount of space

18:58:09 to accommodate the needs of a 21st century church and

18:58:09 school.

18:58:12 I do appreciate the clarification from the city Legal

18:58:16 Department on the nonconforming use, and I would ask

18:58:18 that even just for that reason alone that you all

18:58:21 approve this recommendation.

18:58:22 Thank you.

18:58:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.

18:58:28 >> -- Thornberry.

18:58:32 I live at 834 South Willow Avenue, which is about 100

18:58:37 yards north and east of St. John's church.

18:58:43 And I listened to St. Johns presentation tonight and I

18:58:46 attended the neighborhood meeting they sponsored, but I

18:58:49 have not heard anything that would justify the risk

18:58:52 they are asking the neighborhood to run if their

18:58:57 property is classified public/semi-public.

18:58:59 Councilwoman Mulhern asked a little bit earlier what

18:59:01 are you afraid of.

18:59:05 And to answer that, I will also mention the vicar said

18:59:08 earlier, this doesn't have to be a win-lose situation

18:59:11 for the church and the neighborhood.

18:59:17 But quite frankly, I don't want to spend my dotage

18:59:22 less than 100 yards from driver license bureau which is

18:59:24 one of the items that would be allowed underneath the

18:59:30 public/semi-public land use.

18:59:34 I am not saying that would happen, but there are so

18:59:37 many decisions down the road that we don't know how

18:59:40 they are going to shape up.

18:59:44 If you give this land use tonight, we can't go back and

18:59:46 unring that bell if we don't get the answers we want

18:59:49 further down the road.

18:59:54 The designation the church and school want allows all

18:59:57 manner of things I would say is wildly inappropriate in

18:59:59 a residential neighborhood.

19:00:03 That make no mistake, old Hyde Park has always been a

19:00:06 residential neighborhood, it is one now, that is what

19:00:07 it is going to be the future.

19:00:12 How we square up, public/semi-public with the

19:00:18 comprehensive plan is a total puzzle to me.

19:00:22 St. John's and the neighborhood got along very well for

19:00:26 a century and a lot of people who talked earlier have

19:00:30 said so and I do believe that we will continue to do

19:00:33 so, and whatever the church needs to do, I am sure we

19:00:36 can find a way to do it without giving them the blank

19:00:43 check that that land use designation is.

19:00:46 No one here believes the St. John's board wants to pave

19:00:49 the church and puts up a parking lot or community

19:00:56 center but the land use designation goes to the

19:00:58 property and not to the church or school.

19:01:01 The Episcopal church in America is not growing, it is

19:01:04 shrinking, so we have to face the possibility that in

19:01:13 the future some time somebody else will own that

19:01:16 property and the land use designation will go with the

19:01:16 property.

19:01:17 One final thing.

19:01:19 Some of the folks in the church had mentioned

19:01:25 rebuilding the church if it is destroyed during a

19:01:25 hurricane.

19:01:27 That is a little amusing.

19:01:29 If anybody has seen the church, that is the most

19:01:35 substantial building in the neighborhood.

19:01:38 If that church is blown down, nobody in Hyde Park will

19:01:44 care what their zoning is because old Hyde Park won't

19:01:45 be there anymore.

19:01:50 At any rate, earlier on somebody said this is a blank

19:01:51 check.

19:01:52 I think it is.

19:02:01 And we would ask you to strongly just say no.

19:02:01 Thank you.

19:02:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.

19:02:09 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

19:02:12 My name is joy harden.

19:02:14 I live on south Orleans avenue.

19:02:18 When we relocated to Florida in 1972, we moved to Hyde

19:02:18 Park.

19:02:20 I am a parishioner.

19:02:23 Three of my children have attended there.

19:02:27 One grandson has graduated from there, and I currently

19:02:32 have four grandchildren enrolled in St. Johns.

19:02:32 My comment is this.

19:02:35 Without a doubt, there are probably no current

19:02:38 residents who was living in Hyde Park when the church

19:02:42 was founded, and very few, if any, when the school was

19:02:44 founded.

19:02:49 Most if not all of the homes in the Hyde Park area have

19:02:52 been renovated or enlarged or whatever needed to be

19:02:55 done as needs, space and resources and zoning would

19:02:59 allow.

19:03:02 I would ask if they cannot allow the church the same

19:03:03 ability.

19:03:05 The church has been a good neighbor.

19:03:09 Of course with neighbors, there is always something

19:03:12 back and forth but basically the church has been a good

19:03:12 neighbor.

19:03:15 It has added immensely to the charm and flavor of the

19:03:16 neighborhood.

