Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council

Thursday, November 14, 2013

5:30 p.m. session


This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this 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.

05:37:07 [Sounding gavel]

05:37:09 >>HARRY COHEN: Good evening, everyone, and welcome to

05:37:12 tonight's meeting of the Tampa City Council.

05:37:14 Roll call, please.

05:37:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

05:37:18 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.

05:37:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

05:37:20 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

05:37:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

05:37:22 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.

05:37:25 Before we start, let me read into the record this memorandum

05:37:28 from Chairman Miranda.

05:37:29 Please be advised that hill be unable to attend the City

05:37:32 Council evening session on Thursday, November 14th, as I

05:37:35 will be out of the city.

05:37:37 I would appreciate my absence being read into the record.

05:37:41 Okay.

05:37:41 We are going to start tonight.

05:37:45 We had some changes to our agenda.

05:37:46 We are going to start tonight with items 2, 3 and 4.

05:37:50 And then we are going to return and do one and -- 1 and 5

05:37:55 and then follow that by item 12.

05:37:57 And then we are going to take a short recess and finish the

05:38:00 rest of the agenda.

05:38:01 So with that, we will start with item number 2.

05:38:05 I need a motion to open public hearing items 2, 3 and 4.

05:38:10 >> So moved.

05:38:11 >> Second.

05:38:11 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilman Reddick,

05:38:15 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

05:38:16 All in favor please indicate by saying aye.

05:38:18 Opposed?

05:38:19 Okay.

05:38:21 Item number 2.

05:38:27 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

05:38:28 I would like to preface my presentation and give you a brief

05:38:32 overview very quickly of the amendments you will be hearing

05:38:35 this evening.

05:38:36 Item number 2, in addition to item number 6 on your agenda,

05:38:42 are small scale amendments.

05:38:44 They only require council action and do not have to be

05:38:47 submitted for state and regional review.

05:38:50 Items 3, 4 and 5 did have to go for state and regional

05:38:54 review.

05:38:55 And they will be presented in accordance so all. Amendments

05:39:01 we have for you this evening, all five amendments, will be

05:39:04 going to first adoption hearing this evening.

05:39:20 The first amendment before you is a small scale amendment.

05:39:22 This was privately initiated.

05:39:24 This is known as Tampa comprehensive amendment in the Avenue

05:39:32 of -- the request is a small scale amendment.

05:39:39 Therefore not subject to state and regional review.

05:39:44 The change to go from residential 10 to residential 20.

05:39:48 The site is located in the central planning district.

05:40:00 This is one. Three district that offers the most

05:40:03 opportunity for growth, redevelopment and job creation.

05:40:08 Getting you a little bit into the particulars of the site,

05:40:11 give you some context with this aerial.

05:40:13 Here is the site, which is located on the northeast -- on

05:40:17 the southeast corner of the intersection of hider and Webb,

05:40:23 approximate to the intersection of Tampa Bay Boulevard and

05:40:30 Himes Avenue which obviously can be seen by Raymond James

05:40:32 stadium directly to the west, and the news station to the

05:40:39 north of the site.

05:40:39 The site is it presently vacant land.

05:40:44 Let me show you some aerials of the site.

05:40:47 Here is the north view.

05:40:48 There's Raymond James stadium to the west.

05:40:50 To the north, the television station.

05:40:51 The site is here to the south of the road.

05:40:58 Here is the south perspective.

05:41:01 This is the subject property.

05:41:05 And then if one were to go to the east from the property.

05:41:12 And another east perspective, a little more direct.

05:41:22 Future land use request in the categories, Raymond James

05:41:26 stadium, the Sports Authority, public-semi-public.

05:41:34 The TV station to the north has a land use designation of

05:41:39 mixed use 35, and this down here which is just south of

05:41:42 Tampa Bay Boulevard and Himes Avenue the subject of the plan

05:41:46 amendment that came about six or seven years ago, I believe,

05:41:50 to go to the 35.

05:41:52 Other land use categories on this particular block, and I am

05:41:55 going to focus on this block because that's where the site

05:41:58 is at, are a little darker color here, and residential 35

05:42:02 land use category.

05:42:03 This is residential 20.

05:42:05 The subject site has a land use category of residential 10.

05:42:09 If it goes to residential 20 as being proposed, staff will

05:42:15 eliminate any residential 10 on this particular block.

05:42:18 As you can see, these are the only three pieces that have

05:42:21 that category.

05:42:22 This particular category has consideration for low density

05:42:27 and low intensity uses, office uses, or neighborhood

05:42:30 commercial uses.

05:42:34 So this is what the site will look like so you have of a

05:42:37 complete block, has residential 20 or residential 35 on it.

05:42:47 What are the impacts?

05:42:48 To go from residential 10 to residential 20, right now the

05:42:51 floor area ratio is .35 to go to a .5 F.A.R.

05:42:56 The density position to density unit to the gross acre, and

05:43:04 where they could build four units, under the new category,

05:43:08 8.

05:43:08 Under nonresidential uses they currently build 6700 square

05:43:13 feet nonresidential use.

05:43:15 Under the proposed residential 20 it could go to a little

05:43:18 over 9500 square feet.

05:43:25 There were no objections from the agency, with the

05:43:28 comprehensive plan.

05:43:29 It was consistent with the following comprehensive plan,

05:43:33 objectives and policy, promoting transition and scale.

05:43:37 The development was reflective of the neighborhood

05:43:39 character, access to support of multi-modal options.

05:43:42 There is a multi-modal station north oh of the site.

05:43:49 And of course to encourage pedestrian oriented development

05:43:54 in the central planning district.

05:43:56 Staff's recommendation was to be find the proposed map

05:43:58 amendment consistent with the goals, objectives and poses of

05:44:01 the comprehensive plan.

05:44:03 That concludes my presentation of this particular plan

05:44:05 amendment.

05:44:05 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Garcia, we can ask the petitioner to

05:44:15 come up if there are no questions from come up members.

05:44:18 >> Ed Turanchik here on behalf of Armando Roche, I think you

05:44:31 know them as members of long standing in our community as

05:44:34 well as Polanski who owns property on the southern part

05:44:41 where the land use goes, it's one third R-10 and two-thirds

05:44:46 R-20 and we think the creators no one is quite sure why that

05:44:54 area was R-10 versus R-20.

05:44:57 So we are here to ask for unified land use treatment.

05:45:02 The Roches are looking for redevelopment on that lot.

05:45:10 It will the be something in the future but right now we are

05:45:12 just here for the land use change.

05:45:14 We fully support the Planning Commission's analysis and

05:45:18 recommendation.

05:45:20 Armando and Sharon are here if you have any questions, or in

05:45:23 support of it.

05:45:24 And that concludes our comments and presentation.

05:45:27 Thank you.

05:45:27 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there anyone from the public who would

05:45:31 like to comment on this item, item number 2?

05:45:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close.

05:45:38 >>HARRY COHEN: I don't think our petitioner would like time

05:45:41 to rebut but I think I have to ask him anyway.

05:45:46 Okay, thank you.

05:45:47 We have a motion to close by Councilman Reddick, seconded by

05:45:51 Councilwoman Montelione.

05:45:52 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

05:45:55 Okay.

05:45:57 Mr. Suarez, would you please take item number 2?

05:45:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I present an ordinance for first reading

05:46:06 consideration, an ordinance amending the compromises Tampa

05:46:09 comprehensive plan land use map for the property located in

05:46:11 the general vicinity of the southwest corner of southwest

05:46:14 Heiter Street and North Webb Avenue, 4004 North Webb Avenue

05:46:22 from residential 10, to residential 20, providing for repeal

05:46:29 of all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

05:46:32 providing an effective date.

05:46:32 >> Second.

05:46:35 >> Motion by Councilman Suarez, Seconded by Councilman

05:46:36 Reddick.

05:46:36 All those in favor?

05:46:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Mulhern being

05:46:41 absent.

05:46:42 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

05:46:45 10 a.m.

05:46:46 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

05:46:49 Mr. Garcia, item number 3.

05:46:53 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

05:46:55 The second amendment before you this evening is one of three

05:46:59 that I told you were subjected to state review.

05:47:05 All text amendments, land use amendments, are subject to

05:47:09 state and regional review.

05:47:10 The next two that will be presented to you are text

05:47:13 amendments to the comprehensive plan.

05:47:15 This one is identified as Tampa comprehensive plan amendment

05:47:19 13-05.

05:47:20 A second amendment to the housing amendment of the

05:47:23 comprehensive plan.

05:47:28 This was publicly initiated by the Planning Commission in

05:47:29 cooperation with the Land Development Coordination of the

05:47:29 City of Tampa. This is a text amendment, subject to state

05:47:33 and regional review.

05:47:34 This is changed to existing language in housing elementary

05:47:38 chapter 4 of the Tampa comprehensive plan.

05:47:40 We did have the transmittal hearing in September which was

05:47:44 followed today by adoption hearings.

05:47:47 So what do we have?

05:47:48 The purpose of the amendment is the existing language in the

05:47:51 comprehensive plan does not further the intent. Plan as it

05:47:58 relates to this particular housing need.

05:48:00 The new language will further clarify the location purpose

05:48:03 and establishment of the community serving use.

05:48:05 The proposed changes are the following: Objective 26.18,

05:48:10 provide a clearer description of those groups in need of

05:48:13 this use, which is congregate living, which resulted in the

05:48:18 deletion of existing language, in policy 26 .18.2.

05:48:22 In policy 26.18.1 clarifying what services this use should

05:48:29 have access to, to health related entities, proximate to

05:48:37 this nature, and the use should have relative environment,

05:48:42 uses such as this are located within established residential

05:48:45 neighborhoods.

05:48:45 So we want to make sure that the form of scale with the

05:48:53 existing character.

05:48:55 And to facilitate how the size of each is determined, the

05:48:59 actual number of beds is what we are talking about here.

05:49:01 The new language replace it is language in policy 26 .18.2,

05:49:08 so that means 26 .1.3 shall be totally deleted.

05:49:12 And that's upside down.

05:49:21 As it relates to planned consistency, encourages appropriate

05:49:27 housing options for especially 1.36.3, modification of land

05:49:34 use regulation to accommodate changing lifestyles, policy

05:49:36 22.1.

05:49:38 This also addresses the demographic trends providing a range

05:49:41 of housing choices consistent with objective 26.17.

05:49:44 This allows fair housing choice, access to housing to

05:49:47 protected classes, which includes the elderly, especially

05:49:51 the elderly as you can see here, policies 26.17.1, 26.17.5.

05:49:57 Renovation of structures for housing needs of special

05:49:59 populations, policy 64.2.3.

05:50:04 Cannot stress to you all enough, the clarifying language

05:50:08 that we have given you, and in plan amendment reports.

05:50:12 And this particular type of use has been in great demand,

05:50:21 and accommodate the growing needs we felt we needed to

05:50:25 facilitate the existing language

05:50:33 Planning Commission staff found the request, Tampa

05:50:35 comprehensive plan 13.05 consistent with the Tampa

05:50:40 comprehensive plan.

05:50:41 We did not receive any objections from any of the reviewing

05:50:46 agencies that did provide us comments in return.

05:50:51 That concludes my presentation on this plan amendment.

05:50:54 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there anyone from the public who would

05:50:56 like to address council regarding item number 3?

05:50:59 >> Move to close.

05:51:05 >> Second.

05:51:06 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion to close by Councilman Reddick,

05:51:09 seconded by Councilman Montelione.

05:51:11 All in favor?

05:51:12 Opposed?

05:51:32 The hearing is now closed.

05:51:33 Councilwoman Capin, would you please take item number 3?

05:51:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: An ordinance being presented for first

05:51:41 reading consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa

05:51:45 comprehensive plan, housing element to provide guidance to

05:51:49 the development of special needs housing and congregate

05:51:57 living -- oh, my, my glasses, I'm sorry.

05:52:00 I'm in denial, sorry.

05:52:03 Congregate living facilities, providing for repeal of all

05:52:06 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

05:52:09 providing an effective date.

05:52:09 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilwoman Capin,

05:52:15 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

05:52:17 All in favor?

05:52:18 Opposed?

05:52:19 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Mulhern being

05:52:22 absent.

05:52:23 Second reading, the adoption will be on December 5th at

05:52:27 10 a.m.

05:52:30 >> Item number 4.

05:52:33 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

05:52:33 The next amendment before you, this is known as Tampa

05:52:38 comprehensive plan amendment 13-06, also a text amendment.

05:52:44 The future land use element provided in chapter 3 of your

05:52:48 plan.

05:52:49 That is a publicly initiated amendment, a text amendment,

05:52:53 state and regional review.

05:52:55 This is the future land use element chapter 3.

05:52:58 We did have the transmissional -- transmittal hearing.

05:53:02 We did receive a review from state and regional agencies and

05:53:07 now before you for the adoption of this hearing.

05:53:09 We did not change any policies.

05:53:11 We changed some of the development standards relating to the

05:53:14 characteristics of these two future land use designations,

05:53:19 specifically SMU-3 and SMU-6, suburban mixed use 3 and

05:53:24 suburban mixed use 6.

05:53:25 They are almost exclusively located in the north planning

05:53:28 district. City of Tampa which again is not a growth

05:53:33 district, the north and south districts are what we call

05:53:35 more stable districts and offer the opportunity for in-fill

05:53:39 development, which is what we are looking at over here.

05:53:43 The present language that's being considered for

05:53:45 modification is in the future land use element under the

05:53:48 development standards section for the aforementioned

05:53:53 regulations, it will maximize potential for undeveloped

05:53:56 properties under these designations while protecting those

05:53:59 environmentally sensitive lands prevalent in that area.

05:54:01 That's one of the characteristics of most of the lands north

05:54:05 of Fletcher Avenue.

05:54:08 Quite a bit of them are interspersed with environmentally

05:54:10 sensitive lands, which makes development a little more

05:54:15 complex.

05:54:15 This does make the process and determining potential

05:54:17 development with the urban mixed use categories of using

05:54:22 floor area ratio over density calculation.

05:54:25 This will clearly establish that future development must be

05:54:28 consistent in scare and character in the area.

05:54:33 Let's say we are going to use SMU 3 calculation F.someone

05:54:37 wants to go ahead and realize that three units to an acre

05:54:41 and they haven't been able to realize that because they had

05:54:43 too much environmental land but they still have some

05:54:45 uplands, we are going to be able to allow them by use of

05:54:48 floor area ratio to maximize their upland buildability

05:54:52 potential for residential use, as long as it's similar in

05:54:56 scale and character to the surrounding environment.

05:54:59 That's the most important aspect of it.

05:55:02 So for both categories, this is the changed language.

05:55:07 Projects may being determined either by density or floor

05:55:10 area ratio whichever calculation is more beneficial to the

05:55:12 development.

05:55:13 If the floor area ratio is applied to a residential project

05:55:16 to obtain maximum density potential shall be consistent in

05:55:22 character and scale with the surrounding residentially built

05:55:24 environment.

05:55:25 That is consistent with the application of form-based codes

05:55:28 which is what the city has embarked on right now as far as

05:55:32 looking at new areas, or areas that need to be given special

05:55:36 attention to.

05:55:37 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Montelione has a question.

05:55:40 >> You can finish your question, Mr. Garcia.

05:55:44 >> I'm done.

05:55:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What I am just concerned about is he we

05:55:53 are doing this so that people who have property are unfairly

05:56:01 restricted from developing that, whether they want to put a

05:56:04 house, or any other type of development, but at the same

05:56:09 time, it's one of the few areas in the city having just

05:56:13 heard this morning our urban forestry management plan, it's

05:56:17 one of the few areas in the city that does still have wide

05:56:22 open swaths of environmentally sensitive land, which you

05:56:28 just mentioned.

05:56:29 So the sentence or part of the sentence that says

05:56:35 development shall be consistent in character and to scale

05:56:37 with the surrounding residentially built environment, when

05:56:42 you have large swaths of environmentally sensitive land, you

05:56:46 don't have a lot of surrounding residentially built

05:56:50 environment.

05:56:51 So what is the benchmark going to be for meeting the

05:57:00 comprehensive plan condition, if this should be approved?

05:57:05 >>TONY GARCIA: There's a lot of characteristics to look at

05:57:07 when you are going to have something like this come in.

05:57:09 Most of the lands that come in for development normally have

05:57:13 to apply certain different types of building standards that

05:57:17 they might have to cluster your sites in many cases.

05:57:20 They may have to create cul-de-sacs.

05:57:22 We look at those types of characteristics to make sure, and

05:57:25 also the types of lot configurations that are built.

05:57:28 You are going to have a little larger type of lot predicated

05:57:31 on what the development standard is.

05:57:32 Again, this sew three dwelling issue, predominantly.

05:57:36 >> Oh, I was going to say, because it's not always the case

05:57:40 because sometimes when you want to maximize the upland use,

05:57:44 even though the surrounding areas may have typically larger

05:57:48 lots, you are going to do the smaller lots because that's

05:57:50 what you can fit.

05:57:51 >> Right.

05:57:52 You will have to cluster and you will have to go similar in

05:57:54 scale.

05:57:54 The idea is not to build anything that's going to be totally

05:57:57 out of character.

05:57:57 A lot of larger homes on large lots is not characteristic of

05:58:03 the area.

05:58:03 We November that.

05:58:04 So based upon the philosophy of the area.

05:58:08 So we take it into consideration.

05:58:10 It will have to be done on a case-by-case basis.

05:58:14 The beauty of this, though, is since we are talking about

05:58:16 scale in character, and the rezoning application comes in,

05:58:19 we already are going to know, and Ms. Feeley will know when

05:58:22 she does the rezoning applications all the surrounding

05:58:25 developments that there are to begin with, because really

05:58:27 there's not that many large swaths of undeveloped land left

05:58:31 up to the north of Fletcher, so this is really to give an

05:58:33 opportunity for those smaller developments that are going to

05:58:36 come in and probably do anything from 24 to 16.

05:58:40 The annexation before you this evening is probably one of

05:58:42 the last remaining larger swaths and that's only about 150

05:58:46 acres.

05:58:46 Everything else is going to be a lot smaller, even up in

05:58:51 K-bar ranch that they pieced that out quite a bit.

05:58:54 So out aren't going to see anything major where people come

05:58:57 in and try to take advantage of, try to get a realization of

05:59:01 20 DUs to the acre which is totally unrealistic for the

05:59:05 area.

05:59:05 And we have that protection already by saying you have got

05:59:08 to be in character with what the density is.

05:59:10 >> But if there's nothing built it's hard to bring up

05:59:14 character.

05:59:14 And you brought up K-bar ranch. Is this going to affect

05:59:19 future development in K-bar?

05:59:20 Or is that already --

05:59:22 >> Well, K-bar, there's still pieces in K-bar that have not

05:59:26 come in for rezoning so there's some PDAs that have come

05:59:29 in but it may impact them in respect if they haven't come in

05:59:33 and actually gotten entitlement for their rezoning.

05:59:36 They could tapping this into consideration.

05:59:37 But at the same time, that being said, they are still going

05:59:41 to have to meet the intent of reaching.

05:59:44 This is to reach the three.

05:59:47 If they go to a four and they go to a seven, that's only

05:59:49 going to be applicable if they are going to meet

05:59:52 transportation requirements.

05:59:53 They are still going to have to meet all the other

05:59:55 requirements and still be in character with the surrounding

05:59:58 built-in environment.

06:00:00 But their concerns should be allayed to a degree and

06:00:05 finishing my presentation by telling that you DEO had no

06:00:08 presentation with this,D.O.T. had some comments that you are

06:00:12 probably going to have to do some transportation, they are

06:00:16 concerned obviously with the transportation affects, but

06:00:19 standard operating procedures, they do their transportation

06:00:21 impact at point of rezoning, not during the plan amendment

06:00:24 process. But that protection is there to ensure there's not

06:00:28 going to be anything that's going to be developed that's

06:00:29 going to be adverse in character or functionality to that

06:00:32 particular area.

06:00:33 >> Thank you.

06:00:37 >>TONY GARCIA: Sure.

06:00:40 The other change was additional layers for the SMU 6

06:00:43 category south of Fletcher.

06:00:45 This is recommended solely for low intensity input.

06:00:49 There's maybe two acres of SMU 6 south of Fletcher, and

06:00:53 those really are just low intensity office in-fill projects.

06:01:00 There's nothing from a residential aspect that's been built

06:01:03 south of Fletcher with this particular land use designation.

06:01:06 So as it relates to planned consistency, residential mix odd

06:01:13 pedestrian and bike friendly located on certain road

06:01:16 networks, policy

06:01:18 2.6 and 2.7, to make sure throws land, 1.3, preserve land

06:01:26 for planned for residential purpose to accommodate future

06:01:29 land growth while considering the impact of growth on

06:01:32 adjacent areas, policies 18.3.1, 18.3.2, and making sure

06:01:38 that uses are protected -- projected to meet the needs of

06:01:42 the residents, 18.4.6 and 18.4.9.

06:01:47 We received comments back from DEO, no one had raised any

06:01:52 objections. There were some comments that we will forward

06:01:54 to Land Development Coordination for the rezoning process.

06:01:57 That concludes my presentation.

06:01:59 Thank you.

06:01:59 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you, Mr. Garcia. Is there anyone from

06:02:04 the public that would like to address council about this

06:02:06 item number 4?

06:02:07 >> Moved.

06:02:12 >> Second.

06:02:13 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion to close by Councilman Reddick,

06:02:16 seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

06:02:18 Councilman Reddick, would you please read item number 4?

06:02:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

06:02:25 Presented for first reading consideration, an ordinance

06:02:27 amending Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element,

06:02:31 future land use plan categories of suburban mixed use-3 and

06:02:35 suburban mixed use-6 to clarify how residential density may

06:02:39 be calculated for a project development, providing for

06:02:43 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

06:02:46 severability, providing an effective date.

06:02:47 >> Second could.

06:02:50 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion from Councilman Reddick, seconded by

06:02:54 Councilman Suarez.

06:02:55 All in favor?

06:02:56 Opposed?

06:02:56 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Mulhern being

06:03:01 absent.

06:03:02 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

06:03:05 10 a.m.

06:03:06 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to move back to items 1, 5 and

06:03:10 12 are related.

06:03:11 So we will take items 1 and 5 first, and then we will have a

06:03:17 quasi-judicial public hearing for item number 12.

06:03:20 So item number 1.

06:03:23 Let's open 1 and 5 first, since they are non-quasi-judicial

06:03:28 and then we'll do the other ones.

06:03:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Move to open items 1 and 5.

