TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, August 20, 2015
6:00 p.m. Session
DISCLAIMER:
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.
18:04:54 [Sounding gavel]
18:04:55 >> We are going to call this meeting to order.
18:04:59 At this time, roll call.
18:05:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
18:05:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
18:05:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
18:05:06 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
18:05:08 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
18:05:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
18:05:14 Thank you.
18:05:14 Item number 1.
18:05:17 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
18:05:22 If I may, may I clear the agenda, please?
18:05:24 >> Yes, you can.
18:05:25 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 4 on your agenda REZ 14-55
18:05:29 has been withdrawn.
18:05:32 It will obviously not be heard tonight.
18:05:34 Item number 5 on your agenda tonight --
18:05:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Sorry to interrupt, but if you could take
18:05:40 action on that.
18:05:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Move to have remove item 4 from the agenda.
18:05:45 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez.
18:05:47 All in favor say aye.
18:05:49 Opposed?
18:05:49 All right.
18:05:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
18:05:53 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Number 5 on your agenda, failed to
18:05:56 perfect notice, REZ 15-45.
18:06:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mrs. Capin, second by Mr. Cohen.
18:06:04 All in favor say aye.
18:06:06 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 7 on your agenda has
18:06:10 requested a continuance REZ 15-41, from the applicant to the
18:06:14 September 10th public hearing.
18:06:15 >> Move to remove item --
18:06:25 >> We have to open the public hearing.
18:06:26 >> Anyone here to speak on continued item number 7?
18:06:36 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I'm here on behalf of the applicant and we
18:06:38 have requested this continuance.
18:06:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone else here to speak on item number 7?
18:06:44 Seeing none.
18:06:45 >> Move to continue.
18:06:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, but procedurally, you have not
18:06:51 yet opened the public hearing.
18:06:52 If you could open it so it could be continued.
18:06:55 >> Move to open the public hearing.
18:06:57 >> Second.
18:06:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion from Mrs. Montelione,
18:07:00 second by Ms. Capin.
18:07:02 All in favor of the motion?
18:07:04 >> Move to continue to September 10th at 6 testimony
18:07:07 p.m.
18:07:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Second.
18:07:09 Motion by Mr. Cohen.
18:07:10 Second by Mrs. Capin.
18:07:11 All those in favor say aye.
18:07:12 Opposed?
18:07:13 All right.
18:07:14 That's it?
18:07:14 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, sir.
18:07:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 1.
18:07:20 Anyone from staff here for number 1?
18:07:23 >> Cathy Ginster on behalf of legal department, here with a
18:07:30 request to designate, ask council to read the announcement
18:07:37 for a public meeting that's going to be held off-site, the
18:07:47 brownfield area on Hanna Avenue.
18:07:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mrs. Montelione, will you read it?
18:07:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Certainly, sir.
18:08:20 The following announcement of a public meeting.
18:08:25 A public hearing will be held
18:08:27 Regarding a proposed brownfield area designation for the
18:08:27 rehabilitation and redevelopment of city-owned property
18:08:27 located in the general vicinity of 2515 east Hanna Avenue in
18:08:27 the City of Tampa, totaling approximately 11.2 acres.
18:08:40 This public hearing will be held in the City of Tampa,
18:08:43 Gwendolyn Miller Center in Woodland Terrace Park located at
18:08:47 6410 North 32nd Street in Tampa, Florida on Monday, August
18:08:53 31, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. until no later than 6:30 p.m.
18:09:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
18:09:03 We have a motion by Mrs. Montelione.
18:09:04 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.
18:09:06 Any discussion on the motion?
18:09:07 Seeing none all in favor of the motion say aye.
18:09:09 Opposed?
18:09:10 Okay.
18:09:11 >>HARRY COHEN: Move to item opens 2 through 10.
18:09:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Staff, let me ask you, on item 10 it cannot
18:09:18 be heard.
18:09:19 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, sir, I'm sorry about that.
18:09:21 That is not one of our cases.
18:09:23 But, yeah, item number 10 cannot be heard because apparently
18:09:26 they did not perfect that notice.
18:09:28 I'm sorry, I apologize.
18:09:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
18:09:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So move to remove item number 10.
18:09:36 >> Second.
18:09:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mrs. Capin.
18:09:38 Second by Mrs. Montelione.
18:09:40 All in favor say aye.
18:09:41 Opposed?
18:09:42 All right.
18:09:42 Anyone going to speak on item 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9.