19:03:21 For years it maintained several homes for staff and

19:03:28 clergy until constraints dictated their sale.

19:03:31 And others present figures that prove there are fewer

19:03:33 people at St. John's now.

19:03:35 I did a little math, and according to my calculations,

19:03:40 at this point, there is some 80 fewer students in St.

19:03:43 John's Orleans buildings than there were in the 1980s

19:03:46 and early '90s.

19:03:49 To sum up, the church and the school not asking for a

19:03:54 carte blanche or a blank check to erect a mega

19:03:55 structure.

19:04:03 Simply stated, their petition has two pull purposes.

19:04:06 One is for the ability to rebuild in the event of a

19:04:07 catastrophe.

19:04:11 And even though a hurricane haven't knocked it down

19:04:12 yet, who knows.

19:04:15 And the second is to have the ability to affect

19:04:21 reasonable alteration of the building within the

19:04:28 framework of the exist structure and if equal zoning

19:04:30 restrictions were allowed.

19:04:32 I ask that you approve this request.

19:04:32 Thank you.

19:04:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

19:04:46 >> Which way does this go?

19:04:59 I don't know how this goes.

19:05:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Maybe while she is putting the map up,

19:05:05 the next speaker can come.

19:05:20 Next -- oh, okay.

19:05:28 I am Mary Esther Parker, South Willow, and I lived in

19:05:32 that house for 35 years.

19:05:38 You have a map of our historic neighborhood, a plat map

19:05:40 and one of the neighborhoods Nestled among the trees

19:05:42 where the homes date back to 1880.

19:05:44 As you can see St. John's church and schools are

19:05:49 Nestled among the trees and historic tree homes, the

19:05:51 attorney for the school board is asking to you call the

19:05:53 shots to change this challenged property from pink to

19:05:55 blue.

19:06:00 Blue coating represents Wilson middle and Gorrie

19:06:02 elementary school both on collector street surrounded

19:06:05 by Commercial buildings.

19:06:09 Stated concerns of Director of the school board that

19:06:11 the church and school could not be built back if a

19:06:12 hurricane destroyed them.

19:06:15 Our neighborhood is prepared to write an agreement with

19:06:18 signed petitions that it could be rebuilt.

19:06:20 Imagine tonight if you were vote continuing to rebuild

19:06:23 St. John's if it was destroyed.

19:06:26 I can't believe you would not agree to rebuild it.

19:06:30 I need to thank mark Bentley for writing some of my

19:06:35 notes in opposition tonight since I will be using them.

19:06:37 History is repeating itself, only the attorney changed

19:06:38 sides.

19:06:40 In may of 1998.

19:06:42 And you have copies of these.

19:06:46 In may of 1998, a group us retained Mr. Bentley's

19:06:51 services to oppose St. John's PD request, a small --

19:06:55 far smaller request in scope to the one they are asking

19:06:56 for tonight.

19:07:01 He wrote -- Mr. Bentley wrote in 1998, St. John's has

19:07:05 no compelling reason to seek a PD zoning instead of

19:07:07 pursuing a variance and obtaining a Special Use Permit

19:07:11 under the subject properties existing RS-60 zoning

19:07:12 classification.

19:07:17 And then on Page 4, Paragraph 2, Mr. Bentley wrote,

19:07:21 please recognize because of St. John's fast-track

19:07:24 processing of its plans and reluctance to involve the

19:07:27 neighborhood, the neighborhood's confidence in St.

19:07:29 Johns is slowly deteriorating.

19:07:32 Significant facts have not changed since 1998.

19:07:34 Mr. Bentley's conclusion should not change either.

19:07:37 The burden is being put on your shoulders to make this

19:07:41 harsh and serious zoning change to this challenged and

19:07:42 land-locked property.

19:07:45 In 1998, the petition was withdrawn, and the school

19:07:49 solved their problem with the purchase of property on

19:07:51 Platt street for three or four grades.

19:07:54 This petition should be withdrawn or continued.

19:07:59 St. John's is in -- is not in a rush and have yet to

19:08:00 decide what they want to do.

19:08:02 We would welcome you out to the site to see for

19:08:06 yourself how tightly we sit under the old trees on our

19:08:07 narrow streets.

19:08:10 In fact while eight years ago on the old board of

19:08:13 adjustment board, I found it helpful to visit the site

19:08:14 before voting.

19:08:18 A continuous of this zoning request will allow you the

19:08:21 time to visit the site and see the arrangement for

19:08:24 drop-off and pick-off for children when school is in

19:08:24 session.

19:08:28 We love having St. John's and school with limitation.