06:03:34 >>HARRY COHEN: Seconded by Councilwoman Montelione to open

06:03:37 items 1 and 5.

06:03:38 All in favor?

06:03:40 Opposed?

06:03:42 Okay.

06:03:48 .

06:03:48 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:03:50 Items number 17, 5 and 11 are a series -- is it 11 or 12?

06:03:58 >> 12.

06:03:59 >> Okay.

06:04:00 1, 5 and 12 are all applicable to the same property.

06:04:03 It is a voluntary annexation, which subpoena bringing

06:04:06 property into the city.

06:04:07 There's a comp plan amendment, which is giving that property

06:04:10 then a comprehensive plan designation, and the last to

06:04:14 rezoning that will entitle the property.

06:04:20 Other than that, I have an aerial and everything that goes

06:04:25 with the rezoning, and not so much the comp plan amendment.

06:04:30 We could talk about it that the way if you would like to do

06:04:32 that and have it all heard all together, and voted on

06:04:38 separately as an annexation.

06:04:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Let me put the question, Mr. Shelby, should

06:04:45 we go ahead and open item 12 and then talk freely about all

06:04:49 three interchangeably?

06:04:50 Or should we go ahead and do items 1 and 5 and then do the

06:04:54 zoning separately, in your opinion?

06:04:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, I don't think it should be a problem

06:05:06 if you swear in the witnesses for number 12 and take them

06:05:10 all together.

06:05:11 I think that would probably -- do you have any objection to

06:05:17 it?

06:05:18 >> I don't have any objection to that but we do have to take

06:05:21 them in sequential order, the comp plan, then the rezoning.

06:05:25 >> We will do that but let's go ahead and open item 12.

06:05:29 And that way -- we have a motion from councilwoman

06:05:32 Montelione, seconded by Councilman Reddick.

06:05:35 All those in favor --

06:05:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before we go, excuse me, we have two

06:05:41 non-quasi-judicial and one quasi-judicial.

06:05:44 Is it better to go ahead and just do the other ones first?

06:05:49 It does seem like we might be mixing apples and oranges in a

06:05:52 way.

06:05:54 >>GINA GRIMES: We can do it that way.

06:05:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's the case and if that's council's

06:05:58 pleasure, there's separate criteria for how you weigh your

06:06:03 decision, and you have to apply the evidence that you hear

06:06:06 differently.

06:06:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: For the purposes of the record as to us

06:06:10 doing all together to their not quasi-judicial and one that

06:06:17 is.

06:06:17 >> Why don't we just go ahead and do the first two as

06:06:21 non-quasi-judicial?

06:06:23 And then we can move into the third.

06:06:24 >>HARRY COHEN: We'll go ahead with the original plan then.

06:06:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I apologize, chair.

06:06:29 >>HARRY COHEN: That's fine.

06:06:31 Number 1.

06:06:32 We'll do that one first.

06:06:42 >>GINA GRIMES: Mr. Shelby, would you mind handing those --

06:06:45 thank you.

06:06:47 For the record, Gina Grimes, with the law firm of Hill,

06:06:50 Ward, Henderson, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard.

06:06:54 Our firm represents Taylor Morrison of Florida, which is the

06:06:59 applicant in this proceeding.

06:07:03 Sorry.

06:07:04 You need another one?

06:07:07 Taylor Morrison of Florida is the applicant in this

06:07:09 proceeding.

06:07:10 They actually have a contract to purchase the property

06:07:12 that's the subject of the annexation.

06:07:19 These are three separate petitions, and they are

06:07:22 interrelated.

06:07:24 There are various different maps in the materials that I

06:07:29 have provided you.

06:07:30 But I am going to begin with this one, which is the

06:07:33 annexation map.

06:07:34 We are going to start with the annexation.

06:07:36 The property is in the New Tampa area.

06:07:40 It is west of county road 581, just to orient you, this is

06:07:46 Wharton high school right here. They is to the west of

06:07:49 Wharton high school.

06:07:50 This is Grand Hampton development up here.

06:07:53 And then West Meadows down here.

06:07:55 So it's in between the two.

06:07:59 You will see on this map that I have that there is a portion

06:08:04 of the property that already lies within the City of Tampa.

06:08:08 The yellow portion is 21.5 acres.

06:08:11 It's already located in the City of Tampa.

06:08:13 The area in green excluding this piece right here is the

06:08:18 property that still lies within Hillsborough County, and

06:08:20 that's the property we are seeking to annex into the city,

06:08:24 about 148 acres.

06:08:26 The overall acreage for both yellow and the green is about

06:08:31 170 acres, and the project will be on the 170 acres.

06:08:35 But for purposes of this annexation we are just talking

06:08:37 about the green area which is 148 acres.

06:08:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You mentioned the green area.

06:08:45 Part of the green area is marked not included.

06:08:47 >> Correct.

06:08:50 >> Please explain that.

06:08:51 >>GINA GRIMES: That area is not a portion of the property

06:08:54 that Taylor Morrison is purchasing.

06:08:56 That property is being retained by the current owner which

06:09:02 is Busch junction enterprises, sometimes made up of various

06:09:06 members of the Greco family, because the parcel is sometimes

06:09:08 referred to --

06:09:11 >> The Greco parcel, because you said the green area. Is

06:09:13 that included in the annexation?

06:09:15 >> No.

06:09:16 Not in the annexation nor the comp plan amendment nor the

06:09:19 rezoning.

06:09:20 They are keeping it and it's not part of this development

06:09:22 proposal.

06:09:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I just wanted to clarify because you

06:09:26 said the green area.

06:09:27 >> Everything except what is marked as not included.

06:09:30 So it's the 148 acres that we are seeking to annex into the

06:09:33 city.

06:09:34 Typically when you have these annexations especially in New

06:09:37 Tampa they are usually accompanied by a development

06:09:39 agreement and an annexation agreement, and a lot of times

06:09:42 the reason for that is because there are development

06:09:45 incentives, that the developer is asking for to annex the

06:09:50 property into the city N.this case that's not true.

06:09:52 The developers have not asked for any development incentive.

06:09:56 They are moving forward with their own plan of development,

06:09:58 and they intend to do -- to construct all. Mitigation

06:10:03 that's required on their own.

06:10:07 The purpose of the annexation is to bring all of the

06:10:10 property into one jurisdiction, rather than having property

06:10:12 that's partially in the city and partially in the county, it

06:10:15 brings it all into the city.

06:10:16 And the reason it's being brought into the city is because

06:10:18 it's already in the city's water and sewer service area, and

06:10:22 because the only access point into this parcel, which is

06:10:27 Royal Hampton Boulevard right here, is a city road.

06:10:33 And that road dead-ends right into the project.

06:10:36 So it's served by city street, has city water and sewer.

06:10:41 That's the reason its being annexed into the city.

06:10:44 As stated in our annexation narrative, the proposal that we

06:10:48 will discuss later during the rezoning is to develop the

06:10:51 project with about 425, up to 425 dwelling units.

06:10:56 Those dwelling units will be single-family dwelling units

06:10:59 but they are comprised of the normal detached single-family,

06:11:05 semi attached and then attached units.

06:11:09 Taylor Morrison is proposing this project in somewhat unique

06:11:13 in the New Tampa area.

06:11:15 They have a similar project down in large that is targeted

06:11:18 towards -- Lakewood Ranch, targeted towards empty-nesters

06:11:24 that want smaller lots but not necessarily smaller homes.

06:11:26 You will see when we get to the rezoning there are smaller

06:11:29 lot sizes but the homes are not necessarily smaller and they

06:11:32 also include a lot of outdoor areas.

06:11:34 And the reason they thought that the New Tampa area was

06:11:36 appropriate for this kind of project is because these kinds

06:11:41 of individuals that buy these homes like now could be closer

06:11:44 to their children and grandchildren, many of whom live in

06:11:47 the New Tampa area, and so that's why they selected this

06:11:50 area.

06:11:51 Under the statute, whenever there is a voluntary annexation

06:11:56 like this there are now only two requirements.

06:11:58 They are required that the area be contiguous to the

06:12:01 jurisdictional limits. City, which obviously it is.

06:12:04 There's city to the north and city to the south, city to the

06:12:07 east and city to the west.

06:12:08 So it is contiguous, and it's compact meaning it's in a

06:12:13 small area and not spread out.

06:12:14 It's also required by the statute that when you annex

06:12:18 property like this that part or all of it has to be intended

06:12:22 for development, and the definition in the statute at least

06:12:27 two people per acre, which would rarely meet.

06:12:31 That with your staff reviews a proposal what they look for

06:12:34 is whether or not there's adequate public facilities to

06:12:36 serve the proposed development that's requested to be

06:12:40 annexed, and in this situation all the staff found there is

06:12:44 adequate public facility, water, sewer, streets, drainage,

06:12:48 stormwater, transportation, et cetera.

06:12:51 And none of the departments had any objection.

06:12:55 That completes my presentation just on the annexation

06:12:59 portion.

06:12:59 I don't not if you want to hold off on closing the hearing

06:13:03 or taking any action on it until we go through all three of

06:13:06 them.

06:13:07 It's up to you.

06:13:08 >>HARRY COHEN: I think that we should deal with them one at

06:13:11 a time, and we should ask for public comment on the

06:13:15 annexation and then deal with the annexation and then move

06:13:18 on to item 5.

06:13:19 So with that I would like to ask anyone in the public,

06:13:23 unless there are any questions or comments --

06:13:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just one question.

06:13:28 Do you have any visual about the Lakewood Ranch that's going

06:13:33 to be a similar project like Lakewood Ranch?

06:13:35 Do you have a visual on that?

06:13:37 >>GINA GRIMES: I was going to do that.

06:13:39 I know I have enough material to spend the rest of the night

06:13:42 reviewing it.

06:13:43 But that was the one thing I did not bring.

06:13:46 I apologize.

06:13:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Looking for a specific --

06:13:52 >>GINA GRIMES: But I do have representatives from -- we have

06:13:57 Dave Truxton, the developer's representative from Taylor

06:14:02 Morrison, and I'm sure he will be able to tell you a little

06:14:05 more about that product.

06:14:07 >> I was just looking at small yards and larger homes, but

06:14:11 similar to what this project is going to be and I just

06:14:13 wanted to see what it looked like.

06:14:14 >> And I think we probably should not deal with of that

06:14:18 during the annexation, though.

06:14:22 So anyone else before we go to the public?

06:14:25 Is there anyone from the public that would like to address

06:14:27 council, only on item 1, which is the annexation?

06:14:31 If there is anything related to the rezoning, we'll hear

06:14:36 that when we actually deal with that item in a few minutes.

06:14:39 >> Jeffrey Blank, Indian Rosewood Drive.

06:14:51 I'm not sure if it would fall under this or the rezoning so

06:14:54 I apologize.

06:14:56 Regarding the traffic study for that property.

06:14:58 >>HARRY COHEN: That is the rezoning, and this is exactly

06:15:01 why I asked.

06:15:03 This is exactly why I thought that it might be cleaner to

06:15:06 open all three.

06:15:07 But since we did not, let's hold off until the zoning and

06:15:10 we'll talk about that then.

06:15:11 >> Joseph Caetano.

06:15:18 I live in Grand Hampton off of County Line Road.

06:15:21 This is just for the rezoning?

06:15:25 >>HARRY COHEN: Right now we are just talking about the

06:15:27 annexation.

06:15:27 We will be talking about the rezoning next.

06:15:29 And if you would like to comment we'll open the public

06:15:32 comment for that.

06:15:34 >> Are you going to then move to the rezoning?

06:15:36 >> We are going to vote on the annexation but it's only the

06:15:39 first reading so there will be a second.

06:15:41 >> Well, it's important.

06:15:43 I'm not against the annexation.

06:15:45 But I don't want to see the city come up and grab a million

06:15:49 and a half dollars of tax money and take it downtown,

06:15:53 because we bought land when I was on this council for a fire

06:15:59 house, 1.285 million.

06:16:04 Now there, was an accident the other night in front of

06:16:07 Burger King, which is right around the corner.

06:16:10 And behind that, 486 apartment houses.

06:16:15 And the Hammocks have 500 town homes.

06:16:18 And Grand Hampton is approaching a thousand homes.

06:16:21 The firemen said, where is station 23?

06:16:25 It's supposed to be built.

06:16:28 The city put up a sign there when we bought that land, they

06:16:31 were so proud that they bought that land for $17,285,000.

06:16:37 I happen to take a -- 1.285 million.

06:16:43 The only thing they have there now is no trespassing, city

06:16:46 property.

06:16:47 We need a fire house.

06:16:48 If we are going to annex another 400 homes into that area,

06:16:53 we need that.

06:16:54 And I understand the attorney -- I didn't hear the

06:16:58 presentation but I understand she has committed to a red

06:17:01 light out on County Line Road, and what do you call it, a

06:17:07 streetlight to light up that area.

06:17:10 >> That's part. Rezoning so we need to talk about that --

06:17:13 >> Okay.

06:17:15 I'll come back.

06:17:16 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there anyone else from the public that

06:17:18 wishes to talk to council only about the annexation, which

06:17:21 then is on first reading only?

06:17:25 There is not.

06:17:25 Is there anything additional from council members?

06:17:30 We have a motion to close from Councilman Reddick, seconded

06:17:34 by councilwoman Montelione.

06:17:36 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

06:17:40 Opposed?

06:17:41 All right.

06:17:41 Councilwoman Mulhern, would you please take item number 1?

06:17:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance presented for first

06:17:52 reading consideration, an ordinance relating to the

06:17:53 voluntary annexation to the city of Tampa, Florida and

06:17:58 municipal corporation existing under the laws. State of

06:17:59 Florida, of certain unincorporated lands generally located

06:18:03 west of Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, north of New Tampa

06:18:06 Boulevard, east of interstate 75 and south of east County

06:18:10 Line Road, and consisting of approximately 148 acres of

06:18:15 land, property, annexing the property to the City of Tampa,

06:18:24 voluntary petition, extending the boundary lines of the City

06:18:27 of Tampa including the property, providing an effective

06:18:28 date.

06:18:29 >> Second.

06:18:31 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilwoman Mulhern,

06:18:33 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

06:18:35 All in favor indicate by saying aye.

06:18:37 Opposed?

06:18:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

06:18:41 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

06:18:44 10 a.m.

06:18:44 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to move on now to item number

06:18:49 5.

06:18:49 >>David Hay: Planning Commission staff.

06:18:54 Your next amendment for your review is plan amendment 13-04,

06:19:00 future land use amendment to the future land use map in the

06:19:03 City of Tampa.

06:19:06 The plan amendment is a privately initiated map amendment

06:19:10 consisting of approximately 148 acres of land in the New

06:19:12 Tampa area, the subject site, as we just saw currently

06:19:17 within the annexation process.

06:19:19 The property currently has a future land use designation of

06:19:22 the neighborhood mixed use 4, 3, which is a unique category,

06:19:28 unincorporated county.

06:19:29 Some areas are designated four units per acre but this one

06:19:32 was under an overlay which only allows for three units per

06:19:38 acre.

06:19:39 That's again for the unincorporated Hillsborough County.

06:19:42 The applicant is requesting annexation suburban mixed use 3

06:19:48 future land use category.

06:19:51 First, let me or intercept you to the site.

06:19:54 We have already heard it's up in the New Tampa area so it

06:19:58 falls within our New Tampa planning district.

06:20:00 The subject site as you can see is located in the northern

06:20:02 portion. City of Tampa just west of Bruce B. Downs.

06:20:06 Once annexed the site will be located again within the New

06:20:09 Tampa planning district.

06:20:13 Let's zoom in a little to give you a little better idea of

06:20:16 the surroundings.

06:20:17 Basically, the dark blue line snaking its way through the

06:20:21 map is the current City of Tampa jurisdictional boundary.

06:20:26 That's right here.

06:20:29 The City of Tampa is located to the west, south and north of

06:20:32 the subject site with unincorporated county being on the

06:20:36 east.

06:20:38 In a that unincorporated county includes the Wharton high

06:20:42 school property.

06:20:43 And properties located further east.

06:20:47 Across Bruce B. Downs.

06:20:48 Those are all in unincorporated Hillsborough County.

06:20:51 The large purple property to the east again is Wharton high

06:20:55 school.

06:20:57 Some of the commercial uses represented by the lap

06:21:01 consistent a are along Bruce B. Downs Boulevard.

06:21:04 To the south we see the yellow representing the

06:21:06 single-family detached residential within The Landings and

06:21:09 the estates subdivision.

06:21:11 All the brown on the map is actually community-owned

06:21:13 property such as open space, wetlands or amenity buildings.

06:21:18 And finally to the north, we have some other residential

06:21:20 planned communities such as the Grand Hamptons and Brentwood

06:21:24 village.

06:21:27 Onto the aerial.

06:21:28 You can see the surrounding development pattern.

06:21:31 The pattern is appraise dominantly detached and attached

06:21:35 single-family uses.

06:21:36 You can see Bruce B. Downs along the east or right side of

06:21:38 the aerial.

06:21:39 Most of the development along Bruce B. Downs is commercial

06:21:43 in character, with some office uses and multifamily

06:21:46 residential.

06:21:47 You can also see some of the wetlands located on-site, and

06:21:50 the trout creek corridor along the eastern property

06:21:54 boundary, right here.

06:22:01 Onto to the existing future land use map.

06:22:03 Here you can see the subject site designated mixed use 4-3,

06:22:09 similar to the properties to the east of the subject site

06:22:11 within unincorporated Hillsborough County.

06:22:13 The blue located to the east is the public, semi-public land

06:22:17 use category associated with Wharton high school.

06:22:21 The ever so slightly darker pink located to the south of the

06:22:24 subject site is suburban mixed use 6.

06:22:27 Future land use category within the City of Tampa, and the

06:22:30 reddish pink color to the north and west all are within the

06:22:34 City of Tampa, the existing suburban mixed use 3.

06:22:42 Here is the future land use map.

06:22:45 The proposed amendment if approved tonight, you can see the

06:22:47 subject site.

06:22:48 If the site is approved for the urban mixed use 3 future

06:22:52 land use category the same as what's located to the north.

06:22:59 Now let's look at the overall impacts.

06:23:02 As you can see, overall development, maximums would remain

06:23:05 the same.

06:23:06 There would be a slight reduction in office, the potential

06:23:10 for office square footage, neighborhood mixed use 4-3 does

06:23:14 allow consideration of .35 floor area ratio for office or

06:23:17 mixed use development.

06:23:20 That is not a scenario that is permitted within the City of

06:23:23 Tampa.

06:23:24 So all the development would be at the .25 floor area ratio.

06:23:29 These numbers do not reflect anytime of the environmental

06:23:32 found on-site and maximums would probably be lower once

06:23:34 those environmental features are delineated.

06:23:40 Overall, a number of agencies reviewed the request, and none

06:23:46 expressed any concerns related with the proposed amendment.

06:23:49 Some comments were received regarding transportation issues,

06:23:53 and those are usually not dealt with at the plan amendment

06:23:55 stage but the rezoning.

06:24:00 Overall, Planning Commission found the map amendment

06:24:03 consistent with a number of comprehensive planned objectives

06:24:06 and policies promoting a mixture of uses within close

06:24:10 proximity of each other and overall development that is

06:24:12 reflective of existing neighborhood character, while also

06:24:15 allowing for the city to accommodate future housing needs by

06:24:18 creating new residential districts.

06:24:21 And based on all that, the Planning Commission recommends to

06:24:25 you this evening that proposed map amendment be found

06:24:27 consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the

06:24:30 comprehensive plan amendment.

06:24:31 That concludes my presentation.

06:24:32 >>HARRY COHEN: If there are no questions from council

06:24:38 members we will ask the petitioner to come up.

06:24:49 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, ward Henderson, 101 East Kennedy

06:24:51 Boulevard, again representing Taylor Morrison, which is the

06:24:56 applicant for this comprehensive plan amendment.

06:24:58 I don't have a whole lot to add in addition to what you have

06:25:05 already heard from Mr. Hay.

06:25:07 The comprehensive plan category going from a county comp

06:25:11 plan category to a city comp plan category.

06:25:15 The density limitations are effectively the same.

06:25:18 Three dwelling units to the acre.

06:25:19 We will discuss in the rezoning hearing that our proposed

06:25:23 density is actually 2.5 which is less than the maximum of

06:25:27 three.

06:25:28 The property to the north is SMU 3.

06:25:31 The property to the south is SMU 6.

06:25:34 Actually, the portion of our project, this portion right

06:25:37 here, which was the yellow portion on this map, is actually

06:25:43 has a higher comprehensive plan category, the SMU-6.

06:25:48 We are not seeking that on the remainder of the parcel.

06:25:51 We are only asking for the SMU-3.

06:25:53 So with that we are not changing the density.

06:25:55 You heard the Planning Commission has recommended approval,

06:25:58 and has found it consistent with the comprehensive plan.

06:26:01 So we would ask for your approval of this as well.

06:26:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Grimes, is there a reason why -- and

06:26:10 maybe we'll get to this when we talk about the re zoning

06:26:13 which we won't talk about now, so if there is, don't say

06:26:16 anything, but why you weren't requesting the downgrade SMU-3

06:26:23 to the property that's already located within the city?

06:26:27 >>GINA GRIMES: One of the reasons had to do with the legal

06:26:29 description and changing a larger area than what we needed

06:26:34 to.

06:26:35 We aren't asking for density of 6 on that in our proposed

06:26:40 PD.

06:26:41 Overall it's a density of 3.

06:26:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And didn't change anything -- we were

06:26:48 only changing that portion that was still in the county.

06:26:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yeah, I just -- I think it would have

06:26:54 been, for me, at least, cleaner to the whole thing SMU --

06:27:00 >> I think it would have involved two different comp plan

06:27:03 amendments, one from the county to the city, and from the

06:27:06 city SMU 6 to the city SMU3.

06:27:09 >> It would have been a little more comprehensive.

06:27:11 Thank you.

06:27:12 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there anything from the public that would

06:27:15 like to address council, just on the issue of the amendment

06:27:18 to the comp plan?

06:27:19 >> Jeffrey Blank, 20115 Indian Rosewood Drive.

06:27:30 I just want to clarify, and I feel like this is a forgotten

06:27:34 community.

06:27:35 We seem to be left out.

06:27:36 Not left out, but it affects us quite a bit a lot of these

06:27:40 plans and we seem to forget.

06:27:42 This right here is called the Hammocks.

06:27:45 It's made up of Brentwood and oakwood sections, and 500

06:27:49 homes.

06:27:50 In that area.