18:09:49 If you are going to speak, please stand to be sworn in.
18:09:53 >>HARRY COHEN: And while they do that, to go back to the
18:09:56 motion, open items 2 through 9.
18:09:59 >> Second.
18:10:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen.
18:10:02 Second by Mr. Suarez.
18:10:03 All in favor say aye.
18:10:05 Thank you.
18:10:05 (Oath administered by Clerk).
18:10:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 2.
18:10:18 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
18:10:20 This is the continued public hearing for AB-26-15-15,
18:10:25 concerns property at 6809 north Nebraska.
18:10:29 The applicant did revise the proposed square footage for the
18:10:35 alcohol beverage sales area.
18:10:37 They are now proposing 1715 square feet inside area, 2540
18:10:45 square feet of permanent outdoor area, and 5,149 square feet
18:10:52 of event outdoor area, for a total of 24,705 square feet,
18:10:59 total AB sales area.
18:11:01 The site plan shows 94 parking spaces and indicates that it
18:11:06 will be consistent with chapter 14.
18:11:10 The proposing is for a large venue, beer-wine, on and off
18:11:15 premises consumption.
18:11:16 They are asking for waivers of distance separation for other
18:11:21 AB establishments.
18:11:23 The code requires that 250-foot separation, and they are
18:11:27 providing 111-foot separation.
18:11:31 The residential use separation 250 is required and they will
18:11:35 be 8 feet from the residential use.
18:11:38 They are also asking in order for the outdoor event space to
18:11:44 be located in the parking and loading area.
18:11:51 The proposal is for a microbrewery and tasting room.
18:11:57 As I indicated the site plan does show that there are 94
18:12:00 offstreet parking spaces, 25-foot and for motorcycle spaces.
18:12:09 They are complying with the requirements for off-street
18:12:11 parking for the facility itself.
18:12:14 Staff has talked to the applicant about the revised site
18:12:18 plan indicating that there is still needs to be a little bit
18:12:22 of refinement as to how the event space will work, and they
18:12:25 have indicated that they will be willing to add in a
18:12:29 clarifying note that they will be complying with the Tampa
18:12:34 special event requirements which is section 27-2282 .16,
18:12:40 when that space is used in construction with the
18:12:42 microbrewery facility.
18:12:45 Otherwise, they indicated that the event space would only be
18:12:49 used when the facility, the tasting room and out door event
18:12:55 area is closed off.
18:12:58 The site plan also included an indication or waivers of some
18:13:03 design exceptions to the Seminole Heights district.
18:13:08 Those are handled administratively through a design
18:13:11 exception process.
18:13:12 They submitted the application and it has been approved by
18:13:16 staff.
18:13:17 So the site plan revisions that are still needed relates to
18:13:21 solid waste and also clarification about the temporary
18:13:26 parking and deletion of the waivers related to the design
18:13:32 exceptions.
18:13:34 This property is again the nearest other AB establishment is
18:13:42 mermaid tavern at 6719 north Nebraska Avenue and the
18:13:47 residential use is the north side of the property.
18:13:52 The property is in the Seminole Heights urban village.
18:13:56 Nebraska Avenue is a transit emphasis corridor, enroute
18:14:01 to -- and runs on Nebraska.
18:14:04 I am here to answer any questions related to the staff
18:14:06 report.
18:14:07 We did find it inconsistent in the sense that they do not
18:14:11 meet the distance separation waivers.
18:14:24 (off microphone).
18:14:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?
18:14:29 Petitioner?
18:14:34 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Good evening.
18:14:34 My name is John Grandoff.
18:14:36 My address is suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.
18:14:39 And I have the pleasure this evening of representing 7venth
18:14:44 Sun Brewery.
18:14:46 I'm joined this evening by Deven, who is the founder of
18:14:51 7venth Sun Brewery.
18:14:55 Justin is not with us this evening but they are currently
18:14:58 operating a brewery in Dunedin, and they have recently been
18:15:03 in the news.
18:15:16 This is back in 2012.
18:15:18 The current site is a warehouse, roofing company.
18:15:23 They are going to repurpose the warehouse and put the 7venth
18:15:26 Sun Brewery Tampa location here on Nebraska Avenue just
18:15:30 south of Sligh Avenue and just north of the Mermaid Tavern.
18:15:34 They have the support of the Seminole Heights neighborhood
18:15:36 association, and also with us this evening, Mr. Joe Hafner,
18:15:49 to show you what the 7venth Sun looks like from Nebraska
18:15:53 Avenue.