19:08:30 It has been our church for 35 years and the chosen

19:08:35 school for our son opinion ironically, we are writing a

19:08:39 booklet called "a history of Hyde Park zonings."

19:08:43 Perhaps tonight will be the last zoning request for the

19:08:44 book to go to press.

19:08:52 Thank you.

19:08:57 >> My name is David Williams, 599 Rivera drive and I am

19:08:58 here in support of this petition.

19:09:00 I have been a member of St. John's church for over 20

19:09:04 years and on the Vestry at the church.

19:09:08 What we are asking for today is to have Council approve

19:09:09 what the Planning Commission found and approve the

19:09:12 existing structure that are there.

19:09:13 Sort of unique.

19:09:16 We are asking to approve what we have.

19:09:18 We are not asking right now to do anything.

19:09:22 Just to approve what we have and I think you have heard

19:09:25 all the reasons why, and I would urge to you support

19:09:28 the Planning Commission and vote positively for this

19:09:29 plan amendment.

19:09:38 Thank you.

19:09:43 >> Good evening, Mary Britton, 840 South Dakota Avenue,

19:09:46 and I am going to be using this map also that Miss

19:09:48 Parker left if that's all right.

19:09:50 I would like to show you -- I know you have seen this

19:09:52 map before, but this is a little different.

19:09:55 And I know y'all got a lot of E-Mails on this subject,

19:09:58 because I came down and read them with another

19:09:59 neighbor.

19:10:03 What we did in this analysis is we marked the

19:10:07 properties in the red circle opposed to this land use

19:10:09 change and we marked the ones in favor with green.

19:10:13 And you can see that overwhelmingly, the ones this

19:10:16 opposition are coming from within the neighborhood, so

19:10:19 I would like to you consider that some of the support

19:10:22 that you are receiving throughout E-Mails or through

19:10:24 letters is not from people who live in our

19:10:25 neighborhood.

19:10:27 We welcome them to drive into our neighborhood and use

19:10:32 it, drop their children off at school, but we want you

19:10:35 to be aware that they don't necessarily live there.

19:10:37 I also want to use the map for another purpose which is

19:10:41 show you how I walk with my son to school.

19:10:43 My -- my coming into fifth grade son walks to school,

19:10:48 and he attends Gorrie elementary.

19:10:48 Let's see.

19:10:50 I live here.

19:10:55 So I walk this way with him through the neighborhood

19:10:59 out to Boulevard where it starts getting quite a bit

19:11:01 more Commercial after you cross Swann.

19:11:05 And you can see there is a buffer zone here of more

19:11:07 Commercial properties as you start heading into the

19:11:07 school.

19:11:14 These are -- are brown and more intensive but basically

19:11:17 homes that are converted into homes and offices.

19:11:25 If you were familiar with Gorrie there are addition to

19:11:27 that use, a large property there.

19:11:31 The property of Gorrie itself is a buffer before you

19:11:33 get to the actual school building.

19:11:36 And I want to point that out because I think the two

19:11:37 properties are different.

19:11:40 You can see St. John's outlined on the map.

19:11:43 A smaller piece of property and not surrounded by

19:11:45 higher intensity uses.

19:11:47 The other thing that I haven't heard tonight and that I

19:11:48 would like to point out.

19:11:52 I worked with the ARC on other issues before.

19:11:53 I think they are great.

19:11:56 I saw in a lot of E-Mails and letters that conditions

19:11:58 -- people would be more supportive of this if

19:12:00 conditions can be applied, and we heard that they can

19:12:00 not.

19:12:03 The one that concerns me that haven't been brought up

19:12:05 is happening right now in the court system in Coral

19:12:06 Gables.

19:12:09 Apparently there is a Florida statute that overrides

19:12:13 anything, any conditions that you all might make during

19:12:16 the zoning process as to the number of students that

19:12:17 can use the school.

19:12:18 If you were not familiar with that, I wasn't either.

19:12:21 I read an article in the "Miami Herald" the statute

19:12:27 number 100.23 subparagraph 18 c.

19:12:30 And what concerns me about that is y'all know the city.

19:12:33 Mr. Miranda talks about driving around the last

19:12:36 petitioner's area.

19:12:40 Ms. Mulhern talked about the CVS on the corner.

19:12:43 I am uncomfortable with a boilerplate law in the

19:12:45 Florida statute that can override something people in

19:12:46 my city have control over.

19:12:48 That is what I wanted to share with you, and I hope you

19:12:51 take that into consideration if you were not familiar

19:12:51 with the law.

19:12:53 Take some time to research it.

19:12:56 Isn't this worth continuing the process and making sure

19:12:58 that we have the