06:27:51 So it does have -- anything that goes on there has a

06:27:55 significant affect on our communities, and they seem to be

06:27:59 left out during a lot of the discussions.

06:28:01 I just want to make sure it's clear that we do exist.

06:28:06 Thank you.

06:28:06 >>HARRY COHEN: Anyone else?

06:28:12 >> We have a motion to close from Councilman Suarez.

06:28:20 Seconded by councilwoman Montelione.

06:28:22 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

06:28:26 Opposed?

06:28:27 All right.

06:28:27 Councilman Montelione, would you please take item number 5?

06:28:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

06:28:32 I move an ordinance being presented for first reading

06:28:34 consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive

06:28:37 plan future land use element, future land use map for the

06:28:40 property located in the general vicinity of -- west of Bruce

06:28:44 B. Downs Boulevard and south of east County Line Road, from

06:28:48 neighborhood mixed use 4 (3), unincorporated Hillsborough

06:28:53 County future land plan category to suburban mixed use-3,

06:28:59 Tampa comprehensive future land use plan category, providing

06:29:03 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

06:29:07 severability, providing an effective date.

06:29:08 >> Second.

06:29:10 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilman Montelione,

06:29:13 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

06:29:15 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

06:29:17 Opposed?

06:29:18 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

06:29:21 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

06:29:24 10 a.m.

06:29:24 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.

06:29:26 As promised we are going to take item number 12 now since it

06:29:29 relates directly to what we have just been talking about.

06:29:32 I would like to open this hearing.

06:29:34 It is quasi-judicial.

06:29:36 So once it's open, I am going to ask that anyone that plans

06:29:41 on speaking at all during this hearing be sworn in by the

06:29:44 clerk.

06:29:44 >> Move to open 12.

06:29:47 >> Second.

06:29:48 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion to open number 12 by Mr. Councilman

06:29:52 Suarez, seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

06:29:56 All in favor? Opposed?

06:29:58 Okay.

06:29:58 (Oath administered by Clerk.)

06:30:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

06:30:11 Finally, the item that we have been talking about, what we

06:30:16 refer to as the Bush-Greco junction rezoning, case Z-13-74

06:30:24 located at Royal Hampton Boulevard, south of County Line

06:30:26 Road, and to the property in lying with Grand Hampton and

06:30:31 the Hammockss.

06:30:32 The request before you tonight is from PDA planned

06:30:34 development alternative and AS-1 which is the Hillsborough

06:30:38 County zoning designation to PD-A, planned development

06:30:41 alternative, and at this time previously stated this is to

06:30:45 entitle this property for residential development, three

06:30:49 types, detached, semi-detached, and attached.

06:30:53 What you typically know as single-family residential home, a

06:30:57 duplex, or duplex style, which means two units attached by a

06:31:01 center wall, and then attached, which would be the town home

06:31:09 style typically more than two units.

06:31:10 So three to six units, a type of configuration.

06:31:20 >>David Hay: Planning Commission staff.

06:31:22 I have been sworn.

06:31:23 I'll keep it nice and short since I already did most of my

06:31:26 presentation.

06:31:27 Overall, the Planning Commission staff found the proposed

06:31:31 planned development would allow for development that is

06:31:33 comparable and compatible to the existing surrounding

06:31:35 development pattern.

06:31:36 The proposed planned development is consistent with the

06:31:38 maximum that can be considered under the mixed use 3, future

06:31:42 land use category, and the proposed planned development

06:31:45 protects the environmentally sensitive areas found on-site

06:31:49 including the trout creek wetland system.

06:31:53 The New Tampa area continues to develop out to the low

06:31:59 density development pattern and based on the goals and

06:32:01 objectives and policies Planning Commission staff found the

06:32:06 plans consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.

06:32:09 Thank you.

06:32:09 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Let me go ahead.

06:32:16 I'm pretty sure that you are familiar now with the site, the

06:32:18 areas that we are talking about showing here in green on the

06:32:21 zoning atlas.

06:32:23 Most everything up in the New Tampa area is a PDA, that's

06:32:26 planned development alternative.

06:32:28 It's a master set of entitlements.

06:32:30 Those entitlements are drawn down off of either through what

06:32:34 we refer to as incremental site plan approval, or you can

06:32:38 use a preliminary platting approval process also in order to

06:32:43 be able to receive that.

06:32:46 They are complying with the conditions that are going to run

06:32:47 with the entitlements.

06:32:49 The entitlements before out tonight for this property are

06:32:52 425 dwelling units, that is consistent with comprehensive

06:32:55 plan, and as stated and in 2.5 dwelling units per acre so it

06:33:03 is less than the SMU, 3 and 6, that the comprehensive plan

06:33:07 would provide.

06:33:09 Here again is an aerial of the property.

06:33:13 As mentioned, Royal Hampton Boulevard is a city road and it

06:33:18 is the only way into this subject property, shown here for

06:33:22 you, Wharton high school to the east, so this is all city

06:33:26 property on the north, south and west, county property to

06:33:29 the east, and now what is now going to be city property

06:33:33 shown in yellow.

06:33:38 There are two waivers being requested with this.

06:33:42 As mentioned is a total of 169.9 acres or 1 0 acres.

06:33:48 21 of those are currently within the city.

06:33:50 The annexation that you just approved on first reading is

06:33:53 for 148 acres.

06:33:56 And in addition total 425 units, dwelling units that are

06:34:01 being requested, the applicant is also going to be providing

06:34:06 a 2.42 acre amenity center, as well as complying -- they are

06:34:13 committing to comply with the comprehensive plan Parkland

06:34:16 requirement of 4.3 acres per thousand residents.

06:34:22 Those commitments are on the site plan, and they will occur

06:34:24 before the 212th certificate of occupancy which is

06:34:29 roughly 50% of the development.

06:34:32 The environmental open space within that 169 acres is 33

06:34:38 acres of wetland, and 18.84 acres of significant wildlife

06:34:43 habitat conservation area.

06:34:45 Both of these have been mapped on the site plan and those

06:34:47 areas obviously will not be eligible for development.

06:34:52 The significant wildlife conservation area was negotiated

06:34:56 with Hillsborough County staff and accepted by the Board of

06:34:58 County Commissioners, and the site plan reflects the

06:35:02 agreed-upon mitigation.

06:35:03 The City of Tampa staff was included in the Hillsborough

06:35:06 County sessions on the significant wildlife habitat area,

06:35:11 and once annexed into the city the monitoring including

06:35:14 habitat management plans will be conducted by the City of

06:35:16 Tampa staff.

06:35:18 The applicant is requesting to keep a 67% tree removal

06:35:23 waiver, which they would be required to retain 50% of the

06:35:32 trees on-site.

06:35:33 So they are asking to reduce that retention from 50% to 33%.

06:35:38 You will see they have done an aerial that I showed you,

06:35:43 there are a large cluster of trees here, a lot of the other,

06:35:47 these are the wetland areas which are mapped on your site as

06:35:50 well, and significant wildlife habitat areas, all those

06:35:55 areas will be left intact so it's really a remainder of what

06:35:59 is left.

06:36:02 Also, there is a gave to allow for the removal of up to ten

06:36:07 nonhazardous grand trees.

06:36:11 This has been discussed with natural resources, and they are

06:36:14 in support of this waiver.

06:36:16 They found it consistent with the intent of chapter 13.

06:36:24 Tampa site plan you have shows you the overall area.

06:36:27 It shows you the commitments.

06:36:31 There are notations of commitments.

06:36:34 There's a set of performance standards that is running with

06:36:39 this application.

06:36:42 And it should have been attached to your site plan.

06:36:45 It's just a small document.

06:36:48 These are really the development standards that staff will

06:36:50 review the project when it comes in for incremental site

06:36:53 plan or comes in for preliminary plat approval, and this is

06:36:56 what will guide the development within the property.

06:37:01 On page 3 of your staff report, I did provide the minimum

06:37:04 development standards for both single-family detached,

06:37:13 single-family semi detached, and single family attached, as

06:37:15 well as recreational facility. As was mentioned the

06:37:18 smallest single-family detached lots would be 4,000 square

06:37:22 feet.

06:37:23 This is a little bit less than what our standard is in the

06:37:26 city of an RS-50 for a 5,000 square foot lot, that they are

06:37:32 looking to do some smaller-type products on the property.

06:37:38 In addition, the developer has committed that any adjacent

06:37:43 off-site single-family detached dwelling units including

06:37:45 Grand Hampton and West Meadows would be buffered from any

06:37:50 onsight single-family semi attached or attached that is set

06:37:54 back more than 100-foot so that's more a perimeter type

06:37:57 setback that is going to really be more toward the north

06:38:03 area and the south area here.

06:38:11 I do have some picture of the site.

06:38:15 I will provide those. You will see on pages 4, 5 and 6 of

06:38:22 the staff report, there are modifications that need to be

06:38:25 made either to the performance standards or to the site plan

06:38:28 in between first and second reading.

06:38:31 They are really predominantly housekeeping things that are

06:38:33 being worked out toward the ends of bringing this before

06:38:38 City Council.

06:38:39 I can go over each of those, or if there's any questions

06:38:43 specifically related to those, I can provide answers to

06:38:48 those as well.

06:38:53 169 acres, I did not take these pictures. I do want to

06:38:59 thank Mr. Stevenson, he's here tonight, for providing such

06:39:05 detailed description of where they are.

06:39:07 I have the numbers here for you.

06:39:08 This is the western portion of the site, Grand Hampton

06:39:11 coming in, and I'm just going to one, two, three, show you

06:39:16 these pictures and go back then to four and five.

06:39:19 And then I do have some of the eastern side of the property

06:39:24 as well.

06:39:25 >> Lower them a little bit.

06:39:36 >> Sorry about that.

06:39:42 This is one and it's looking back more northwest.

06:39:51 Two, looking toward that western boundary of the property.

06:39:54 This is three.

06:39:55 This is down in this corner looking back.

06:40:02 Four.

06:40:03 This is Royal Hampton drive looking south toward the

06:40:06 property.

06:40:11 This is just inside.

06:40:19 These are over on the eastern side.

06:40:23 And then lastly, all the way over on the east, 8 and 9.

06:40:30 If the modifications are made between first and second

06:40:36 reading which I believe the applicant is amenable to, staff

06:40:38 did find the request consistent.

06:40:40 I did want to briefly -- I didn't talk about the annexation

06:40:45 portion of my report, but in that portion of the report, Mr.

06:40:54 Job son of our staff who worked so hard on this, when the

06:40:57 property came in for analysis of annexation, the levels of

06:41:00 service were looked at, and it was transmitted to city

06:41:05 departments for evaluation, including increased service

06:41:08 demands.

06:41:08 The utility departments identified that there was adequate

06:41:12 capacity, and it was not an issue.

06:41:14 Petitioner is obligated to connect to all existing city

06:41:17 facilities.

06:41:20 All new utility extensions must be designed with City of

06:41:22 Tampa's water development standards, and permanently I am

06:41:26 stalled at the developer's expense.

06:41:28 Finally, fire and EMS service will be provided by New Tampa

06:41:32 stations 20, 21 and 22.

06:41:35 The development as built out will only increase emergency

06:41:38 service by 2 to 3% in the annexation area.

06:41:45 I'm available for any questions.

06:41:47 Thank you.

06:41:48 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.

06:41:50 Petitioner.

06:41:59 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East Kennedy

06:42:01 Boulevard representing the applicant on this PD rezoning

06:42:05 which is Taylor Morrison of Florida.

06:42:09 I'm going to start this part of the presentation showing you

06:42:14 the aerial that Ms. Feeley previously showed you.

06:42:18 And this is a 2013 aerial.

06:42:23 And I want to address the overall site and how the acreage

06:42:31 is broken up as far as the development is concerned, because

06:42:35 of the 170 acres, actually in the end, only 64 acres of 170

06:42:43 acres is going to be utilized for the residential

06:42:45 development track, and the reason is about 15 acres is for

06:42:51 right-of-way, 33 acres on this site is wetland areas.

06:42:55 There will be a 4.3-acre amenity area, and then the rest of

06:43:00 it is comprised of open space, significant wildlife habitat

06:43:05 that will be preserved in just other open space on the lot.

06:43:08 And that's 65 acres.

06:43:09 Sole when you take up the right-of-way, the wetlands, the

06:43:12 amenities and the other open space, you really actually only

06:43:19 going to have residential development on 64 acres.

06:43:22 Ms. Feeley also talked about the development standards.

06:43:25 And I am not going to go into that again.

06:43:27 But I do want to mention that bun of the reasons that the

06:43:30 lots are smaller is that it gives the flexibility to do what

06:43:36 you mentioned earlier, Mrs. Montelione, which is to cluster

06:43:40 the development in our tracts of land which have large

06:43:44 environmental areas like this does.

06:43:45 It allows the lots being smaller to cluster closer together

06:43:50 and allow it more area for open space, which is why at 170

06:43:55 acres we only have 64 acres being used for the residential

06:43:58 development.

06:43:59 Another important development standard that I want to review

06:44:03 and emphasize has to do with the buffering that we are

06:44:08 providing on the perimeter of our site as it relates to the

06:44:13 adjacent development.

06:44:16 This map is maybe a little too big, but I did want to go

06:44:20 around the site and address how we are impacting the

06:44:27 adjacent property.

06:44:29 I know Mr. Blank is here and he's been to every planned

06:44:34 amendment hearing, and he's been to -- at this hearing

06:44:38 tonight, and I know that he mentioned that he thought we

06:44:40 were ignoring the Hammocks, which are just immediately to

06:44:43 the north.

06:44:44 The Hammocks are just in this area.

06:44:46 They are on the east side of Royal Hampton Boulevard, which

06:44:50 is the main accessway, not just into our parcel but into

06:44:53 their parcel as well.

06:44:55 And I want to show you, this map is included in your

06:44:58 materials, and it's referred to as the -- the preservation

06:45:09 area map.

06:45:11 And what it showed here is that where --

06:45:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Do could you refer to Royal Hampton

06:45:20 Boulevard on the site plan that we have?

06:45:23 And --

06:45:26 >> Glen?

06:45:27 >> It says Hammocks Glen.

06:45:29 >> It was platted at Hammocks Glen and then at some point it

06:45:33 was changed to Royal Hampton.

06:45:35 It's referred to interchangeably.

06:45:38 >> I wanted to clear because the development agreement says

06:45:40 one thing.

06:45:41 >> Change to the Royal Hampton.

06:45:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just trying to be clear.

06:45:48 >> And Hammocks Glen, and again the Hammocks development is

06:45:51 just to the east of that.

06:45:53 But along the perimeter of this portion of our site, the

06:45:59 Hammocks, you can see we are going to have a pond, and we

06:46:04 don't have that necessarily slated for development.

06:46:07 And as you come down along this portion of the site, which

06:46:10 also adjoins the Hammocks development you have another pond,

06:46:16 and it's really only this small area right in here where

06:46:20 there actually will be proposed development abutting the

06:46:24 Hammocks.

06:46:26 One thing I also wanted to show you as far as the Hammocks

06:46:29 is concerned is I want to show you a map from 2004 which is

06:46:34 an aerial map that shows you what the area now known as the

06:46:38 Hammocks looked like before it was developed.

06:46:41 Here you have the 2013 map, and it shows the Hammocks in

06:46:46 this area.

06:46:47 And then this is what the Hammocks looked like before it

06:46:51 developed.

06:46:52 It had probably more environmental areas on the Hammocks

06:46:56 than we do on our site.

06:46:58 This is our site back in 2004, and it pretty much looks

06:47:03 almost like it does now with large open areas, and then the

06:47:06 wetlands, and then the preservation area along the top three

06:47:12 tier, and I am going to get into the significant wildlife

06:47:15 area that we are going to preserve in and around here.

06:47:19 But our site versus their site.

06:47:21 And you can see the difference in how it looked originally

06:47:26 right here in 2004, and then it was platted and developed,

06:47:32 and this is how it looks now.

06:47:34 And it looks like this main wetland area and this area down

06:47:37 here was all that they say, and all the rest of that side is

06:47:42 completely developed.

06:47:43 So it looked very much like our site did before it was

06:47:47 developed.

06:47:52 And back to the issue of buffering, the other point I wanted

06:47:55 to make is to the south.

06:47:57 I don't think we have anybody here from West Meadows, which

06:48:01 is the development to the south.

06:48:02 But as you can see where they have homes along this area

06:48:07 right in here, that you can see, right in here, our southern

06:48:13 boundary, and you can see this will be buffered by a

06:48:17 100-foot significant wildlife preservation area.

06:48:20 And that area is already under a conservation easement that

06:48:24 was recently approved by Hillsborough County.

06:48:27 So that whole area adjacent to our project will be buffered

06:48:31 by this conservation area.

06:48:33 The Hammocks will be buffered mostly by pond areas. This

06:48:39 area right in here is adjacent to single-family homes in

06:48:46 West Meadows.

06:48:48 So what we did, as Ms. Feeley mentioned, commit to a

06:48:52 condition that says that if we have anything other than

06:48:55 single-family next to single-family, we have

06:48:59 semi-detached -- or semi-detached or attached, we will have

06:49:03 a 100-foot buffer between our proposed development and the

06:49:08 development to the south, or to anywhere else, where there

06:49:13 might be considered inconsistent development.

06:49:14 So we feel like we have adequately buffered this project

06:49:20 from the adjacent areas.

06:49:22 But I also want to go into the environmental issues just a

06:49:26 little bit more.

06:49:27 Actually, there's two main issues we want to address,

06:49:31 environmental and transportation.

06:49:33 Our transportation engineer Bill Oliver is here tonight and

06:49:36 he's going to do a separate presentation to you on the

06:49:39 transportation issue.

06:49:40 But as far as environmental is concerned, there is the

06:49:42 significant wildlife habitat issue, and then there is the

06:49:46 tree issue.

06:49:54 His property was subject to a notice of violation.

06:49:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, Ms. Grimes.

06:50:06 The perimeter adjoining the West Meadows --

06:50:19 On the site plan, you know, it's cross hatched. I don't see

06:50:23 the key as to --

06:50:28 >> The drawings are not shown on the site plan?

06:50:30 Is that what you are asking?

06:50:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.

06:50:33 The existing wetland is shown.

06:50:34 And the cross hatching there.

06:50:36 But the buffer area you are talking about, the 100-foot

06:50:40 buffer along the West Meadows property line?

06:50:46 >>GINA GRIMES: Yes, there is.

06:50:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It doesn't at least to me look like it

06:50:50 was designated as significant wildlife and county be ever,

06:50:55 you know, had developed on anything, put there.

06:50:58 When did the county approve that?

06:51:00 >>GINA GRIMES: This item?

06:51:01 This tab 10 in your book.

06:51:04 Copy of the recorded preservation easement.

06:51:07 >> I didn't get to look at tab 10.

06:51:11 >> It was approved by the Hillsborough County board of

06:51:14 commissioners last Wednesday.

06:51:17 And as recently -- I didn't look at the recording date, but

06:51:21 it was this last Wednesday, but it has been recorded, and I

06:51:24 did include it in the package of material.

06:51:27 So that.

06:51:28 >> So that explains why it's not identified as much on the

06:51:31 site plan because this was submitted prior to last

06:51:33 Wednesday.

06:51:34 >> Yes, but we intended -- we knew that was going to be the

06:51:38 conservation area.

06:51:39 We were waiting for the county to formally approve it.

06:51:41 And it is now formally preserved as conservation area which,

06:51:47 by the way that conservation easement was granted in

06:51:50 Hillsborough County, but it's already been agreed upon, and

06:51:53 there's a document at the end of the conservation easement

06:51:56 where the county intends to assign it to the city,

06:52:02 annexation of this property into the city. So the

06:52:04 conservation easement will then be assigned to the City of

06:52:06 Tampa, as well as the upland habitat management plan.

06:52:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thank you.

06:52:15 >> Way wanted to do was simply explain how we got back to

06:52:22 this conservation easement, and there was notice of

06:52:25 violation in Hillsborough County for the current property

06:52:28 owner who some time ago apparently committed some land

06:52:35 alteration, or conducted some land alteration without a

06:52:40 permit.

06:52:40 And so the county said that they would have to mitigate by

06:52:45 providing preserving significant wildlife habitat on the

06:52:48 site.

06:52:49 And they negotiated a settlement with Hillsborough County,

06:52:52 and that yielded a 19-acre conservation area of on-site

06:52:58 preservation of the significant wildlife habitat.

06:53:00 The county also agreed to allow the developer to mitigate

06:53:04 off-site for 16 acres.

06:53:08 And what that will require is the developer paying into the

06:53:11 Bullfrog Creek habitat management bank $101,000 for off-site

06:53:19 mitigation.

06:53:19 So the total mitigation for the significant wildlife habitat

06:53:23 that's on the site is a 35-acre total.

06:53:28 In addition to that we have 33 acres of wetland on the site.

06:53:32 That will be preserved under the wetland preservation

06:53:35 regulation.

06:53:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: One last thing about the perimeter.

06:53:42 Speaking of that boundary in particular, it may not apply to

06:53:50 that one, but there is a condition in the development

06:53:54 agreement, number 4, page 2 of 8, developer Macon instruct

06:53:59 perimeter walls and fences along the PDA boundaries at a

06:54:04 maximum height of 8 feet.

06:54:07 Walls and fences are not required, and are at the

06:54:11 developer's discretion.

06:54:12 So even if they -- they can't put anything there.

06:54:16 So --

06:54:19 >>GINA GRIMES: That's right.

06:54:20 Yes.

06:54:21 Absolutely.

06:54:22 I guess it goes without saying that you can't erect anything

06:54:26 in the significant wildlife habitat area.

06:54:31 >> But I wanted to point that out because even though it

06:54:33 says that they may at their discretion build an 8-foot wall,

06:54:36 that it county be built in that area.

06:54:39 >>GINA GRIMES: The reason that the wall is addressed, fences

06:54:41 are addressed in the development standards, is you don't

06:54:44 give yourself the ability to constructs a fence, in a PD.

06:54:48 Then if you later want to come back and construct one, you

06:54:51 cannot do it.

06:54:52 So if you are even thinking of constructing a fence you

06:54:57 include in the your PDA application.

06:54:59 So these why it's in there.

06:55:01 And I think the height of the fence came down to 6 feet,

06:55:04 didn't it?

06:55:04 It's going to be required to be six.

06:55:07 That was the original submittal.

06:55:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So this was provided to me last week.

06:55:16 >> There's a revision in the revision sheet that requires to

06:55:20 include a note that says that they will comply with current

06:55:23 development standards.

06:55:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thank you.