18:15:54 It's important to review this elevation because this
18:15:56 elevation shows compliance with the Seminole Heights overlay
18:16:00 and also as Ms. Moreda mentioned there are two overlays
18:16:05 required, one as to parking, 0% of the parking, supposed
18:16:10 to be placed on side or rear yards.
18:16:13 We place 70% of parking on the side or rear yard.
18:16:18 In terms of the rule not to have parking in the front yard
18:16:21 to obscure the vista of the street.
18:16:24 Since we are repurposing an existing building we had to work
18:16:26 around those four walls to provide the parking.
18:16:31 I think 73% is close enough, and Ms. Moreda felt it was
18:16:35 close enough also and granted that waiver.
18:16:37 The second waiver was for a concrete wall to be installed on
18:16:41 the eastern boundary line of the rear of the property.
18:16:44 If you review your site plan you will see that we are going
18:16:46 to place a PVC fence instead of the concrete wall.
18:16:51 And what's important is that there are already wood fences
18:16:54 existing for adjoining property owners so this PVC fence
18:16:57 will merely be adjacent to and abut existing fences of the
18:17:02 neighbors and it will not be visible from Nebraska Avenue.
18:17:06 And that is the second design exception in Seminole Heights
18:17:08 which Mrs. Moreda has also approved.
18:17:11 The site plan has a note that we are adding to it.
18:17:16 It's not on your site plan but we will add it after this
18:17:20 hearing, which will require Deven and Justin to be comply
18:17:27 with the temporary criteria of the city code which is
18:17:32 provided in 27.282.16, and I will provide a copy of this to
18:17:38 Mr. Shelby.
18:17:42 (off microphone) at the time they will shut down the
18:17:47 interior and have a special event outside meeting these two
18:17:52 four criteria in chapter 27, and, again, meet the required
18:17:58 parking.
18:17:59 Parking is important.
18:18:00 They have provided 94 spaces.
18:18:02 They are required to provide 94 spaces so there's no parking
18:18:06 waiver involved.
18:18:09 One other point I want to make.
18:18:16 Pardon me.
18:18:19 Up at the top left hand corn of the site plan you have, you
18:18:24 will see that there are two waivers mentioned.
18:18:26 Those will no longer be necessary under your jurisdiction,
18:18:31 as I mentioned.
18:18:32 Mrs. Moreda has approved those administratively.
18:18:34 We had to have those approved before you could rule on this
18:18:37 application.
18:18:39 This evening.
18:18:41 I have nothing further to add.
18:18:43 I request that you approve the distance waivers in the
18:18:49 application, and if you have any questions, Justin an --
18:18:53 excuse me, Deven and I are available to answer those for
18:18:56 you.
18:18:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Grandoff, on the site plan, I am looking
18:19:05 on my right-hand side, this says the event area.
18:19:09 The event area has 5100 square feet.
18:19:13 It looks like -- is there a truck or a food truck or
18:19:17 something that is parked there?
18:19:19 >> That's just a delivery truck.
18:19:21 We are superimposing a delivery truck.
18:19:23 When the event area is not being used that's where our
18:19:25 delivery trucks will bring the grain and remove the spent
18:19:29 grain.
18:19:30 >> I had never seen a truck on the site plan before so I was
18:19:32 curious what that was.
18:19:34 And I guess there is a parking space to the right side
18:19:37 there.
18:19:37 Is that what it is?
18:19:38 >> In the street to the left.
18:19:39 >> And four of those delivery trucks, correct?
18:19:43 >> Correct.
18:19:43 >> I was curious about that.
18:19:45 Interest wasn't sure if they were using that for some other
18:19:47 purpose.
18:19:47 >> No.
18:19:50 We need to demonstrate to the transportation department that
18:19:52 we can make the turn.
18:19:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.
18:19:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: Other questions by council?
18:19:57 Anyone in the public wishing to speak on item number 2?
18:20:01 Item number 2.
18:20:13 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Somebody else is enroute.
18:20:16 >> Susan Long.
18:20:17 We are totally in support of this.
18:20:19 The only question is the hours of operation.
18:20:20 We would like them to close 11:00 Wednesday through -- I got
18:20:25 that backward.
18:20:25 Sunday through Wednesday.
18:20:26 And 1 from Thursday through Saturday.
18:20:29 And if those hours will be placed on this we will be very
18:20:33 happy.
18:20:33 We like the site plan.
18:20:35 We are tickled pink.