06:55:30 >>GINA GRIMES: So as far as the significant wildlife

06:55:33 habitat, you see the areas that are agreed to by the county.

06:55:36 They are also agreed to by the city.

06:55:38 And now they are formally and legally preserved and

06:55:41 protected.

06:55:42 And that conservation easement will be assigned to the City

06:55:45 of Tampa, and they will manage -- or they will be in

06:55:49 agreement with us for the upland habitat management.

06:55:53 The second environmental issue I want to address is the tree

06:55:57 issue.

06:55:57 As Mrs. Feeley mentioned we requested two waivers.

06:56:00 One of the waivers is to allow us to remove more than 50% of

06:56:04 the trees.

06:56:04 We wanted to go up to 67%.

06:56:09 And when it comes to the tree -- and you will see in the

06:56:15 package of materials, that the trees are broken down into

06:56:19 three categories.

06:56:21 The nongrand tree, the grand tree, and the significant

06:56:24 wildlife habitat trees, because there are a number of trees

06:56:27 in the significant wildlife habitat area.

06:56:30 In fact, here again is the aerial.

06:56:33 And you can see in these areas where the significant

06:56:35 wildlife habitat, the conservation easement is located, that

06:56:40 that's where the greatest number of trees are located as

06:56:43 well.

06:56:44 All of the trees -- and there's 262 of them in the

06:56:47 significant wildlife habitat, all of the trees in those

06:56:51 areas will be preserved.

06:56:54 As far as the non-grand tree, there are approximately 17,996

06:57:00 non-grand trees.

06:57:02 What's important is, 1,650, or 82% of all the other trees,

06:57:08 non-grand trees, are pine trees.

06:57:11 And those pine trees do not tolerate fill surrounding the

06:57:17 base of the tree.

06:57:18 And those are principally the trees we are seeking to

06:57:23 remove.

06:57:23 Most of the trees we are removing about 1300 are going to be

06:57:28 the pine trees.

06:57:29 We are saving 665 trees outside of the significant wildlife

06:57:33 habitat areas.

06:57:38 The grand tree, separate category, we are also asking for a

06:57:42 waiver to remove up to 10. 25 grand trees that are on-site.

06:57:48 And the reason for that is the location of these grand

06:57:50 trees.

06:57:51 You can see all the trees are really clustered in two areas,

06:57:55 the significant wildlife habitat areas, and then right here,

06:57:59 almost at the project entrance, again, this is Royal Hampton

06:58:02 Boulevard, which dead-ends right into the project.

06:58:05 We have no control over the location of Royal Hampton

06:58:08 Boulevard.

06:58:10 It comes to this terminus at it exists today.

06:58:14 This is the cluster of grand trees right in here in this

06:58:18 area.

06:58:19 Now, some of that area will be protected right here by the

06:58:26 significant wildlife habitat preservation area and the

06:58:29 conservation easement, but some of those trees are outside

06:58:33 that area.

06:58:35 And given that that's right at the main entrance to the

06:58:39 project is extremely difficult for us to avoid having to

06:58:42 remove some of those streets trees, unfortunately.

06:58:45 Bull what we did agree to do was, it says as a preliminary

06:58:53 plat stage, that when we are finalizing the locations of the

06:58:57 buffers, the setbacks, the ponds, and the roadway, that at

06:59:01 that point in time we will do our breast to jog those things

06:59:06 around trees, including the grand trees, to preserve as many

06:59:10 additional trees above the 3665 as we can.

06:59:14 So I wanted to address that, the reasons for the request to

06:59:20 remove some of these grand trees, and what we are willing to

06:59:22 do to try to actually in the end preserve more trees, and

06:59:28 the natural resources is requiring us as we go through the

06:59:31 preliminary plat stage to do a running total. Trees that

06:59:36 have been taken out a cumulative number of trees taken out

06:59:41 and trees preserved, so they can at all times ensure that we

06:59:46 are staying below the waivers that we are requesting.

06:59:49 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilman Mulhern.

06:59:51 >>MARY MULHERN: To me it looks like this overhead, instead

06:59:56 of having the entryway, the road continue on that Street

06:59:59 straight line, if it's not at right angle to the property

07:00:06 line, if you had to jog over to the west a little, you could

07:00:10 avoid the trees.

07:00:11 >> And again this is the site plan.

07:00:19 This is the area where some of those grand trees are

07:00:21 located.

07:00:22 As we go through the preliminary plat, if it is possible to

07:00:26 jog any of this in any way without losing too many lots --

07:00:31 because remember only 60 some acres of all the 170 are going

07:00:35 to be used for development tracts.

07:00:37 If we can jog it around to save those trees, then we have a

07:00:43 commitment to do so.

07:00:44 And you have to keep in mind natural resources department

07:00:47 will be evaluating all of these different applications every

07:00:51 step of the way, and we will be on-site throughout the

07:00:54 development process.

07:00:55 And the trees are an amenity so there's no reason to remove

07:00:58 them if you don't have to.

07:01:01 But they are located in an area where it's difficult to jog

07:01:05 around standard grand trees.

07:01:08 There is a commitment to do what we can to save as many as

07:01:10 we can.

07:01:11 >>MARY MULHERN: The reason you can't have the road sort of

07:01:15 angled that way is because your building --

07:01:19 >> Well, we have a wetland right here that we can't touch.

07:01:22 And there may be a way to do that.

07:01:25 And I'm sure they will evaluate that as they go through the

07:01:27 process.

07:01:29 And we do have a note on the site plan that says that these

07:01:33 rights-of-way are preliminary, and that they are subject to

07:01:35 change as we go through the platting process.

07:01:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If you could leave that up.

07:01:49 One thing I noticed that's missing from this site plan are

07:01:51 any retention areas.

07:01:54 >>GINA GRIMES: That's correct.

07:01:55 And remember this is a PD-A.

07:01:57 >>ABBYE FEELEY: If I may, land development.

07:02:01 This is a planned development alternative.

07:02:03 They are going to have to bring infrastructure to the site.

07:02:05 They are going to have to plat the site.

07:02:07 They are going to have to do a lot of other things.

07:02:09 This isn't just one piece that's ready to go to development

07:02:11 now that we can say, okay, we know we can move the road five

07:02:16 feet.

07:02:17 I mean, they are going to have sewer connections, water

07:02:19 connections, all these things coming in.

07:02:21 We have to be a little forthright in assuming and making

07:02:24 some assumptions that will allow them to develop it to a

07:02:27 certain point where they are not coming back before you

07:02:30 because we said, oh, we are going to retain 55.23%, and we

07:02:37 do try to put in some provisions to allow especially on a

07:02:40 site like this where you have such large significant

07:02:43 wildlife and other things to allow from development

07:02:48 consistent with our comp plan and our zoning code and have a

07:02:51 little foresight to allow for some of those --

07:02:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: This is going to be -- I mean, they are

07:02:58 not going to come in again, so this is pretty much just this

07:03:03 reading and second reading going to be the time that we can

07:03:06 weigh in, correct?

07:03:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.

07:03:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Unless they can significantly change the

07:03:12 site plan for some reason.

07:03:13 >> But this isn't the site plan.

07:03:15 This is a than overall site plan with a master set of

07:03:18 development standards --

07:03:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: My only point was that if we have

07:03:23 limited opportunities to weigh in, and I think that's where

07:03:26 Ms. Mulhern and I -- why we are expressing our concerns now.

07:03:34 >>GINA GRIMES: You usually do PDs and they are very

07:03:36 specific site plans, and that's what you have to a bid by.

07:03:40 But when you do a PDA, it's a conceptual site plan.

07:03:44 As you go through and finalize your development, and you

07:03:46 take that specific development, like you would a PD site

07:03:50 plan, and they evaluate that and make sure you don't exceed

07:03:53 any of these parameters that City Council sets, so it's

07:03:58 different from what you are used to because it's more

07:04:00 conceptual and has more flexibility built into it and you

07:04:03 have to do that when you have a site that's 170 acres.

07:04:07 There's no way that you can pinpoint everything at this

07:04:10 early of a stage.

07:04:11 Where you can on a two-acre PD or one acre PD, or those

07:04:15 kinds of PDs.

07:04:17 It's easier to engineer and design that and develop it as

07:04:20 opposed to have a very, very large site, with all these

07:04:23 different issues that you have to deal with in stages, as

07:04:26 you go through the development process.

07:04:30 So I do realize and appreciate the fact that it is different

07:04:33 than what you are used to, and it doesn't have all the

07:04:36 specifics on here that you are used to seeing.

07:04:38 I do know our engineer can testify that those wetland areas

07:04:42 have already received approval, so they are mix fixed.

07:04:49 They are not shown on the PD site plan, but that is where

07:04:52 the ponds are already permitted to be located.

07:04:57 With that I am going to turn now to Bill Oliver.

07:05:00 Again he's our transportation engineer and he's going to

07:05:03 address the traffic impact study that he conducted, and the

07:05:06 results of that.

07:05:07 >> Bill Oliver, senior vice-president, Tindale Oliver in

07:05:24 Tampa, north Ashley drive, suite 400.

07:05:28 We undertook the traffic concurrency study for this

07:05:30 development as everyone has said.

07:05:32 It's a 425-unit development, single-family.

07:05:35 We have estimated that it would all be built as

07:05:38 single-family units for purposes of the traffic study, which

07:05:41 results in a slightly higher estimate of traffic generation,

07:05:45 but basically, we estimated the site would generate about

07:05:50 4,000 daily trips.

07:05:53 From a vacant tract of land which is surrounded by

07:05:56 subdivisions, and it's laid out, obviously, if you look at

07:05:59 the aerial, anticipating the single road access, via Royal

07:06:04 Hampton drive.

07:06:07 Royal Hampton is a two-lane road.

07:06:09 Currently serves two residential pockets in the Hammocks,

07:06:15 with a total of 500 dwelling units, and currently as the

07:06:18 road approaches County Line Road, carries about 2500 to 3

07:06:23 that you cars a day.

07:06:27 That level of traffic is well within the capability of a

07:06:30 residential major collector roadway.

07:06:33 No homes front on Royal Hampton drive.

07:06:37 And walls exist to protect the homes from vehicular noise

07:06:41 and traffic intrusion or people intruding on the roadway.

07:06:46 The institute of transportation engineers provides planning

07:06:49 guidelines for roadway design in residential areas.

07:06:52 And I have got a table here that kind of summarizes.

07:07:19 Okay, streets and residential areas that you can see running

07:07:23 off the edge of your screen at the top right corner.

07:07:25 Major collector road.

07:07:27 If you just zip down that column to the bottom line, it

07:07:30 basically indicates the major collector roadway --

07:07:36 >> Excuse me Mr. Oliver's time is up but let's let him

07:07:40 finish this presentation because I'm sure it's related to --

07:07:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: There were so many questions of Ms. Grimes

07:07:50 that we allow him to finish.

07:07:53 Thank you, chair.

07:07:53 >> Their guidance and vice is that a major roadway can serve

07:07:59 up to about a thousand dwelling units.

07:08:01 And with the 500 that exist in the Hammocks plus the 425

07:08:05 units that we adhere, we are talking about 925 dwelling

07:08:11 units, and that's it.

07:08:13 That's all this road will serve.

07:08:14 So it's exactly in line.

07:08:17 The land area has been designed and planned exactly in line

07:08:21 with what these guidelines give us.

07:08:24 We have undertaken a very detailed traffic study.

07:08:28 It's been reviewed by your staff.

07:08:30 The site does meet concurrency requirements.

07:08:33 Currently there's in a traffic signal at the intersection of

07:08:37 Royal Hampton and County Line Road.

07:08:40 We recommend it because roughly somewhere in the range of

07:08:44 about 3500 to 5,000 cars a day is when you typically start

07:08:48 to meet warrants for signalization, for installation of the

07:08:53 traffic signal.

07:08:53 The traffic right now is just below that threshold, with the

07:08:56 addition of our traffic, we anticipate delays will become

07:08:59 long, and we have recommended that a traffic signal be

07:09:03 installed at that intersection, at some point in the future,

07:09:07 should warrants be met, and our guess is that based on the

07:09:11 math mat mix, warrants will be met.

07:09:14 So that's essentially the findings, and we are glad to

07:09:19 answer any questions that you may have.

07:09:20 >>HARRY COHEN: Any questions from council members?

07:09:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just one.

07:09:26 And again just for clarity.

07:09:29 Where that signal is proposed, Mr. Oliver, is not within the

07:09:34 City of Tampa city limits?

07:09:37 >> That's correct.

07:09:38 County Line Road is under the jurisdiction of Hillsborough

07:09:40 County.

07:09:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Parts of it are, parts of aren't, but

07:09:44 that particular spot -- well, Ms. Grimes, thank you very

07:09:51 much.

07:09:52 Can you bring it down a little bit?

07:09:54 We can't see that on our screen.

07:09:57 To bring it down.

07:09:58 There you go.

07:10:01 >>GINA GRIMES: The red line is the jurisdictional limits of

07:10:03 the city.

07:10:05 You can see the city limits end here.

07:10:07 And you are right, the signal would be installed on County

07:10:11 Line Road, which would be in Hillsborough County.

07:10:14 >> So how is that handled then?

07:10:19 If we are requiring the developer to install a signal, but

07:10:25 it's not within the City of Tampa jurisdiction, can you shed

07:10:29 light on that, Mr. Oliver?

07:10:31 >> Well, the developer Taylor Morrison would be the

07:10:34 responsible spent.

07:10:37 You would basically approach -- presuming the residents of

07:10:40 that area get frustrated with the delay, they would then

07:10:45 approach Hillsborough County with the signal warrant study,

07:10:48 requesting that they be granted a permit to install their

07:10:51 traffic signal.

07:10:52 >> So they would have to -- I know the warrants have to be

07:10:58 met before we can install a signal.

07:11:00 I mean, we don't vice-president any control over that.

07:11:04 But it would be prudent, I would say, for the developer to

07:11:11 monitor themselves and not wait for the community to get

07:11:16 frustrated because the traffic has got to the point that it

07:11:21 causes them to make phone calls.

07:11:24 So if there is some way that the development company Taylor

07:11:29 Morrison could track and periodically test the intersection

07:11:37 to see if it meets those warrants, that would, I think, be

07:11:41 preferable than getting angry people who then have to make

07:11:46 requests to have that done.

07:11:47 >> And that perhaps could be incorporated into the

07:11:51 conditions of approval.

07:11:52 To my knowledge, such a monitoring condition is not in the

07:11:55 current conditions.

07:11:56 >> Thank you.

07:11:57 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Capin.

07:12:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: My question was that we are not requiring

07:12:09 that traffic light.

07:12:10 The city is not requiring that traffic light.

07:12:12 >> It's customary whether you develop within the county or

07:12:18 the city that the developer's traffic creates the need for

07:12:21 the traffic signal, they are usually the ones on the block

07:12:26 to have it installed.

07:12:29 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

07:12:29 But it would be required from the county?

07:12:33 >> That's correct.

07:12:34 The county would have to permit it.

07:12:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

07:12:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Oliver, the question I have, it would

07:12:41 have to meet the warrant first.

07:12:46 By virtue of the fact of the rezoning, it probably won't

07:12:49 reach the warrant until -- I don't know if your study said

07:12:52 at what time it would reach that warrant, that would then

07:12:56 trigger a traffic light study.

07:12:58 >> Right.

07:13:00 Meeting the warrant is a little bit of a tricky proposition

07:13:03 in this particular case, because normally the longest delays

07:13:07 are incurred by cars that want to exit that want to turn

07:13:12 left or northbound straight through N.this case most of the

07:13:15 traffic wants to make a right turn and go east to 581.

07:13:18 So it's probably going to be on the higher side, closer up

07:13:23 to the a 5,000, maybe even 6,000 cars a day before the

07:13:27 warranty conditions are met.

07:13:29 So a field study would be appropriate, at the appropriate

07:13:31 time.

07:13:31 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilman Reddick.

07:13:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: The streetlights.

07:13:40 Do the streetlights go the same location?

07:13:46 >>GINA GRIMES: Yes.

07:13:46 The last stab is the city staff report.

07:13:48 On page 6 of the staff report, it has the two conditions.

07:13:51 The streetlight, Mr. Reddick, and the signal lights

07:13:57 intersection condition.

07:13:58 Both of those conditions are stated there.

07:14:00 And the way the city has proposed the wording is that as far

07:14:03 as the signalization, it says within two years of final CO,

07:14:12 that's a long period of time.

07:14:14 You are talking about buildout. Entire project.

07:14:16 Within two years. Final CO and when warranted by City of

07:14:19 Tampa transportation division the developer will design and

07:14:23 construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Royal

07:14:26 Hampton and County Line Road.

07:14:27 So that gives the residents specifically at the Hammocks the

07:14:32 assurance that there isn't going to be a long period of time

07:14:35 when this obligation is going to remain in place, so as the

07:14:39 project build out, if the traffic gets to that level after

07:14:43 build-out, and plus two years after buildout, and the signal

07:14:48 meets warrants, then it will have to be designed and

07:14:51 constructed by the developer.

07:14:54 Mr. Reddick, as to the request to install streetlights, it

07:15:01 has the first building permit, the developer will install

07:15:05 streetlight and county line reason road and Hampton

07:15:08 Boulevard with efficient foot candle to illuminate the

07:15:12 entire intersection and we will have to execute a TECO

07:15:15 street contract and plan for -- plan for evaluation to the

07:15:20 city department prior to streetlight installation.

07:15:24 And I wanted to mention this in closing because I don't want

07:15:27 to take up too much more time, we did meet with the

07:15:29 residents of the hammock on October 21st.

07:15:32 We met with their HOA.

07:15:34 And one of the concerns they had was that intersection, and

07:15:38 the fact that sometimes when people turn to go southbound on

07:15:43 Royal hammock, they overturn, and their landscaping along in

07:15:48 that area is impacted, and hopefully the light will help a

07:15:53 little bit, because it is dark in that area, and it will

07:15:57 help people when they make that turn, at least at night, to

07:16:00 navigate it, maybe a little bit more smoothly.

07:16:04 And then there are other concerns the hammock's other

07:16:06 concern was the traffic on Royal Hampton, and the concern

07:16:09 about the signalization.

07:16:11 I also wanted to mention on September 3rd we had another

07:16:15 neighborhood meeting.

07:16:16 And a lot of the residents from West Meadows came, and they

07:16:19 wanted to look at the site plan, and I don't believe any of

07:16:22 them are here today.

07:16:23 And the last resident that we heard from quite frequently

07:16:31 was Mr. Caetano.

07:16:32 I know I spoke to him several times.

07:16:34 The staff spoke to him.

07:16:36 Planning Commission spoke to him.

07:16:38 Mr. Caetano had mentioned to us about a request he had to

07:16:41 install a sidewalk along County Line Road.

07:16:45 And I'm not sure why when the Hammocks was developed, which

07:16:49 is much closer to County Line Road than we are, why they

07:16:52 didn't require that that sidewalk be installed at that point

07:16:56 in time.

07:16:56 I think when the Hammocks in 2005, when the Hammocks was

07:17:01 platted, I think Mr. Caetano might have been on City Council

07:17:04 at that point in time.

07:17:05 The sidewalk is not required.

07:17:08 And we don't believe it's our obligation to build a sidewalk

07:17:11 three quarters of a mile from our development.

07:17:13 We are building our own internal sidewalks, and there are

07:17:17 sidewalks on Royal Hampton, but we do not feel it's our

07:17:20 obligation to build a sidewalk on this portion of County

07:17:22 Line Road.

07:17:24 >> We have two council members with questions.

07:17:27 Council member Montelione and Councilman Suarez.

07:17:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess when I asked of Mr. Oliver about

07:17:37 the trigger for meeting those warrants, and you yourself

07:17:44 noticed quite a long period of time, two years after the

07:17:47 final certificate of occupancy was issued, at that point,

07:17:54 I'm assuming, already will be some people living there, when

07:17:58 the final certificate of occupancy is issued.

07:18:02 >> Yes, right.

07:18:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And two years after that is -- that

07:18:08 doesn't mean -- Ms. Feeley is like dying to say something

07:18:12 here.

07:18:12 I can tell.

07:18:13 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I think there is a miscommunication, or

07:18:21 when warranted.

07:18:22 Let's say it takes five years.

07:18:24 >> Oh, it says and when warranted, not "or."

07:18:29 >> But it's up to two years after, up to two years after the

07:18:33 CO, or when it is warranted.

07:18:35 So if they build the first 150 units -- then I'll make the

07:18:39 clarification, because -- I had an in-depth briefing with

07:18:44 Susan Johnson this afternoon and the intent of that

07:18:46 statement is when it is warranted, or up to two years after

07:18:52 full buildout.

07:18:53 So if they build the first 100 units --

07:18:57 >> If it said "or" I wouldn't have --

07:19:01 >> I will clarify that.

07:19:03 >> And in legal language between --

07:19:06 >> I understand what you are saying.

07:19:08 But the intent of that is, when the signal is warranted, and

07:19:11 it meets warrant, or up to two years after full buildout.

07:19:16 >> So we'll make a change.

07:19:18 >> Absolutely.

07:19:18 Absolutely.

07:19:19 I didn't want the discussion to continue down that path when

07:19:22 the intent is, as soon as it is warranted, that signal is

07:19:25 going to be taken care of.

07:19:26 >> And they will have to conduct some kind of tests, some

07:19:32 field tests.

07:19:33 >> It is done on a regular basis, much like a discussion we

07:19:36 had a few weeks ago on another intersection where the

07:19:39 question came as to when warrants are in existence, the

07:19:43 signal would be put in.

07:19:44 So, yes.

07:19:45 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilman Suarez?

07:19:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The only question I had, and maybe Ms.

07:19:50 Feeley or Ms. Grimes.

07:19:52 When I was following the decision about the warrants, the

07:19:55 city would monitor that traffic during the course of the

07:19:59 build-out for that property.

07:20:01 Is that correct?

07:20:03 Did I hear that incorrectly?

07:20:06 I think Mr. Oliver might have said it.

07:20:08 >> No, that's correct.

07:20:09 I mean, we monitor for those intersections now, whether this

07:20:13 development is occurring or not.

07:20:14 If there's other developments that's now warranting the

07:20:17 signal.

07:20:18 >> My point is if we are monitoring it, but the signal

07:20:20 itself, when it comes -- I mean, the county itself doesn't

07:20:25 have any kind of -- I mean, is this going to be a process

07:20:28 where the city and the county have to work together in order

07:20:30 to get the signalization?

07:20:32 >> Yes.

07:20:33 We do it all the time.

07:20:34 >> I want to make sure, because sometimes when we do these

07:20:36 things, get confused as to who has responsibility for what.

07:20:40 And I just you wanted to make sure we are Clare on it.

07:20:42 We are going to monitor what the traffic warrants are going

07:20:45 to be, then the builder is going to, as part of the site

07:20:49 plan, say this that they will build that streetlight at

07:20:53 County Line Road, and Royal hammock.

07:20:58 Royal Hampton, excuse me.

07:20:59 Is it Hammocks or Hamptons?

07:21:03 I know we are going to be confused on that. Is that

07:21:05 correct, Mrs. Feeley, what I just said?

07:21:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes, absolutely.

07:21:10 Intergovernmental coordination it.

07:21:12 We do will that all the time.

07:21:13 We are out there monitoring and this is standard practice,

07:21:15 yes.

07:21:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just wanted to make sure.

07:21:19 Thank you, Ms. Grimes, I appreciate it.

07:21:21 >>HARRY COHEN: All right.

07:21:27 So on this item, we have three minutes per speaker.

07:21:31 And the first speaker -- that's our rule.

07:21:34 Please just line up and come see us one by one.

07:21:37 >> Jeffrey Blank, 20115 Indian Rosewood Drive. I am the

07:21:41 vice-president and treasurer of the Hammocks HOA and

07:21:44 chairman of the Hammocks CDD.

07:21:48 Three minutes for a 133 page traffic study, that's a little

07:21:51 tough.

07:21:52 First of all, the traffic study, County Line Road is a 55

07:21:57 mile-an-hour speed limit, not 45.

07:22:00 It is an accident-prone road.

07:22:03 I don't know if you have seen the crash data on that road.

07:22:07 If not, you definitely need to.

07:22:10 That intersection that's in question, Royal Hampton

07:22:13 intersection, I sit in that intersection trying to make a

07:22:17 turn.

07:22:17 I'm from New York.

07:22:18 I'm used to Manhattan driving.

07:22:20 I have trouble making that turn.

07:22:22 Forget about anyone who is not used to that.

07:22:24 As it is, County Line Road right now has no sidewalks along

07:22:29 there, no riding along the stretches between Royal Hampton

07:22:35 and Bruce B. Downs.

07:22:36 People walk along there.

07:22:38 People bicycle ride along there.

07:22:40 I came within inches of hitting a bicycle two nights ago

07:22:44 because there was nowhere for them to ride, no way for them

07:22:49 to walk except in the road.

07:22:51 And now, several years down the road, if we are lucky, from

07:22:58 the sounds of it, we are going to consider putting a traffic

07:23:00 light at this intersection.

07:23:03 Add to that the fact that there's an ID, Trout Creek, an

07:23:10 apartment complex and an entrance to another housing

07:23:12 development across the way from there.

07:23:14 That intersection makes Manhattan driving look easy, okay?

07:23:21 Cars come out of there.

07:23:22 They make a left.

07:23:23 It is almost impossible.

07:23:25 But they do it.

07:23:26 And I watched near misses and hits on a regular basis.

07:23:32 The other thing is, on Royal Hampton Road, we have two

07:23:38 school bus stops along that road with probably somewhere in

07:23:41 the neighborhood of 100 kids, multiple school buses

07:23:44 throughout the day.

07:23:45 We are going to now be having construction trucks going down

07:23:48 there morning, noon and night going with the kids standing

07:23:54 on the corners waiting for the school buses.

07:23:59 As far as also the homeowners in there, the brick wall, I

07:24:05 don't have a brick wall on the Hammocks side.

07:24:08 We have a fence.

07:24:09 It's two-story buildings.

07:24:11 So they get hit with the dust and the road and the dirt

07:24:14 coming along there.

07:24:16 In addition, I just heard, I believe, it was 1300 trees that

07:24:20 are being taken down?

07:24:22 1300 trees?

07:24:26 These are old growth trees.

07:24:29 How can you just wipe that away?

07:24:31 They are not replaceable.

07:24:33 What that does to the community and to water retention in

07:24:36 the area.

07:24:37 Are you aware that there's an area there that has been

07:24:40 designated as flood zone now, in the new floodplain maps.

07:24:44 (Bell sounds)

07:24:45 Pi don't see any write-up about that or any mention of that

07:24:49 that they are going to be affecting the new floodplain.

07:24:52 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay, thank you very much.

07:24:54 >> Joseph Caetano.

07:25:03 I live in the grand Hamptons.

07:25:06 I heard a report that by putting these homes, it's only

07:25:11 going to bring up one percent on the fire department.

07:25:13 Is that what somebody said?

07:25:16 Two percent?

07:25:17 Who gave you those figures?

07:25:19 Fire department?

07:25:20 I don't believe it.

07:25:21 Fire department was complaining the other night.

07:25:24 How long it took them to get to the accident in front of

07:25:29 Burger King.

07:25:30 And that's where these apartments are even going to be

07:25:33 further.

07:25:35 So we have got about 2,000 homes here.

07:25:39 I have been talking with Mr. Bratt from the traffic

07:25:44 department under Jean Duncan's department.

07:25:46 We are going to have a meeting with Hillsborough County

07:25:48 because these poles where I want to see the streetlights are

07:25:53 is in Hillsborough County.

07:25:54 And he's also going to bring in Pasco County, because they

07:25:57 are going to take advantage of this.

07:25:58 They put a lot of traffic on that road.

07:26:02 Once the sidewalks are in, if they are going to be in, they

07:26:06 can't be cement sidewalks because of the slope of the land.

07:26:09 It would be too expensive.

07:26:10 And I recommended putting foot bridges like they have on

07:26:15 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard.

07:26:19 Do we have a crash report?

07:26:21 Has anybody seen one?

07:26:24 Mr. Chairman?

07:26:25 Has the council seen a crash report?

07:26:27 >>HARRY COHEN: I'm not sure.

07:26:29 We may want to ask Mr. Oliver.

07:26:31 I don't think that that's a part of the traffic analysis

07:26:34 that was undertaken, though.

07:26:35 >> All right.

07:26:38 I have one provided by the police department.

07:26:40 Also, the police department recommends streetlights on

07:26:43 County Line Road.

07:26:45 I have that documentation, also.

07:26:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Montelione.

07:26:49 >> Do you have that with you, Mr. Caetano?

07:26:52 >> No, I do not have it Mr. Brett has it.

07:26:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because we would have considered it as

07:26:57 evidence.

07:26:59 But I can't pull it and introduce it myself.

07:27:01 Someone else would have to do it.

07:27:02 >> If I can get to a computer I can bring it up.

07:27:06 It's on my computer.

07:27:09 Do you have any crash data or out-- how come we don't have

07:27:14 it?

07:27:15 >> Mr. Caetano, since we are in public comment, you really

07:27:19 need to direct your comments to us.

07:27:20 >> So that land is owned by Hillsborough County.

07:27:25 And Mr. Breck is going to set a meeting up with the city,

07:27:29 the county, and Pasco County in order to do that.

07:27:33 And he definitely wants streetlights there.

07:27:42 There is a sidewalk six tenths of a mail to the east that

07:27:47 was put by the developer from the shopping center on the

07:27:49 corner.

07:27:50 But it ends.

07:27:51 So if they put a sidewalk, they would have to go six tenths

07:27:55 of a mile until it meets the other sidewalk.

07:27:57 Every day, there's people walking there.

07:28:00 I saw a young lady at 10:30 in the morning with a baby

07:28:03 carriage.

07:28:04 And I happened to see her at 5:00 in the evening in front of

07:28:07 Sweetbay.

07:28:07 I asked her, did you go down County Line Road this morning?

07:28:12 She said, yes, I walked to the library, ten mails.

07:28:15 With a baby carriage.

07:28:17 With a 13-month old baby.

07:28:20 Is that the end of my time, sir?

07:28:22 >> No.

07:28:22 The end of your time is when it turns red, but it's

07:28:26 blinking.

07:28:27 >> I am not against the development.

07:28:28 But what I don't want to see is the city grab the money like

07:28:31 they do everything else, because New Tampa brings 13% of the

07:28:36 ad valorem tax money that comes into the city, comes

07:28:40 downtown.

07:28:41 We got one park.

07:28:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

07:28:46 Is there anyone else?

07:28:50 >> Fran Plantikow, 20108 Indian Rosewood Drive.

07:28:56 And in respect to all of these high-level views, I would

07:29:00 like you to actually see pictures of the area that's going

07:29:03 to be affected.

07:29:06 This is turn one.

07:29:08 And this is how narrow this road is.

07:29:11 Now, you picture construction trucks coming up and down this

07:29:14 road.

07:29:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What road are you on?

07:29:19 >> This is Royal Hampton.

07:29:22 This is a closer view of that first turn.

07:29:29 This is not going to show up too well.

07:29:31 What I was looking to do is show the view of the second

07:29:34 turn, and that's here.

07:29:37 And I will give you a close-up of that.

07:29:45 You can see these are actual turns that again we are talking

07:29:50 4,000 vehicles.

07:29:52 We are talking construction.

07:29:53 We are talking fire and security and ambulances coming up --

07:30:01 this is the entrance to the second one.

07:30:03 And again you can see the significant turn here.

07:30:07 I'm trying to hurry.

07:30:10 I'm throwing this in.

07:30:12 It's the same turn but you get to see the deer standing

07:30:16 there, when I happened to take it.

07:30:18 We do have wildlife.

07:30:20 It will not be there with 425 units.

07:30:24 Another picture of the deer.

07:30:26 Excuse me.

07:30:28 I love deer.

07:30:31 This is the third bend in the road.

07:30:38 Once again you can see now -- well, I'll take the next one.

07:30:44 There's in a chance of widening.

07:30:50 It's got the fire hydrant here.

07:30:52 We have got the electrical box here.

07:30:54 So we are not going to be widening this road as the 4,000

07:30:59 vehicles come down it.

07:31:04 This is the end of the road.

07:31:07 And you can see the left-hand turn to accommodate maybe four

07:31:13 vehicles.

07:31:14 Maybe?

07:31:15 Now, you know when this light, if it comes on in eight

07:31:21 years, that if anybody turning left is going to come down

07:31:27 the opposite side of the street to get to this -- here is

07:31:31 another one of that same intersection, and you can see there

07:31:35 just isn't egress to leave it.

07:31:38 So the fire -- the ambulances may get in but they are going

07:31:44 to have a tough time getting out again carrying individuals.

07:31:48 This is turning right onto County Line Road.

07:31:52 This is going 55 miles per hour.

07:31:56 We are not talking -- this is where they are turning into

07:32:03 the area.

07:32:03 (Bell sounds)

07:32:06 That's the kind of traffic we are dealing with now.

07:32:09 Not 4 that you people that are also with 4 that you cars

07:32:14 that are also going to join.

07:32:15 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

07:32:17 >> You can see that it's going to have a significant impact.

07:32:22 There were seven cars lined up to turn right at Royal

07:32:25 Hampton.

07:32:27 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

07:32:30 Is there anyone else who would like to address council on

07:32:32 this item?

07:32:34 Now would be your opportunity.

07:32:39 Okay.

07:32:41 Petitioner?

07:32:43 You have an opportunity for rebuttal.

07:32:47 And there may be additional questions from council members.

07:32:51 >>GINA GRIMES: A brief rebuttal.

07:32:52 Mr. Blank talked about the number of trees that are proposed

07:32:55 to be removed.

07:32:56 The 1300 trees that are proposed to be removed,

07:33:01 80-some-percent of those trees as I mentioned before are

07:33:04 pine trees.

07:33:06 That will not live even if they stayed on-site because of

07:33:09 the fill requirements.

07:33:11 And again, the area that he lived in, or he lives in now,

07:33:19 was predevelopment stage.

07:33:23 It had probably more trees than what you see on the subject

07:33:27 site.

07:33:29 So they are holding basically this project to a different

07:33:32 standard than they themselves better held to.

07:33:35 Mr. Caetano talked about not believing that the fire

07:33:38 department said there was a two to three percent increase in

07:33:42 the calls for service.

07:33:43 I have a memo from Chief Forward dated May 22nd, and in

07:33:50 there it says there would be approximately 2% to 3% annual

07:33:54 increase for fire and EMS response in the annexed areas as a

07:33:57 result of the development.

07:33:58 The crash data that he wanted is not required as information

07:34:03 to be submitted as part of the traffic impact study.

07:34:05 So we do not have that.

07:34:07 I'm not sure if they are relevant.

07:34:09 The streetlighting issue, we committed to putting a

07:34:12 streetlight in, three quarters of a mile from our project.

07:34:16 We are not required to, but the transportation department

07:34:19 requested that and we agreed to it.

07:34:22 The last issue is on the sidewalks.

07:34:25 Mr. Oliver mentioned to me that there is a proposal, I

07:34:29 think, that's going to be presented to City Council about

07:34:32 expanding the use of impact fees, transportation fee impact

07:34:36 money and part of that proposal is to allow impact fee money

07:34:38 to be used for things such as sidewalks.

07:34:41 And he said, if that change to the code is made, then this

07:34:45 project will be paying a significant amount of

07:34:49 transportation impact fees, fanned so desired by the city,

07:34:51 some of that money could be earmarked for sidewalks on

07:34:55 County Line Road.

07:34:56 But it is, again, it's in the county.

07:34:58 It's not in the city.

07:35:00 So I don't know --

07:35:02 >> I'm sure the city could build a sidewalk and not be part

07:35:11 of the city.

07:35:11 >> Sometimes it can.

07:35:13 You can use the money outside the jurisdictional limits.

07:35:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: There was one issue.

07:35:25 It happens to take place tomorrow, and both Councilman

07:35:29 Suarez and Councilman Cohen know that I have been appointed

07:35:35 by the MPO to represent Hillsborough County to a TRY-county

07:35:42 group to work on transportation issues, specifically between

07:35:46 Hillsborough County, Pasco County, and Pinellas County, and

07:35:52 County Line Road is one of a long list of issues that I have

07:35:59 to bring up in the discussions with Pasco County.

07:36:04 The committee was just formed a month ago and approved by

07:36:09 the Hillsborough MPO as well as the Pinellas and Pasco

07:36:14 MPOMPOs, so myself, Mark Sharpe and Sandy Murman will be

07:36:19 representing Hillsborough County on that newly formed

07:36:21 tricounty group.

07:36:23 So the issue of widening a sidewalk, lighting, all that is

07:36:30 going to eventually -- I said our very first meeting is just

07:36:35 an organizational meeting, and that it's taking place

07:36:38 tomorrow.

07:36:38 So it will be a little while before we actually get into the

07:36:44 nuts and bolts of negotiating the important issues that face

07:36:49 the three counties.

07:36:49 >> I just wanted to add one more thing.

07:36:54 On the crash safety thing, apparently the concerns are

07:36:57 preexisting condition.

07:36:58 However, when the warrant analysis is done for the traffic

07:37:03 signal, safety, crash patterns, are a consideration in that

07:37:09 study process.

07:37:11 So a traffic signal could be warranted based on crash

07:37:14 patterns if those crashes are the type that can be cured

07:37:18 through installation of the traffic signal.

07:37:20 I just want to let you know. It's not totally off the

07:37:22 radar.

07:37:23 The safety issue is not totally off the radar.

07:37:26 It is part of the signal warrant analysis.

07:37:28 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Montelione.

07:37:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Can you tell me, Mr. Oliver, what the

07:37:35 warrants are?

07:37:36 I mean, we heard them before.

07:37:38 >> There's a variety of situations.

07:37:41 >> Well, let me preface why I am asking the question.

07:37:49 Is part of the issue the construction trucks coming back and

07:37:52 forth, and the safety of the children getting off the school

07:37:55 buses?

07:38:00 Could the traffic lights be met even prior to half the

07:38:07 residents moving in?

07:38:09 >> Well, I am not going to -- the warrant analysis doesn't

07:38:13 specifically deal with Ole well, if it's pedestrian

07:38:17 signalization, yes, possibly, if they are crossing the

07:38:21 street.

07:38:21 But if it's a matter of them getting down Royal Hampton, my

07:38:25 gut tells me the warrants probably would not be.

07:38:27 It's a combination. Traffic volume on the roadway they are

07:38:31 crossing, plus the volume of traffic or pedestrians crossing

07:38:34 the street itself, are most of the criteria. And basically,

07:38:40 you put in a signal, you are creating the lanes, so it's a

07:38:43 trade-off between how much delay and all that technical

07:38:46 stuff U.

07:38:52 >>GINA GRIMES: The last issue that hi wanted to address that

07:38:54 was mentioned by the third speaker -- and I apologize, I

07:38:57 didn't write her name down -- but she mentioned the concern

07:39:00 about Royal Hampton drive and not being able to handle this

07:39:03 amount of traffic.

07:39:03 The traffic impact study that we submitted a dressed that

07:39:06 issue.

07:39:07 I believe -- and I can't find exactly where I saw it, but

07:39:11 it's a 60-foot right-of-way, which is significantly wider

07:39:14 than most rights-of-way that you see throughout the city.

07:39:19 And the study shows, the competent substantial evidence

07:39:23 shows that it is has sufficient capacity to handle the

07:39:27 traffic subject to the intersection on meeting warrants and

07:39:31 a signal being installed.

07:39:33 With that I would like to make sure that the record includes

07:39:36 the traffic impact study as well as the package of materials

07:39:39 that I submitted.

07:39:40 I am going to give them to the clerk.

07:39:42 All of that is substantial and competent evidence to support

07:39:46 the approval, all of the staff recommended approval, and

07:39:50 with that we would ask for your approval of this PDA

07:39:53 rezoning.

07:39:54 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay, Councilwoman Capin.

07:39:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Move to close.

07:39:58 >> Okay.

07:40:00 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion to close from Councilman

07:40:03 Capin, seconded by Councilman Reddick.

07:40:06 All in favor?

07:40:07 Opposed?

07:40:09 Okay, motion passes.

07:40:10 We have item number 12.

07:40:12 Councilman Suarez.

07:40:14 Will you please take item number 12?

07:40:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move an ordinance for first reading

07:40:19 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

07:40:21 vicinity of Royal Hampton Boulevard, south of County Line

07:40:24 Road to property line with the Grand Hampton/hammocks in the

07:40:28 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in

07:40:30 section 1 from zoning district classification PD-A, planned

07:40:36 development alternative, and AS-1 , Hillsborough County, to

07:40:39 PD-A, planned development, alternative, residential

07:40:42 single-family detached, attached, and semi-detached,

07:40:45 providing an effective date.

07:40:45 >> Second.

07:40:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Please include the revisions.

07:40:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Including the revision sheet as provided by

07:40:54 staff and by applicant.

07:41:00 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion by Councilman Suarez,

07:41:02 seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

07:41:03 All those in favor?

07:41:05 Opposed?

07:41:05 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

07:41:10 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

07:41:14 9:30 a.m.

07:41:15 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.

07:41:17 We are going to take a five-minute recess, and we will be

07:41:20 back at 7:45 to complete the agenda.

07:41:23 >> (City Council in recess).

07:41:33 >>

07:47:55 (Tampa City Council reconvenes.)

07:52:30 [Sounding gavel]

07:53:46 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay, welcome back.

07:53:48 Tampa City Council is back in session.

07:53:51 Roll call.

07:53:56 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.

07:53:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

07:53:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

07:54:00 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

07:54:06 >> We are going to move back to item number 6, a

07:54:09 non-quasi-judicial proceeding.

07:54:10 If I could have a motion to just open the public hearing for

07:54:13 item number 6.

07:54:14 >> So moved.

07:54:15 >> Second.

07:54:16 >> We have a motion from Councilwoman Capin, seconded by

07:54:18 Councilwoman Mulhern.

07:54:20 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

07:54:26 Opposed?

07:54:27 All right.

07:54:27 >> Good evening.

07:54:33 Planning Commission staff.

07:54:34 I'm here to present to you Tampa comprehensive plan

07:54:37 amendment 1303 located at west Carmen street and north

07:54:42 Sterling Avenue.

07:54:44 This is a privately initiated plan amendment.

07:54:47 A small scale plan amendment which means it's less than 10

07:54:50 acres and the proposed change is from a residential 20 which

07:54:53 typically allows for single-family duplexes, condos and town

07:54:58 homes and limited commercial, to a community commercial 35.

07:55:02 Community commercial allows for single-use general

07:55:07 commercial development office and service uses.

07:55:10 The current residential 20 designation does not allow for CI

07:55:14 zoning activity which is essentially warehousing.

07:55:17 It has been do ultimated warehousing on the site since at

07:55:20 least 2002.

07:55:23 The plan amendment is located in the Westshore planning

07:55:26 district.

07:55:27 This district is an economic hub for the entire Tampa Bay

07:55:30 region.

07:55:32 And promotes economic development and business activity.

07:55:36 This is an aerial view of the plan amendment site.

07:55:41 You will notice that Dale Mabry runs north and south to the

07:55:43 west, Himes Avenue north and south to the east.

07:55:46 To the north you have Cypress Street.

07:55:48 And to the south just off the map is Kennedy Boulevard.

07:55:53 The plan amendment site is distinguished in pink.

07:55:57 Just for your bearing, you have this parcel here is

07:56:02 Alexander and Florida orthopedics, this is the former Office

07:56:07 Depot, or what is this?

07:56:08 I can't remember the store that was there.

07:56:10 There's a Corvette supply shop here, a Wawa on this corner,

07:56:14 and Bank Atlantic, just to get your bearings.

07:56:18 Another thing to note, Sterling Avenue which runs north and

07:56:21 south is a line of demarcation for this area.

07:56:26 Typically to the west of Sterling you have a higher density

07:56:29 development pattern, more high density commercial, higher

07:56:32 density residential.

07:56:33 To the east, you have a lower density pattern, typically

07:56:39 single-family homes.

07:56:44 This is an aerial shot of the amendment site.

07:56:47 The amendment site is here.

07:56:49 It was built in 1967.

07:56:52 Parcels around the site to the north there was a town home

07:56:57 built in 2007.

07:56:59 Further north built in 1999, some town homes.

07:57:02 There's an apartment community built in 1973.

07:57:04 And most of the single-family homes in the area were built

07:57:06 in the 1970s with the exception across the street in 1952.

07:57:11 As you can see most. Development in the area came after the

07:57:14 amendment, the structure was built.

07:57:17 This is the Molding Depot. They sell windows and doors.

07:57:24 This is a historic perspective from 1982.

07:57:27 The amendment site is located here.

07:57:29 You can see that there was the structure on the site in

07:57:32 1982.

07:57:32 There's an ingress-egress point to the north which allows

07:57:35 for access to loading docks.

07:57:38 There was vacant parcel to the north.

07:57:41 Another vacant parcel to the north of that.

07:57:45 This is a north perspective along west Carmen street.

07:57:48 This is looking at TMD indicated in yellow.

07:57:54 To the left side is Dale Mabry.

07:57:55 To the east is Sterling Avenue.

07:57:59 This is a south perspective along Carmen street.

07:58:02 This is looking from the Molding Depot.

07:58:05 This is the single-family homes built in 1950.

07:58:08 This is single-family home built in mid 1970s.

07:58:12 And then over here on the right.

07:58:16 This is the rear of the property along Cass Street.

07:58:20 These are the town homes built in 2007.

07:58:22 The apartments 1973 and this is the ingress-egress point

07:58:26 which provides access to the loading point for molding

07:58:29 depot. This is the rear of the subject parcel.

07:58:32 You can see the white fence which provides the barrier

07:58:36 between the town home development and the molding depot.

07:58:40 And then this is the corner of Carmen street and Sterling

07:58:43 Avenue.

07:58:44 You can see the fence which provides a barrier.

07:58:48 You can see that there's ample landscaping as well.

07:58:54 This is a map of the current future land use as well as the

07:58:57 proposed future land use.

07:58:58 The magenta color is regional mixed use 100.

07:59:02 This second is most intensive land use category in the City

07:59:06 of Tampa.

07:59:06 The brown is residential 20.

07:59:09 The salmon or lighter color is a residential 10.

07:59:12 And the red is the community commercial 35.

07:59:16 This is the proposed future land use.

07:59:18 You can see that going to the community commercial is not

07:59:21 out of place or out of character for the area.

07:59:23 There are other parcels with the community commercial 35 on

07:59:27 them.

07:59:27 Again, notice the line of demarcation.

07:59:30 The higher density residential development, the higher

07:59:33 density commercial development, as opposed to the lower

07:59:35 density.

07:59:36 So the east and west side has a clear line of demarcation

07:59:40 for high density and lower density.

07:59:43 Society the impact for the proposed change, from residential

07:59:46 20 to commercial, community commercial 35.

07:59:51 Thereof would be a change in F.A.R. from .5 to 2.0.

07:59:56 And dwelling unit from 20 to 35.

07:59:59 So essentially, it would allow for 11 dwelling units today,

08:00:03 would allow for 20 dwelling units, or from 1,257 square

08:00:07 feet of commercial to 50,308 square feet of commercial.

08:00:11 This is the photo of the Molding Depot.

08:00:16 And the amendment was reviewed by various agencies including

08:00:18 the MPOs, City of Tampa, school district, EPC and Hart.

08:00:25 There were no objections from the reviewing agency and it is

08:00:27 not subject to state review because of the small scale.

08:00:30 So evaluating the proposed amendment against the

08:00:32 comprehensive plan, we found that it promotes a transition

08:00:36 and scale from the regional mixed use 100 which is highly

08:00:39 intensive down to the community commercial 35, and then

08:00:42 stepping further down into the residential 10, residential

08:00:44 20.

08:00:45 It also promotes economic prosperity and support business

08:00:50 centers.

08:00:50 The Westshore district for the Tampa region.

08:00:56 Dale Mabry, Kennedy Boulevard are mixed use corridors.

08:00:58 This is less than a block off of Dale Mabry.

08:01:01 Also recognizing the neighborhood asset including

08:01:04 independent businesses.

08:01:06 The Molding Depot has been, or this particular parcel has

08:01:10 been in operation since 1962 as a commercial property, part

08:01:14 of the fabric of the neighborhood.

08:01:19 Consideration against the has been in operation since 2002

08:01:25 and similar commercial uses including warehousing has been

08:01:28 on-site for 51 years to be exact.

08:01:30 Here is the rezoning process.

08:01:32 The proposed uses could be limited thus allowing the current

08:01:35 use on the site, addressing any potential neighborhood

08:01:38 concern.

08:01:40 And with that, the Planning Commission did find the proposed

08:01:44 map amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan, and

08:01:49 forward to the you and recommend adoption.

08:01:51 And that concludes my presentation.

08:01:53 The applicant and the representatives are here if there are

08:01:56 any questions.

08:01:56 >> Okay.

08:01:58 Thank you very much, petitioner.

08:01:59 >> Good evening.

08:02:15 My name is Richard Davis.

08:02:19 Amber Lee drive, suite 250, 33647.

08:02:23 And I'm here tonight on behalf of the family who owned this

08:02:28 particular parcel for a number of years and had a business

08:02:32 ongoing since the beginning of 2002.

08:02:34 Businesses have been on this parcel, though, since 1962.

08:02:38 And this is a story that goes along with this comprehensive

08:02:42 plan amendment.

08:02:43 First let me say for purposes of the record, we adopt and

08:02:46 agree with each of the findings and conclusions arrived at

08:02:50 by both the Planning Commission staff and the Planning

08:02:52 Commission.

08:02:53 But I think it is helpful in my brief comments this evening

08:02:55 to tell a little bit of the story.

08:02:58 And the story is, this particular site has been in

08:03:01 commercial usage since 1962.

08:03:05 It has had a commercial sense to it for that long a time.

08:03:10 Now, what has occurred, council members, is that recently it

08:03:14 has been discovered that this particular use on this site is

08:03:19 nonconforming from a comprehensive plan perspective, and

08:03:24 nonconforming from a zoning perspective.

08:03:26 So we have two steps that must occur.

08:03:31 To put commercial use on this site, it has been there at

08:03:34 this particular -- but commercial uses on this site which

08:03:37 has been in existence for so long would have to take two

08:03:39 very critical steps.

08:03:41 The first step is to have a comprehensive plan amendment

08:03:44 approved as described to you for .58 acres.

08:03:50 That would permit the use to be considered consistent with

08:03:54 the comprehensive plan.

08:03:57 But our task is not over at that point, because then we will

08:04:02 cock come back to you with a PD, site plan controlled zoning

08:04:06 for you to consider, which will contain the conditions of

08:04:09 approval, and which will permit us to take this year's PD

08:04:15 process and create a scenario where the use is conform, and

08:04:20 that way, it will resolve the existing issues that have been

08:04:24 recently discovered, and there are matters which we have to

08:04:27 find regulatory answers for.

08:04:30 I will also say that as part of this process, the owners of

08:04:34 the property have convened two meetings with folks from the

08:04:40 neighborhood, and we are going to be working close.

08:04:44 We are presently working close with folks from the

08:04:47 neighborhood on a proposed site plan.

08:04:49 And we will continue that effort, and it is our intent to

08:04:55 begin the PD zoning, rezoning process, as quickly as

08:04:59 possible.

08:05:02 Literally within the next few weeks, because we have to go

08:05:05 down that path in order to make this use conforming.

08:05:07 This is the first of those two steps, and for purposes of

08:05:11 the record, the record contains the explanation from the

08:05:14 Planning Commission, and I certainly agree with those

08:05:17 conclusions and recommendation, and I am here tonight with

08:05:21 the property owner.

08:05:23 I am here tonight with Mr. Steve Hendricks from the Links

08:05:28 Center Associates should you have any questions.

08:05:31 And with that I would respectfully request that you all

08:05:35 favorably move on first reading tonight on this

08:05:37 comprehensive plan amendment, and again we stand ready to

08:05:40 answer any questions.

08:05:42 Thank you very, very much.

08:05:43 >>HARRY COHEN: I don't see any questions from council

08:05:46 members at this time.

08:05:46 Is there anyone from the public who would like to address

08:05:49 council on item number 6?

08:06:05 Would you give us your name and address?

08:06:06 >> Robert Montgomery, 3701 West Gray Street one block from

08:06:12 the business.

08:06:15 A meeting about the Molding Depot owner, plans were

08:06:20 presented to the neighbors.

08:06:22 These include alters to allow semi trucks to enter their

08:06:28 property from eastbound Carmen Street and exit their

08:06:30 property westbound on Carmen Street.

08:06:34 If that's carried through then I have no objection.

08:06:38 Thank you.

08:06:38 >>HARRY COHEN: Seems to me that will be an item we'll take

08:06:41 up during the zoning, but duly noted and we'll get back to

08:06:46 that when we cover that item.

08:06:47 Is there anyone else that wishes to address us on the

08:06:50 amendment to the comprehensive plan?

08:06:53 >> Richard Boydack, 3702 Cass Street, unit 3, which is a

08:07:06 town home.

08:07:06 I'm president of the homeowners association which is

08:07:09 directly adjacent to the Carmen Street lot, Molding Depot is

08:07:13 on and also adjacent to the ingress-egress easement that is

08:07:17 zoned residential 20 where there's proposed parking.

08:07:22 The plan changed around so it's more amenable to the

08:07:24 neighborhood but my main concern is there was a building put

08:07:27 up within a year on the property line, and there was a

08:07:30 proposed buffer on the plan, but I now it's going to be part

08:07:34 of the zoning issue, about but the commercial use is already

08:07:38 been put in place within the past year with this building,

08:07:42 and there's in a buffering.

08:07:43 And some are going into foreclosure.

08:07:49 So we do appreciate they have changed the planning and are

08:07:52 working with the neighborhood but we have an ongoing issue

08:07:53 with property values, and the buffering, I think, is

08:07:56 something that should happen fairly quickly.

08:07:59 The structure has just been put up.

08:08:01 >>HARRY COHEN: I again would say that is an item that's

08:08:05 appropriate for us to address during the zoning.

08:08:08 Ms. Feeley, if you would like to comment on it.

08:08:11 But it is an item that's appropriate for us to deal with

08:08:13 during the zoning itself.

08:08:15 >> Okay.

08:08:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

08:08:19 I just want to be clear that the rezoning associated with

08:08:22 this comprehensive plan amendment is not before you tonight,

08:08:24 as Mr. David city stated, it's going to be filed in the next

08:08:28 few weeks.

08:08:29 That being said, when it is set for public hearing, the

08:08:32 neighbors that were noticed this evening would also be

08:08:34 required to be noticed as part of our standard rezoning

08:08:37 process, so they would be informed.

08:08:39 Does sound like Mr. Davis and his team has melt with them to

08:08:42 discuss the preliminary plan, and what will be filed with

08:08:44 land development in the next coming weeks.

08:08:46 Thank you.

08:08:46 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.

08:08:48 Is there anyone else that would like to address council at

08:08:51 this time on this issue?

08:08:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close.

08:08:56 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion to close by Councilman

08:09:00 Reddick, seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

08:09:03 All those in favor?

08:09:06 Opposed?

08:09:07 All right.

08:09:07 Councilwoman Capin, would you please take item number 6?

08:09:19 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, continued first public hearing from

08:09:21 October 24th, 2013, substitute ordinance being

08:09:24 presented.

08:09:25 Okay, I'm sorry.

08:09:26 Substitute ordinance being presented for first reading

08:09:28 consideration.

08:09:29 An ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future

08:09:32 land use map for the property located in the general

08:09:35 vicinity of 37075 west Carmen street, from residential 20,

08:09:41 R-20, to community commercial, 35, CC-35, providing for

08:09:47 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

08:09:51 severability, providing an effective date.

08:09:52 >> Second.

08:09:54 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion by Councilwoman Capin,

08:09:58 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

08:10:00 All those in favor indicate by saying aye.

08:10:02 Opposed?

08:10:04 Motion passes.

08:10:05 >> Motion carried with Miranda and Montelione being absent.

08:10:10 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

08:10:13 10 a.m.

08:10:13 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

08:10:15 We are now going to move into our public hearings on

08:10:20 quasi-judicial matters.

08:10:22 I would like to entertain a motion to open items number 7

08:10:25 through 11.

08:10:26 >> So moved.

08:10:27 >> We have a motion from Councilman Suarez and second by

08:10:30 Councilman Reddick.

08:10:32 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

08:10:35 Opposed?

08:10:36 All right.

08:10:36 These are quasi-judicial.

08:10:38 Anyone who is planning on speaking on items number 7, 8, 9,

08:10:43 10 or 11, please be sworn in now.

08:10:45 (Oath administered by Clerk)

08:10:59 Ms. Feeley, item number 7.

08:11:01 >> Item number 7 on your agenda this evening -- Abbye

08:11:04 Feeley, Land Development Coordination -- is Z-13-56781

08:11:08 located at 4117 east Hillsborough Avenue.

08:11:11 The request before you tonight is Euclidean rezoning

08:11:14 request, and it is from RS-50 RS-50 to CI.

08:11:22 In Euclidean zoning there are no waivers no, site plans.

08:11:25 This site will need to meet all regulations as proscribed by

08:11:30 city code.

08:11:31 >> Good evening council members.

08:11:34 David Hay with Planning Commission staff and I have been

08:11:36 sworn.

08:11:39 For our second case tonight we head to the central Tampa

08:11:41 planning district.

08:11:43 The subject site is located also within the East Tampa urban

08:11:46 village, and is located along Hillsborough Avenue, which is

08:11:50 designated as a transit emphasis corridor.

08:11:53 Next, we move on to the aerial.

08:11:55 The subject site is located at 4117 east Hillsborough Avenue

08:12:00 just east of north 40th Street.

08:12:02 Hillsborough Avenue.

08:12:03 And you can see it's predominantly commercial intensive in

08:12:07 character.

08:12:07 The subject site is adjacent to the park terrace apartments

08:12:11 located immediately to the south and west of the subject

08:12:13 site, down in the far right of the aerial, we can see the

08:12:20 Gary adult education school and James elementary down at the

08:12:23 bottom down there.

08:12:25 Finally, we have the future land use map, the subject site

08:12:29 and properties immediately surrounding the subject site are

08:12:31 all designated community commercial 35, which is the red on

08:12:34 this map, the light brown are areas designated residential

08:12:39 20 while the darker brown is from residential 35.

08:12:42 Overall Planning Commission staff found the proposed

08:12:44 rezoning to allow for commercial intensive uses comparable

08:12:47 and compatible with the surrounding development pattern.

08:12:50 Therefore based on both findings and the goals, objectives

08:12:52 and policies of the comprehensive plan, Planning Commission

08:12:55 staff finds the rezoning request consistent with the

08:12:58 comprehensive plan.

08:12:59 >> Thank you.

08:13:00 >> As I mentioned, this is a request from RS-50 and CI to

08:13:08 CI.

08:13:09 Part of that reason is because the RS 50 portion. Site

08:13:14 doesn't constitute enough, so we are going to bring the

08:13:16 existing CI plus the RS 50 portion here shown on the

08:13:20 southern part all into one commercial intensive lot.

08:13:27 I will go ahead and show you some pictures of the site.

08:13:29 This property is 100 feet by 254.98 feet for a total of .58

08:13:36 acres, and it has the split zoning.

08:13:40 The site is surrounded by commercial uses to the north,

08:13:42 across Hillsborough Avenue, in the east, and residential to

08:13:46 the south and west.

08:13:52 Here is the site from Hillsborough looking south.

08:13:58 Moving west.

08:13:59 This is also the site.

08:14:17 This is the aerial.

08:14:21 What I did was, really, this RS 50 portion which is the

08:14:25 portion in question is being changed.

08:14:28 I came down through the apartment complex.

08:14:30 I am going to show you some pictures of the operation, and

08:14:34 there's self-storage just to the east here, and then there

08:14:38 is residential multifamily to the west.

08:14:51 This is the western side of the property.

08:14:54 And I was on the access urban to the multifamily.

08:14:59 Coming around looking back north at the subject property.

08:15:07 Here is a view from the south side, self-storage, which is

08:15:10 immediately to the east.

08:15:13 There's a picture from Hillsborough of the self-storage that

08:15:16 is adjacent to the property on the east.

08:15:19 Multifamily residential on the west.

08:15:23 And then the commercial uses to the north.

08:15:31 This is just east of the intersection of Hillsborough and

08:15:36 40th Street.

08:15:42 Staff found the request consistent, and we are available for

08:15:44 any questions.

08:15:45 >>HARRY COHEN: Petitioner?

08:15:49 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm here representing Prem auto.

08:15:56 Basically, this property has been an auto repair area since

08:16:00 the early 40s.

08:16:03 And I am not really sure why or how it ended up with a split

08:16:06 lot.

08:16:07 But that was only discovered when they went to get permits

08:16:10 for a canopy that they were constricting in the rear.

08:16:14 This proposal does not extend the CI zoning anytime further

08:16:18 to the south than the existing adjacent properties that

08:16:22 already have commercial zoning.

08:16:25 And this would allow that business to remain as it is.

08:16:29 It would make the existing building and the rear half of the

08:16:32 property conforming, and we would respectfully request your

08:16:37 approval.

08:16:38 As Abbye pointed out, all the way around, you either have

08:16:41 commercial on one side, or an access road on the west side,

08:16:46 or you have a buffer and remaining commercial properties to

08:16:50 the west, and then to the south you have another road.

08:16:55 We are trying to clean up one of those what I would consider

08:17:00 probably a scrivener's error, but there's simply in a other

08:17:03 way to do it.

08:17:04 The good news is the Planning Commission land use

08:17:07 designation is consistent with the zoning.

08:17:09 So someone at spoke point anticipated that, and at least

08:17:14 recognized the use that was there.

08:17:15 So we respectfully request your approval.

08:17:18 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you there anyone from the public

08:17:21 that would like to address council on this matter?

08:17:26 I don't see anyone.

08:17:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Move to close.

08:17:29 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion to close by Councilwoman

08:17:32 Capin, seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

08:17:35 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

08:17:39 Okay.

08:17:41 Mr. Reddick, please take item number 7.

08:17:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

08:17:47 Move an ordinance being presented for first reading

08:17:50 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

08:17:52 vicinity of 47117 east Hillsborough Avenue in the city of

08:17:57 Tampa, Florida, and more particularly described in section 1

08:17:59 from zoning district classification RS-50 residential

08:18:04 single-family, and CI, commercial intensive, to CI,

08:18:07 commercial intensive, providing an effective date.

08:18:09 >> Second.

08:18:11 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilman Reddick,

08:18:14 seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

08:18:16 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

08:18:19 Opposed?

08:18:21 Thank you very much.

08:18:23 >> Motion carried with Miranda being absent and Montelione

08:18:26 being absent.

08:18:28 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

08:18:30 9:30 a.m.

08:18:31 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to move on now to item number

08:18:35 8.

08:18:35 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination item number 8

08:18:43 is also Euclidean request.

08:18:45 The case number is Z-13-77 located at 8315 north 9th

08:18:50 street.

08:18:51 It is an existing duplex.

08:18:55 The current zoning is residential single-family, and the

08:18:59 request before you tonight is to an RM-16 which is a

08:19:02 residential multifamily district.

08:19:05 This area of Sulphur Springs was down-zoned as part of

08:19:10 zoning conformance in 1987, June 11th.

08:19:15 This duplex has been in existence, and it has lost its

08:19:19 nonconforming status due to being vacant.

08:19:22 They are seeking to be able to retain that in its current

08:19:25 location and current form so the use would then be

08:19:29 considered legal conform.

08:19:30 >>David Hay: Planning Commission staff.

08:19:37 I have been sworn.

08:19:40 We move up to the university planning area for this next

08:19:44 case.

08:19:44 The site is located southeast of the intersection of Waters

08:19:48 Avenue and north Nebraska Avenue in the Sulphur Springs

08:19:50 neighborhood as Abbye has described.

08:19:53 The subject site is located one block east of north Nebraska

08:19:56 Avenue, which has been designated as a transit emphasis

08:20:00 corridor, and this segment of north Nebraska Avenue is also

08:20:03 served by the recently completed metro rapid north-south

08:20:08 route.

08:20:11 Next to the aerial.

08:20:13 You can see the commercial development running north-south

08:20:16 along north Nebraska Avenue.

08:20:18 To the west. Subject site, we can see the adjacent Family

08:20:21 Dollar store in the form of Tampa greyhound park.

08:20:26 To the west is the predominantly single-family and

08:20:30 single-family semi attached residential uses, the northeast

08:20:34 corner of the arrow, you can make out the Sulphur Springs

08:20:37 elementary school campus also.

08:20:39 Finally, we go onto the future land use map.

08:20:42 The subject site and properties located along north 9th

08:20:46 street are all designated residential 35, which is

08:20:49 represented by the brown color.

08:20:51 To the east we have the properties designated residential

08:20:54 10, while properties along north Nebraska Avenue are

08:20:57 designated community commercial 35, and the urban mixed

08:21:01 using 60.

08:21:02 Overall, Planning Commission staff found the proposed

08:21:05 rezoning to RM-16 would allow for development pattern in

08:21:08 keeping with the underlying land use, and the long-term

08:21:12 vision for the portion. City of Tampa.

08:21:14 The residential 35 land use category and the zoning district

08:21:18 typically found in this future land use category such as

08:21:22 multifamily residential provides for an appropriate

08:21:24 transition between the intensive development pattern to the

08:21:28 west of the subject site and the single-family residential

08:21:30 uses located to the east of the subject site.

08:21:33 Therefore, based on those findings and the goals, objectives

08:21:36 and policies of the comprehensive plan, Planning Commission

08:21:38 staff find the rezoning request consistent with the Tampa

08:21:41 comprehensive plan.

08:21:42 >> The request before you tonight from RS-50 to RM-16, as I

08:21:52 mentioned, is total allow for an existing duplex to become a

08:21:56 phone form use.

08:21:58 A 5,000 square foot lot, 50 by 100.

08:22:01 What's before you tonight is 100 by 100.

08:22:04 And the setbacks for the Euclidean districts are provided on

08:22:08 page 1 of your report.

08:22:09 So it does meet all the minimum standards.

08:22:13 The zoning atlas here shows along the west, waters to the

08:22:20 north.

08:22:20 As I mentioned this is a part of the city that was down

08:22:23 zoned to RS-50 during zoning performance.

08:22:27 This has been in existence, and all these were considered to

08:22:33 be conforming until such time they were vacant for a period

08:22:36 of 180 days or were demoed, and then would have to be built

08:22:41 back to code.

08:22:42 So Nebraska Avenue over to the west, this is a Family Dollar

08:22:45 here, with the parking lot for the Family Dollar located

08:22:49 within the CX.

08:22:52 And there is a laundry and church here.

08:22:55 At this intersection, given that this has been in existence,

08:22:58 this is conforming and in use and character.

08:23:04 There is the aerial.

08:23:08 The picture of the subject property from 9th is the

08:23:15 northern portion of the lot at 9th and waters.

08:23:20 This is the subject property from waters.

08:23:22 The property immediately to the south along 9th.

08:23:26 Also along 9th.

08:23:28 This is place of religions religious assembly to the north

08:23:32 A.laundromat I referred to.

08:23:34 This is on the backside of 10th street immediately

08:23:38 adjacent to the property along the east.

08:23:43 This is the Family Dollar that I referred to for you, and

08:23:46 the parking area.

08:23:47 It is immediately across the street to the west of the

08:23:50 subject.

08:23:51 Again, the church from 9th street and then a look back

08:23:57 towards Nebraska Avenue.

08:24:00 Given that the proposed property meets the minimum setbacks

08:24:03 and requirements for the minimum lot area and the

08:24:06 requirements for the RM-16, staff did find the request

08:24:10 consistent.

08:24:10 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay, petitioner.

08:24:16 >> Good evening, council members.

08:24:23 I'm Steve Allison, 13115 Sanctuary Hills Drive representing

08:24:28 petitioner.

08:24:28 I'll be extremely brief.

08:24:31 Again, the purposes of this zoning is to recognize an

08:24:34 existing duplex.

08:24:35 It's been there since 1976.

08:24:39 Lots with nonconform status through a change of ownership,

08:24:44 and renovations.

08:24:46 Again, the site is located at 9th and waters.

08:24:50 The other three corners of the intersection are all

08:24:52 developed with nonresidential uses.

08:24:55 Those include a Family Dollar store, large parking lot

08:24:59 across the street, and open air laundromat to the northwest,

08:25:03 and then a block to the west across Nebraska Avenue is Tampa

08:25:12 greyhound.

08:25:12 I sent notices to 38 property owners and registered

08:25:15 neighborhood associations.

08:25:18 I received only one call, and that bass from a person hoping

08:25:21 to rent a unit.

08:25:24 I conferred with staff, Planning Commission and your staff,

08:25:30 and respectfully request your approval.

08:25:32 I'm available for questions.

08:25:33 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Capin?

08:25:49 Is there anyone from the public who would like to address us

08:25:56 on this matter?

08:25:56 We have a motion to close by Councilman Reddick, seconded by

08:25:57 Councilwoman Mulhern. All in favor?

08:26:01 Opposed?

08:26:02 All right.

08:26:04 I think it's councilwoman Mulhern's turn.

08:26:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance being presented for

08:26:10 first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property

08:26:13 in the general vicinity of 8315 North 9th Street, A/B in

08:26:19 the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described

08:26:21 in section 1 from zoning district classification RS-50,

08:26:25 residential single-family, to RM-16, residential

08:26:29 multifamily, providing an effective date.

08:26:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

08:26:34 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilwoman Mulhern

08:26:37 seconded by Councilman Reddick.

08:26:39 All in favor?

08:26:40 Opposed?

08:26:40 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent and

08:26:44 Montelione absent at vote.

08:26:46 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

08:26:48 9:30 a.m.

08:26:49 >> Item number 9.

08:26:54 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

08:26:56 Case Z-13-69 located at 105 and 107 South MacDill Avenue.

08:27:02 Often referred to by staff as the FSOK shop.

08:27:13 There are six waivers associated with the request this

08:27:15 evening.

08:27:15 The first is to allow contribution to the tree trust fund

08:27:19 for up to the 90% of the required replacement and planting.

08:27:27 And much the replacement to be less than 50% subject to

08:27:30 final landscape design.

08:27:31 Third is to allow replacement trees providing similar or

08:27:36 better wildlife habitat, and water purification to less than

08:27:41 75%.

08:27:42 The final landscape design.

08:27:44 The fourth is to reduce required parking from 48 spaces to

08:27:47 40 spaces.

08:27:49 The fifth is to modify the required buffer adjacent to the

08:27:52 residential along the west from 15-foot to 7-foot, with a

08:27:57 6-foot concrete masonry wall.

08:27:59 So on that one it's just the distance.

08:28:02 This time, a lot of times you guys typically deal with a

08:28:05 change in the materials, but they do want to do the wall.

08:28:09 They are just lowering it from 15 feet to 7 feet.

08:28:12 The spacing.

08:28:13 And then the last is to allow for the placement of the

08:28:16 refuse enclosure to be located within the front yard from

08:28:19 the required 15-foot setback to a 10-foot setback.

08:28:23 And you will see that because the configuration, the design

08:28:26 of the building, the solid waste truck can't go under the

08:28:29 building, so they are going to put the enclosure in the

08:28:32 front.

08:28:33 Code requires it be set back 15 feet.

08:28:35 It's going to be set back at 107 feet so we document have a

08:28:38 waiver for that on the plan, and it would need to be added

08:28:40 in between first and second reading.

08:28:43 >> David Hay again with the Planning Commission staff.

08:28:50 And I have been sworn.

08:28:53 We head back south down to the central Tampa planning

08:28:56 district for this next case.

08:28:59 Like Abbye said the subject site is located along south Dale

08:29:04 Mabry Avenue.

08:29:08 The subject site is located within proximity to Kennedy

08:29:10 Boulevard which has been designated as a transit emphasis

08:29:14 corridor.

08:29:16 Next, onto the aerial.

08:29:18 The first thing you see is Kennedy Boulevard running

08:29:21 east-west across the center of the aerial.

08:29:24 Kennedy Boulevard as we all know is commercial in character.

08:29:27 South MacDill Avenue subpoena predominantly office in

08:29:30 character.

08:29:30 The subject site is adjacent to some single-family detached

08:29:33 residential uses, which are located directly to the west of

08:29:37 the subject site.

08:29:40 Onto the future land use map, the subject site and

08:29:43 properties located to the south along the west side of

08:29:48 MacDill represented by the brown colored are residential

08:29:51 20.

08:29:52 To the east across MacDill Avenue represented by that

08:29:54 pinkish color here are properties designated community mixed

08:30:00 use 35.

08:30:01 The purple located along Kennedy Boulevard represents the

08:30:04 urban mixed using 60, future land use category.

08:30:07 And finally the light tan color located to the west of the

08:30:10 subject site are properties designated as representation

08:30:14 dense -- residential 10.

08:30:16 Planning Commission staff found the proposed planned

08:30:17 development would allow for development in keeping with the

08:30:20 underlying land use as the long-term vision for this

08:30:24 portion. City of Tampa.

08:30:25 The development allows for the vertical integration of

08:30:27 office and residential uses.

08:30:29 The planning development has provided for development that

08:30:32 maximize it is site while being sensitive to the adjacent

08:30:35 single-family development, and therefore based on those

08:30:37 findings and the goals, objectives and policies of the

08:30:39 comprehensive plan, Planning Commission staff find the

08:30:42 rezoning request consistent with the Tampa comprehensive

08:30:44 plan.

08:30:44 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Thank you, David.

08:30:53 The request before you tonight is from CN to PD to allow for

08:30:56 the construction of a 7800-square-foot medical office, with

08:31:02 associated parking.

08:31:03 The subject property is .45 acres and it is located on the

08:31:07 west side of MacDill just south of Kennedy Boulevard,

08:31:11 and west Cleveland street.

08:31:13 In between south Kennedy Boulevard -- in between West

08:31:16 Kennedy Boulevard and -- sorry.

08:31:19 The proposed plan seeks to construct a two-story medical

08:31:22 office with parking located on the ground floor.

08:31:25 The property is surrounded by retail to the north, office to

08:31:29 the south, medical office and bank to the east across South

08:31:32 MacDill, and residential single-family to the west.

08:31:37 I'm just noticing as I am reading this report, there is an

08:31:40 error.

08:31:41 It should be storefront, residential, because there is going

08:31:46 to be a residential unit on the upstairs above the medical

08:31:50 office.

08:31:52 So probably when you read the ordinance you will need to

08:31:55 substitute that use office medical as storefront residential

08:32:00 office.

08:32:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Suarez may want to take note of that

08:32:05 because he's next in the rotation.

08:32:06 >> I wanted to note that properly.

08:32:13 Sorry about that.

08:32:15 The building height is being proposed at 35 feet.

08:32:18 The PD setbacks are north and south, three foot minimum,

08:32:22 west 45-foot minimum, and that would be adjacent to

08:32:26 single-family residential on the west, and the east along

08:32:28 South MacDill would be ten foot, and that would be the solid

08:32:33 waste enclosure that I talked to you about earlier.

08:32:35 Elevations have been provided.

08:32:36 The existing residential structure which I will show you

08:32:39 some pictures of at 105 South MacDill was identified by

08:32:43 historic preservation as a potential landmark structure.

08:32:47 It was scheduled to be heard Tuesday of this week, before

08:32:51 the HPC, and it did go before the HPC for designation.

08:32:59 Dennis Fernandez is here tonight.

08:33:00 I do have the motion that was made by the HPC, and that they

08:33:05 voted, the structure does not meet it the criteria for

08:33:08 designation, and they did approve the issuance. Demolition

08:33:11 permit as presented at the public hearing.

08:33:16 That motion was approved by 5-0.

08:33:22 I wanted to make sure that staff has taken care of it and

08:33:26 that was read into the record.

08:33:28 Let me go ahead and show you the aerial David showed you as

08:33:35 well.

08:33:36 We are just off of Kennedy on MacDill, one zoning lot to

08:33:40 the south.

08:33:40 Bank of America here.

08:33:43 The Glidden paint store here.

08:33:45 And some other medical office uses, and daycare use, general

08:33:51 office use, along this segment of MacDill.

08:33:57 This is the zoning atlas.

08:34:00 With the exemption of I-11, I-10 probably has a lot of PDs

08:34:06 on it, heading south from the subject property all the way

08:34:09 till you reach Azeele street.

08:34:11 Everything on the west side of South MacDill is a planned

08:34:13 development.

08:34:16 On the east side, you have planned development directly

08:34:18 across the street.

08:34:19 Everything along Kennedy is predominantly CG designation

08:34:28 I will go ahead and show you some pictures of the subject

08:34:31 site.

08:34:31 This is 107 South MacDill.

08:34:38 This is 105 South MacDill.

08:34:43 This is just to the north of the property.

08:34:47 This is south of the property.

08:34:49 This is traveling south toward Azeele on the west side of

08:34:53 MacDill.

08:34:55 At the southeast corner of MacDill and Kennedy, the Bank

08:34:58 of America, heading south on the east side of MacDill,

08:35:04 there is some medical office.

08:35:08 The newer medical office use.

08:35:14 And then there's also some general office and personal

08:35:19 services.

08:35:25 There are some required modifications in between first and

08:35:28 second reading on this project as well as, I believe, Mr.

08:35:32 Grandoff may be presenting to you two additional conditions

08:35:34 which he just briefly discussed with me which staff was okay

08:35:39 with.

08:35:40 In relation to solid waste, we do need them to illustrate

08:35:44 and label the opening dimension between the doors being

08:35:47 closer, the interior dimensions, and also add the waiver as

08:35:51 I noted. On page 3 of your staff report you will find staff

08:35:59 did find this request I am consistent with the intent of

08:36:01 chapter 13 based on the waivers that were being requested.

08:36:08 They did say that the plan proposes removal of 100% of the

08:36:12 existing trees on the site.

08:36:14 Site is less than an acre.

08:36:15 Does not require per code retention of 50%.

08:36:19 That 50% is tripped once you get over an acre on a site.

08:36:24 But they are saying due to that 100% removal, the petitioner

08:36:29 has committed to plant two four-inch trees in the space that

08:36:33 was allowed.

08:36:34 However, given the three waivers for landscape and tree,

08:36:38 code requirements, that have been requested in the staff

08:36:43 does not support the waives and it does not meet the intent

08:36:46 of chapter 13.

08:36:49 You will see on your site plans there's very limited space

08:36:51 to be able to plant additional trees.

08:36:56 Mr. Grandoff, I think, will probably speak to those concerns

08:36:59 that were raised by staff in relation to the waivers for

08:37:02 tree and natural resources.

08:37:07 If the other modifications related to solid waste are made

08:37:10 between first and second reading staff will find the request

08:37:14 consistent.

08:37:14 However the natural resources finding will remain on the

08:37:16 record.

08:37:17 I do not believe anyone is present from natural resources

08:37:21 tonight pertaining to those objections.

08:37:24 >>HARRY COHEN: Petitioner?

08:37:30 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza on behalf

08:37:33 of the applicant this evening.

08:37:36 And this evening I'm joined by several folks.

08:37:39 First, the owners of the property, Dominique Goode is here,

08:37:43 if you will please raise your hand.

08:37:44 And also Dr. Dominguez and and Tina Dominquez are here.

08:37:53 They plan to build medical office on the property.

08:37:55 I am also joined by Mark Sullivan, our professional engineer

08:37:57 who prepared the site plan, and Mr. Ralph Schueler who

08:38:00 prepared the elevations that are included in the project.

08:38:03 I would like to step around for a moment and explain a few

08:38:07 things to you.

08:38:11 This is my mark-up of the site plan.

08:38:15 You have this before you.

08:38:20 Briefly, here is MacDill Avenue.

08:38:24 Here is the rear of the property.

08:38:27 We have placed the dumpster to the front to get at way from

08:38:31 the neighborhood.

08:38:32 You have woodland Avenue here, part of the residential

08:38:37 neighborhood.

08:38:38 Mr. Noland was here earlier this evening.

08:38:43 The tall gentleman.

08:38:45 I was talking to him during the recess.

08:38:47 He would like to have a buffer installed here of Viburnum on

08:38:54 the gustrum hedge.

08:38:57 We would like to discuss with the landscape and Parks

08:38:59 Department as to the frequency of the spacing and do

08:39:02 something that would be consistent and grow fairly rapidly

08:39:05 to create a screen for him, and also for his neighbor, Mr.

08:39:10 O'Brien, who is also behind the property.

08:39:14 That's acceptable to Mr. Noland, and Mr. Noland has departed

08:39:18 this evening.

08:39:19 I told him I would place that on the site plan.

08:39:22 The second thing he wanted is we are doing the concrete

08:39:26 masonry wall.

08:39:28 He would like us to leave his side unfinished, stucco, so he

08:39:33 can paint it to match his house and the wall in front of his

08:39:37 home on woodland Avenue and leave it unfinished on Mr.

08:39:40 O'Brien's side so they can match the stucco the way they

08:39:45 would like it to be.

08:39:46 We can do that and draft a condition in the general note to

08:39:48 the site plan to that affect.

08:39:50 Mr. Noland asked necessity if I would send the site plan to

08:39:54 him upon approval, and I said that would be fine.

08:39:56 He also has my telephone number if there's any follow-up.

08:40:00 Here are the elevations of the project.

08:40:07 Facing MacDill.

08:40:08 This will be facing Mr. Noland and Mr. O'Brien's property.

08:40:12 North elevation.

08:40:13 South elevation.

08:40:15 These were prepared by Ralph Schueler, who is here this

08:40:18 evening.

08:40:21 Let me summarize quickly.

08:40:27 With the waiver on the landscaping, primarily driven by the

08:40:33 site layout in order to accommodate the front, accommodate

08:40:36 the dumpster, accommodate the parking, you start running out

08:40:39 of space.

08:40:41 But as provided in chapter 13, there shall be no net loss of

08:40:44 tree canopy in the city.

08:40:46 And what we cannot locate on the site will be contributed to

08:40:49 the tree bank as much as possible.

08:40:52 Also, there are four sable palms on the property in which

08:40:57 Jose will trance plant those palms at his expense to his

08:41:01 property.

08:41:02 So those will be preserved as part. Tree can open it.

08:41:05 We just couldn't work around them in siting the building.

08:41:10 That is the essence of our presentation this evening.

08:41:12 I wish to reserve the remainder of my comments for rebuttal

08:41:16 if necessary.

08:41:16 I respectfully request your approval.

08:41:18 >>HARRY COHEN: Any questions or comments from council

08:41:22 members?

08:41:23 Mr. Suarez.

08:41:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Grandoff, what's going to happen to the

08:41:28 clock?

08:41:28 Does it still work?

08:41:30 >> Dominique?

08:41:33 >> I wasn't sure. I am was looking at the site plan and

08:41:37 thinking maybe we would incorporate it in there.

08:41:40 >> There might be several other clocks involved.

08:41:43 >> And that might be why they have taken it to historic

08:41:46 preservation because it is kind of a landmark for a lot of

08:41:49 people that travel down there.

08:41:51 >> That's correct.

08:41:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was making a facetious remark about the

08:41:55 clock.

08:41:56 I didn't see it anywhere so I assume it will be packed up

08:41:59 and sold to someone who wants a clock of that size.

08:42:02 >> I think it will be.

08:42:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Grandoff.

08:42:06 >>HARRY COHEN: If there are no additional questions at this

08:42:07 time, is there anyone from the public that would like to

08:42:10 address council regarding this matter?

08:42:16 Don't all get up at once.

08:42:19 Okay.

08:42:19 We have a motion to close.

08:42:22 Councilwoman Mulhern?

08:42:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to ask before we close.

08:42:26 We have got a couple of letters about this from -- I thought

08:42:30 they were the adjacent neighbors.

08:42:31 But they are not the names that are on the site plan.

08:42:46 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Excuse me one moment.

08:43:28 >> Those letters came from the owner of this home here

08:43:32 and --

08:43:33 >> Mr. Blank is back.

08:43:36 >> Okay.

08:43:37 Well, this owner right here, and this owner right here.

08:43:41 Mr. Noland lives here Mr. O'Brien lives here.

08:43:44 The two letters you received were from Ms. Wilkerson and Ms.

08:43:53 Scott.

08:43:57 I have written the names here, Mr. Scott and Ms. Huddle live

08:44:01 right here they are not behind.

08:44:05 They are to the southwest.

08:44:06 Mr. Noland is here Mr. O'Brien here.

08:44:10 The letters are the same concern that Mr. noland Ray raised.

08:44:15 He wanted to have some amount of buffering.

08:44:16 >> You are going to do that?

08:44:17 >> We are going to do that southwest of us.

08:44:23 >> It's very sad to see mostly the greenery as much as the

08:44:29 building go.

08:44:31 All the cactus, cacti.

08:44:34 >> Got a brand new medical office building.

08:44:37 >>HARRY COHEN: We had a motion to close I think made by

08:44:44 Councilman Reddick and seconded by councilwoman Capin.

08:44:48 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

08:44:53 Opposed?

08:44:53 Councilman Suarez, would you please take this item?

08:44:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move an ordinance for first reading

08:44:59 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

08:45:02 vicinity of 105 and 107 South MacDill Avenue in the city of

08:45:06 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

08:45:09 from zoning district classifications CN commercial

08:45:13 neighborhood, to PD, planned development, office, storefront

08:45:18 residential, medical, and all CN uses providing an effective

08:45:26 date.

08:45:27 Do I need to change that?

08:45:29 >>ABBYE FEELEY: No, that's absolutely correct.

08:45:31 Thank you very much.

08:45:31 If you would just include the revisions stated in the staff

08:45:34 report and then let me read the two in that Mr. Grandoff --

08:45:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The staff report it provided by staff and

08:45:44 the two you are about to read in.

08:45:46 >> Yes. There was the addition of a hedge along the western

08:45:48 boundary, either Viburnum or other acceptable material, and

08:45:53 then that the west side of the wall would be stucco but

08:45:58 remain unfinished, to be painted by the adjacent property

08:46:02 owners.

08:46:03 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilman Suarez,

08:46:06 seconded by Councilman Reddick.

08:46:08 All those in favor pleas indicate by saying aye.

08:46:10 Opposed?

08:46:11 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent and

08:46:16 Montelione absent at vote.

08:46:17 Second reading and adoption will be on December 5th at

08:46:21 9:30 a.m.

08:46:24 >> For the record that was a substitute title that was read

08:46:27 and the ordinance will be corrected with the correct title

08:46:29 for second reading.

08:46:30 >> Correct.

08:46:31 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to move on now to item number

08:46:35 10 which is an application from Tampa's Lowry Park Zoo.

08:46:39 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

08:46:43 Item number 10 is Z-13-70 located at 7201 North Boulevard.

08:46:49 The request before you tonight is from RS-50 residential --

08:46:55 that should be single-family in the staff report, to PD,

08:46:58 planned development, and the uses are hay barn and accessory

08:47:03 using to Lowry Park Zoo.

08:47:05 There is one waiver associated with this.

08:47:08 And that is to allow commercial access to a local street,

08:47:11 which is Patterson street.

08:47:13 The request before you tonight is on the old kid city safety

08:47:18 village piece of property that has been vacant for some time

08:47:23 now, and the zoo is requesting to be able to relocate their

08:47:27 hay barn, that is the barn that houses all the hay for the

08:47:31 animals, from the existing zoo site to this site.

08:47:34 And you will see on your site plan before you, it is going

08:47:37 to be located at the southwest corner of the site, adjacent

08:47:42 to the actual zoo facility, and should not be very intrusive

08:47:47 to the surrounding neighbors.

08:47:48 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Capin will want to know if they

08:47:52 are going to have amplified music.

08:47:54 [ Laughter ]

08:47:58 >> I will defer to Mr. Hay and then conclude my

08:48:01 presentation.

08:48:01 Thank you.

08:48:03 From.

08:48:04 >>David Hay: Planning Commission staff.

08:48:06 And I have been sworn.

08:48:08 We move back up to the university district for our next

08:48:11 case.

08:48:12 The subject site as Abbye has said is located near the

08:48:15 southwest corner of North Boulevard and west pattern son

08:48:18 street in the Lowry Park central neighborhood.

08:48:22 Next onto the aerial.

08:48:24 The first thing that really pops out is the Lowry Park Zoo,

08:48:27 which as you all know is just to the south.

08:48:30 To the north, we have the predominantly single-family

08:48:33 detached residential.

08:48:35 And to the east we have another portion of Lowry Park.

08:48:42 Onto the land use map.

08:48:43 The subject site and properties located to the south

08:48:46 represented by the green color, designated major recreation

08:48:50 open space, future land use category.

08:48:53 To the north, across Patterson Avenue represented by that

08:48:56 tan color is property designated as residential 10.

08:49:02 Overall Planning Commission staff found the proposed planned

08:49:05 development would allow for the early expansion of some zoo

08:49:09 operations while remaining sensitive to the single-family

08:49:12 detached residential uses located to the north.

08:49:15 Therefore, based on those findings and the goals, objectives

08:49:18 and policies of the comprehensive plan Planning Commission

08:49:21 staff finds the rezoning request consistent with the Tampa

08:49:24 comprehensive plan.

08:49:29 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Thank you, David.

08:49:33 So the rezoning before you as I stated is from residential

08:49:36 single-family to PD to allow for the relocation. Hay barn

08:49:40 at the Tampa safety village property.

08:49:43 It is a 2.8-acre site located at the southwest corner of

08:49:46 North Boulevard and Patterson street.

08:49:49 It's surrounded by Lowry Park Zoo, the west and the south,

08:49:52 City of Tampa parks and recreation and Lowry Park to the

08:49:55 east, and single-family residential to the north across

08:49:59 Patterson.

08:50:00 The site plan identifies 60-foot by 100 foot envelope to the

08:50:04 southwest corner towards the location of the hay barn.

08:50:07 Therefore the setbacks would be 144 feet north, that would

08:50:12 be to Patterson, 45 feet south, which would be to the zoo,

08:50:17 300 feet east which would be the Boulevard, and 73 feet west

08:50:22 which would also be the zoo.

08:50:28 Here is the zoning atlas.

08:50:30 There are three PDs that make up the zoo property.

08:50:37 I think it's two.

08:50:38 This is the subject site here.

08:50:40 Please note that anything other than the hay barn would

08:50:44 require an additional rezoning.

08:50:46 We are just doing this for the hay barn and minor accessory

08:50:50 uses which they stated there are none, but just in case

08:50:53 there were, I put accessory uses on there that would allow

08:50:57 for things to happen, but if anything else were to happen to

08:50:59 this property it would need to come back before you.

08:51:04 Where this is the aerial of the site.

08:51:06 You can see some of the configuration of safety village

08:51:10 still there.

08:51:11 I will show you will pictures.

08:51:12 This is Boulevard looking west into the site.

08:51:17 A little bit closer up.

08:51:19 Here is looking kind of northwest towards Patterson.

08:51:23 This is moving north towards Patterson.

08:51:31 This is the east side of Boulevard, just across from the

08:51:36 site.

08:51:39 That is the northwest corner.

08:51:48 [ Laughter ] I promise.

08:51:49 I was out on veterans day.

08:51:52 Lots of people out there.

08:51:53 It was a beautiful day.

08:51:54 Here is the northwest corner of Patterson and Boulevard.

08:51:57 Here is the front of the house on Boulevard.

08:51:59 That's the front of the house on Patterson.

08:52:02 Moving west down Patterson.

08:52:06 Single-family residential I referred to.

08:52:10 Still moving west.

08:52:14 And coming to the south side of the street, looking back

08:52:17 toward Boulevard, this is the zoo property on the south

08:52:21 side.

08:52:26 That is another view from Boulevard looking west.

08:52:31 This is the gate on Patterson.

08:52:35 This is the east side of Boulevard.

08:52:40 Parks and Recreation Department.

08:52:41 And Lowry Park.

08:52:43 This is another view of the entry to the site from

08:52:46 Boulevard.

08:52:46 And now looking south towards the zoo property and moving

08:52:51 south on the west side of Boulevard.

08:52:57 There is a finding of inconsistency from the transportation

08:53:04 division for local access to Patterson.

08:53:06 There is a local access there from Safety Village.

08:53:09 Because this is a new application that waiver is on your

08:53:12 plan, and they do typically have that standing objection to

08:53:15 the local access.

08:53:18 As you can see, the site is secure.

08:53:21 There are gates.

08:53:23 Those gates do remain locked.

08:53:25 And unless it was for like a rhinoceros transport or

08:53:30 something like that ---I have learned so much from the zoo

08:53:33 by being involved in this application -- those gates would

08:53:36 remain closed and would not be open or have any sort of

08:53:40 commercial traffic onto Patterson.

08:53:43 They weigh several tons.

08:53:45 Okay.

08:53:45 Other than that, staff does find the request consistent.

08:53:49 Thank you.

08:53:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Abbye, could you please put that first photo

08:53:56 up?

08:54:17 Looking down North Boulevard.

08:54:25 Okay, it will get there.

08:54:27 It's going to be so anti-climatic.

08:54:30 Keep going, keep going.

08:54:32 The last one you are going to put up, I think.

08:54:39 It's going to be so anti-climatic.

08:54:41 Keep going.

08:54:45 No more?

08:54:46 There's more.

08:54:49 No, keep going.

08:54:51 I think that was it.

08:54:53 Back up, back up.

08:54:56 That's not it.

08:54:59 [ Laughter ] you know, it's late.

08:55:03 It's the first residence.

08:55:12 >> The white one?

08:55:14 >> It's North Boulevard.

08:55:15 But looking north open North Boulevard.

08:55:18 But that's okay.

08:55:23 That is it, you're right.

08:55:26 Okay.

08:55:28 Whenever you drive down North Boulevard on the corner of

08:55:30 North Boulevard and Kirby is the home that I lived in when

08:55:34 my daughter was born, when my husband and I lived there, my

08:55:37 daughter was born 34 years ago, and that oak tree on the

08:55:40 corner was planted the day she was born.

08:55:43 So when you drive by, look at that oak tree.

08:55:46 And it's the oak tree that was planted when she was born.

08:55:52 Thank you.

08:55:53 >> That's not anti-climatic.

08:55:55 That's sweet.

08:55:55 >>HARRY COHEN: That was worth it to hear that.

08:56:00 Well worth the wait.

08:56:03 [ Laughter ]

08:56:04 >> Good evening, council members.

08:56:06 I'm John LaRocca, Murphy LaRocca consulting group, 101 East

08:56:11 Kennedy Boulevard, representing Tampa's Lowry Park Zoo.

08:56:14 I will be very brief.

08:56:16 Yes, you heard correctly, the PD zoning is to rezone the

08:56:21 last 2.88-acre tract of land owned by the City of Tampa, but

08:56:27 taken through at least by Tampa Lowry Park Zoo, original kid

08:56:33 city safety village.

08:56:34 The zoom is planning to only move its hay barn to the

08:56:38 southwest corner of the site to be rezoned.

08:56:42 The inconsistency raised by the transportation division as

08:56:47 Abbye indicated was a reflection of the existing driveway

08:56:52 and gate that is secured the majority of time except when a

08:56:56 significant piece of equipment or animal is moved in and out

08:57:00 of the zoo.

08:57:02 We respectfully request your consideration and approval to

08:57:06 allow the hay barn to be relocated, and only the hay barn to

08:57:11 be located on this property.

08:57:12 Thank you.

08:57:12 >>HARRY COHEN: Thanks very much.

08:57:15 Is there anyone from the public that would like to address

08:57:18 the council at this time?

08:57:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close.

08:57:28 >>HARRY COHEN: Move to close by Councilman Reddick,

08:57:31 seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

08:57:33 All in favor?

08:57:34 Opposed?

08:57:34 All right.

08:57:35 Councilwoman Capin.

08:57:36 Could you please take this item?

08:57:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair, with pleasure,

08:57:40 ordinance presented for first reading consideration, an

08:57:43 ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 7201

08:57:47 North Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida and more

08:57:50 particularly described in section 1 from zoning district

08:57:53 classifications RS-50 residential single-family to PD

08:57:57 planned development, hay barn, accessory use where to Lowry

08:58:02 Park Zoo, providing an effective date.

08:58:03 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilwoman Capin,

08:58:07 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

08:58:09 All in favor indicate by saying aye.

08:58:11 Opposed?

08:58:11 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent,

08:58:16 Montelione absent at vote.

08:58:19 Second leading and adoption will be on December 5th at

08:58:22 9:30 a.m.

08:58:23 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to move on now to the final

08:58:26 agenda item. Evening, item number 1.

08:58:30 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Will land development.

08:58:31 Case Z-13-71 located at 5112 north Habana Avenue, 2906,

08:58:38 2908, 2910 west Crest Avenue.

08:58:41 The request before you this evening is from RS-60

08:58:44 residential single-family to PD planned development for

08:58:48 office-medical.

08:58:50 There are three waivers.

08:58:51 The first is to reduce the required parking through 36 to 3

08:58:55 spaces.

08:58:56 The second is to allow commercial traffic, access to a local

08:59:00 street, west Crest Avenue, and the last to allow for a 6

08:59:05 foot high PVC fence in lieu of a 6-foot masonry wall.

08:59:10 >>David Hay: Planning Commission staff.

08:59:14 And I have been sworn.

08:59:15 Our final case we head back down to the central Tampa

08:59:18 planning district.

08:59:20 The subject site is located along north Habana Avenue,

08:59:23 approximately 750 feet south of Hillsborough Avenue.

08:59:27 Next, we move onto the aerial.

08:59:30 North Habana Avenue running north-south through the center

08:59:33 of the aerial.

08:59:34 Hillsborough Avenue is on the north side.

08:59:37 North Habana Avenue is predominantly office in character

08:59:41 with some scattered multifamily residential.

08:59:43 To the west and to the east across Habana Avenue is

08:59:46 primarily single-family detached residential, and finally

08:59:49 located northeast of the subject site within the

08:59:53 Hillsborough plaza shopping center.

08:59:56 Finally, onto the future land use map, the portion of the

09:00:01 subject site and properties located along north Habana

09:00:04 Avenue are all designated as a residential 35, which is

09:00:08 represented by that brown color.

09:00:10 The remaining portion of the subject site and property

09:00:12 located to the west are all designated residential 10.

09:00:16 And to the north we can see the pink representing community

09:00:19 mixed use 35, future land use category, and to the south we

09:00:22 see the blue which represents the public quasi-public future

09:00:26 land use category.

09:00:28 Planning Commission staff found the proposed plan

09:00:31 development would have allow for office use that is

09:00:32 comparable with the existing development pattern found along

09:00:36 this portion of north Habana Avenue.

09:00:39 Planning Commission staff did have one area of concern

09:00:41 regarding the proposed access along west Crest street.

09:00:45 The original submitted site plan placed the axis point

09:00:48 across from the apartment building directly to the north.

09:00:52 During the latest site plan the access was moved further

09:00:55 west, deeper into the neighborhood.

09:00:56 Planning Commission staff would recommend that the access

09:00:58 point is feasible, be moved further east to reduce any

09:01:02 potential for commercial traffic negatively affecting the

09:01:06 single-family residential portion of the neighborhood.

09:01:09 With that, Mr. Said, Planning Commission staff overall finds

09:01:13 the rezoning request consistent with the Tampa comprehensive

09:01:16 plan.

09:01:16 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Thanks, David.

09:01:23 The request before you tonight is from residential

09:01:25 single-family RS-60 to PD planned development to allow for

09:01:29 the construction of a 6,000 square foot medical office with

09:01:33 associated parking.

09:01:34 The subject property is .78 acres and located at the

09:01:38 southwest corner of north Habana and Crest Avenue.

09:01:41 The proposed plan seeks to locate the new building towards

09:01:43 the center of the property given that there are three grand

09:01:46 trees on-site.

09:01:49 They are going to provide a small parking lot in a site

09:01:52 along Habana and then another parking lot with the majority

09:01:56 of parking in the Leer with access off of Crest, as David

09:01:59 just discussed with you.

09:02:01 The property is surrounded by medical office to the south,

09:02:04 multifamily residential to the north, single-family

09:02:06 residential to the west, and semi-detached.

09:02:11 Single-family semi-detached.

09:02:14 To the west -- no, to the north along Crest there's a couple

09:02:19 duplexes and they said medical office and residential to the

09:02:23 east along north Habana.

09:02:25 The PD setbacks are as follows.

09:02:27 North 15 feet along Crest.

09:02:29 South 5 feet adjacent to medical office.

09:02:31 I'll show you that.

09:02:32 West 25 feet.

09:02:34 Minimum.

09:02:35 It's shown at 200 feet.

09:02:38 Adjacent to residential.

09:02:39 Then east 55 feet.

09:02:41 The maximum building highlight is proposed at 20 feet.

09:02:44 The required parking based on the proposed use is 36 and 371

09:02:48 spaces are being provided, and some of that is due to the

09:02:52 tree retention.

09:02:55 The site here is shown for you in green.

09:02:57 Crest to the north.

09:02:58 Habana to the east.

09:03:00 MacDill to the west.

09:03:02 You will see this is the residential multifamily apartment.

09:03:05 I'll show you some pictures of that.

09:03:07 There was a PD done just to the south.

09:03:11 Tampa same as what's being proposed to you tonight for

09:03:13 medical office.

09:03:14 I'll show you some pictures of that as well.

09:03:17 At Hillsborough and Habana is a Publix shopping center.

09:03:22 Also, there's self PDs along the Habana area for mixed types

09:03:29 of offices.

09:03:30 I'll show you some of those pictures as well.

09:03:35 Here is the aerial of the site.

09:03:38 Crest.

09:03:38 Habana.

09:03:39 Haya.

09:03:47 Here is the site from Habana looking west.

09:03:53 This is the subject.

09:03:55 I am going to show you everything right now that's the

09:03:57 subject until I tell you it's not the subject because it's a

09:04:00 lot of single-family residential homes

09:04:03 So this is the southwest corner of Habana and Crest.

09:04:08 This is the north elevation of that same house moving west.

09:04:12 Along Crest.

09:04:16 This is still the subject site.

09:04:20 Moving west.

09:04:28 And this is the last house.

09:04:32 This is the house adjacent to the property on the west.

09:04:38 This is the north side of Crest, now moving back east toward

09:04:44 Habana.

09:04:49 This is the duplex immediately across from where the

09:04:53 proposed access that David was discussing with you would be

09:04:56 located.

09:04:58 Then shift to the multifamily residential that is there.

09:05:04 This is approaching the intersection at Habana and Crest.

09:05:07 This is the northwest corner.

09:05:10 This is the east side of Habana.

09:05:12 Now moving south.

09:05:20 This is a vacant piece.

09:05:22 This is one of the PDs we did for medical office on the east

09:05:25 side of Habana that has not been built yet.

09:05:28 This is south of Haya on Habana.

09:05:36 And what I did do was I came onto Haya, and this is the lot

09:05:43 here moving down Haya, that PD that was built for medical

09:05:50 offices.

09:05:50 This is the north side of Haya.

09:05:53 And that piece I think is actually right here, because then

09:06:04 the retention for the medical office PD starts on the other

09:06:08 side of that.

09:06:11 This actually has solid waste access off of Haya, with the

09:06:16 dumpster.

09:06:19 We would not allow for this today, obviously, and we

09:06:25 actually have the dumpster and the maneuvering on the

09:06:28 subject site that we are working on tonight.

09:06:30 This is a look back toward their parking area.

09:06:34 This building actually has internal doors.

09:06:38 It has doors on Haya.

09:06:40 It also has doors on Habana, entryways.

09:06:45 So this is approaching the intersection of Haya and Habana.

09:06:52 This is a view looking north, Habana, Haya.

09:06:57 And that is a shot from Habana.

09:07:00 This is immediately south of the subject property.

09:07:07 Transportation did have an inconsistent finding based on the

09:07:10 access on Crest.

09:07:11 The requested access on Crest.

09:07:13 There are no modifications in between first and second

09:07:16 reading.

09:07:17 There were two comments.

09:07:18 One was from stormwater, in order to get credit for the

09:07:22 existing impervious, they would recommend updating the

09:07:25 property survey to show all existing impervious areas prior

09:07:29 to the time of permitting.

09:07:30 So that credit can be given for that. And also for national

09:07:34 resources, that there are three hazardous grand trees.

09:07:38 There are three grand trees that we are reserving.

09:07:41 There are three hazardous grand trees that are going to be

09:07:44 removed.

09:07:45 And those will be noticed and signed at the time of

09:07:48 permitting through our standard practice for hazardous grand

09:07:51 tree removal.

09:07:52 Other than that, staff did find the request consistent, and

09:07:57 we are available for any questions.

09:07:58 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

09:08:01 Petitioner?

09:08:02 >> Good evening.

09:08:06 Richard Davis, 15310 Amber Lee Drive, Tampa, Florida 33647,

09:08:13 here tonight on behalf of Dr. Atigre, the developer and user

09:08:24 of this office building.

09:08:26 I am accompanied by Mr. Reed Thursby of the Kisinger Campo

09:08:26 firm. I would like to introduce him for the record, his

09:08:29 resume.

09:08:30 He has 38 years of experience in site design, land planning

09:08:33 and civil engineering for the purposes of the record.

09:08:43 Council members, we certainly appreciate and agree with the

09:08:46 conclusions of consistency that staff had mentioned to you

09:08:49 tonight.

09:08:50 I would like Mr. Thursby to come forward with the site plan

09:08:57 and talk briefly about that.

09:09:01 >> This site is a narrow site.

09:09:07 And we worked very diligently with staff to ensure

09:09:10 protection of the grand tree and to locate the building in a

09:09:15 fashion that would most efficiently permit parking.

09:09:19 And the end resultlet, council members, the grand trees that

09:09:26 need protected are certainly being protected and the area

09:09:32 where we put the sidewalks, we are redesigning sidewalks in

09:09:35 a fashion to protect the pecan tree located along Crest.

09:09:39 So the site design from an environmental perspective is a

09:09:43 matter that is of significant captain substance to our

09:09:47 client.

09:09:47 Now, the issue of the parking and the 31 spaces versus 36,

09:09:55 as -- we face the issue as part of the narrowness of this

09:09:59 particular site.

09:10:00 Our client respectfully requests that that waiver be

09:10:04 approved.

09:10:05 He believes clearly that there are enough spaces with 31

09:10:10 spaces on the site instead of the 36 right-hand side, and

09:10:15 would respectfully request approval of that waiver.

09:10:17 Now, that merges with the requested waiver on the access to

09:10:23 Crest.

09:10:24 You will notice again that the narrowness of the site is

09:10:27 such that it is close to the intersection of Crest and

09:10:30 Habana, and we would ask that there be access on Crest.

09:10:36 But please note when you look at the site plan, we have been

09:10:39 able through the design to put seven parking spaces on the

09:10:43 front that will access Habana.

09:10:46 So really there are only going to be 24 spaces that will be

09:10:51 accessing Crest.

09:10:52 So as a result, we believe that through the site design, and

09:10:56 through the minimum number of trips general he earthed by

09:11:01 this particular use, and that information is contained in

09:11:03 your record of preliminary traffic analysis by Mr. Thursby

09:11:11 to show that this particular use consumes only 1.4% of the

09:11:15 capacity along Crest and 0.6% of the capacity on Habana.

09:11:20 We believe that the trips generated from that one parking

09:11:24 lot will be adequately merged on the use of Crest and

09:11:33 support the approval of a waiver.

09:11:36 Finally, the third requested waiver, council members,

09:11:38 relates to a fence which is along this part of the site.

09:11:44 We are asking for approval of the PVC fence instead of a

09:11:49 masonry fence.

09:11:50 You will note that that fence is along the boundary of the

09:11:54 property, and the PVC fence is actually more easily

09:11:59 maintained than a masonry fence, and that is why we would

09:12:03 very much like that particular waiver.

09:12:06 Of course, it will meet the applicable height requirement.

09:12:09 Council members, you will see also in your backup tonight

09:12:15 the renderings of the building.

09:12:19 And one of the goals from my client's architect is to create

09:12:23 a building which carries with it the regulatory feel of

09:12:29 single-family residential.

09:12:31 The building is only 20 feet tall, and you will notice in

09:12:34 those renderings -- and that was very important to our

09:12:39 client so that the building carry that and thus merge with

09:12:47 the environmental feel of the single-family homes that you

09:12:51 find down Crest.

09:12:52 Now, I would ask Lee to bring forward the aerial, just to

09:12:58 close my conversation, and show you the uses in the area.

09:13:05 You will note that the area that is squared off is a site

09:13:10 for the requested use, and right next to it, the existing

09:13:15 medical office that actually extends virtually the same

09:13:19 depth back from Habana.

09:13:22 And then on the opposite side of the street, you will see

09:13:25 the multifamily uses.

09:13:27 We believe as concluded by staff that this use fits in, and

09:13:32 is compatible with the context of land uses in this

09:13:35 particular area, and we would respectfully request your

09:13:40 approval.

09:13:40 We are ready to respond to any questions you may have.

09:13:45 And Mr. Thursby is here and I have introduced his resumé if

09:13:53 you have any questions for Mr. Thursby.

09:13:55 Thank you for your time and consideration.

09:13:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.

09:13:58 I don't seep any questions for council members at this time.

09:14:01 Is there anyone from the public who would like to address

09:14:03 council regarding this matter?

09:14:08 Don't see anyone.

09:14:11 Why.

09:14:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Move to close.

09:14:13 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion to close from Councilman

09:14:16 Suarez, seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:14:18 All those in favor indicate by saying aye.

09:14:21 Opposed?

09:14:22 Okay.

09:14:22 Mr. Reddick, would you please take item number 11.

09:14:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm going to try.

09:14:44 Which one, 11?

09:14:46 Move an ordinance being presented for first reading

09:14:51 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

09:14:53 vicinity of 571712 north Habana Avenue and 2906, 2908, and

09:15:00 2910 west Crest Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and

09:15:03 more particularly described in section 1 from zoning

09:15:05 district classifications RS-50 residential single-family to

09:15:09 PD planned development, office, medical, providing an

09:15:12 effective date.

09:15:12 >> Second.

09:15:15 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a motion from Councilman Reddick,

09:15:18 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

09:15:19 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

09:15:22 Opposed?

09:15:22 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent and

09:15:26 Montelione being absent at vote.

09:15:30 Second reading will be on December 5 they at 9:30 a.m.

09:15:34 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

09:15:35 Well, that concludes our agenda for this evening K.we please

09:15:37 have a motion to receive and file?

09:15:40 We have a motion from Councilman Suarez, seconded by

09:15:43 Councilwoman Capin.

09:15:44 All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

09:15:47 Opposed?

09:15:49 We did do new business earlier in the day.

09:15:51 There are any council members that have new business

09:15:54 tonight?

09:15:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just have one item, sir.

09:15:57 I would like to ask the council to approve a commendation to

09:16:00 Margaret Smith McCallister in celebration of her 90th

09:16:04 birthday.

09:16:05 Ms. McCallister, if you recall, she had retired as the

09:16:09 organist from one of our churches locally and has been doing

09:16:13 it for 56 or 57 straight years.

09:16:17 She's also cousin of one of our former mayors, Julian lane.

09:16:22 She was a first cousin of Julian lane.

09:16:24 She's going to have a celebration on Saturday.

09:16:26 And I hope to present that commendation at that time.

09:16:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

09:16:30 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion from Councilman Suarez, seconded by

09:16:33 Councilman Reddick.

09:16:34 All in favor?

09:16:36 Opposed?

09:16:37 Is there any other new business by council members?

09:16:44 With that we are adjourned.

09:16:45 We'll see you next week.

09:16:47 (City Council meeting adjourned).



This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this 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.