18:20:36 It's probably the only place in Seminole Heights that
18:20:38 doesn't need a parking waiver which makes us very happy.
18:20:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:20:42 Anyone else?
18:20:43 >> Land Use Committee in Old Seminole Heights.
18:20:51 He would don't have any problem with the proposal providing
18:20:53 everything has been done the way we had talked about at the
18:20:57 last time.
18:20:59 We believe it's been done.
18:21:01 We have been very agreeable and accommodating so we have no
18:21:04 opposition.
18:21:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone else wish to speak on item number 2?
18:21:08 Mr. Grandoff, any additional comments?
18:21:15 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's acceptable.
18:21:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
18:21:20 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: The hours.
18:21:21 Hours.
18:21:22 I'll add those.
18:21:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
18:21:26 Any further questions by council?
18:21:28 Need a motion.
18:21:29 >> Motion to close.
18:21:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Cohen.
18:21:32 Second by Mr. Suarez.
18:21:33 All in favor say aye.
18:21:34 Opposed?
18:21:36 Mrs. Montelione, would you read the substitute motion?
18:21:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will, sir.
18:21:42 The substitute ordinance being presented for first reading
18:21:45 consideration, an ordinance approving a special use permit
18:21:47 S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, large venue, consumption
18:21:51 on premises and package sales, consumption off premises and
18:21:54 making lawful the sale of beer and wine at or from that
18:21:57 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 6809 north
18:22:01 Nebraska Avenue, Tampa, Florida as more particularly
18:22:03 described in section 2 that all ordinances or parts of
18:22:05 ordinances in conflict are repealed, providing an effective
18:22:08 date.
18:22:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion from Mrs. Montelione,
18:22:11 second by Mr. Miranda.
18:22:12 Any discussion?
18:22:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The hours of operation to be part of the
18:22:22 motion?
18:22:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: With the hours -- I am reluctantly doing
18:22:32 this -- with the hours stipulated by the applicant.
18:22:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And those being?
18:22:42 >> I think it's 11:00 every evening except Sunday.
18:22:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Sunday to Wednesday, 1 a.m.
18:22:49 I forgot, 11?
18:22:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So Deven, don't go away.
18:22:57 Sunday through Wednesday at 11.
18:23:01 >> Would you state your name for the record?
18:23:04 >> Deven: We will be closing Sunday through Wednesday at
18:23:09 11 p.m. and Thursday through Saturday at 1 a.m.
18:23:15 Thank you.
18:23:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
18:23:18 We have an amended motion from Mrs. Montelione, seconded by
18:23:21 Mr. Miranda.
18:23:23 All those in favor of the motion say aye.
18:23:25 Opposed?
18:23:26 Thank you, sir.
18:23:29 Item number 3.
18:23:30 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
18:23:35 Item number 3 on your agenda is REZ 15-35.
18:23:39 As you may remember, this case was continued from your June
18:23:42 11th meeting.
18:23:45 Before there was a concern or issue because they were
18:23:49 exceeding the allowable F.A.R. for the comp plan.
18:23:54 Their application and site plan has been revised so it's
18:23:56 within the parameters of the comp plan.
18:23:58 Thank you.
18:24:07 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:24:08 I have been sworn in.
18:24:11 I am going to show several illustrations for your benefit.
18:24:20 The first map before you is the addition map which shows
18:24:23 this area is located in the south plannings district, one of
18:24:26 two stable planning districts in the City of Tampa which
18:24:29 does still allow consideration for in-fill projects.
18:24:42 The next illustration before you is -- I want to give you a
18:24:50 little bit of context.
18:24:52 Bay to Bay is to the north several blocks at the
18:24:54 intersection of South MacDill, Dale Mabry and Bay to Bay.
18:24:58 There is a parking lot on the southeast corner.
18:25:00 And to give you a little bit more context, about four or
18:25:04 five blocks from Bay to Bay on Dale Mabry is a steak and
18:25:07 shake on the left-hand side and then of course a variety of
18:25:10 restaurants which includes, I think, PDQ and several other
18:25:14 places.
18:25:14 But anyway that should give you a general context of what's
18:25:17 there.
18:25:18 As far as land use is concerned, there are two predominant
18:25:24 land uses in this area and they are residential 20 which is
18:25:27 the brown color along Dale Mabry, which does allow
18:25:31 consideration and location of criteria for neighborhood
18:25:35 commercial uses and also professional office.
18:25:38 So office is the request here so it is an allowable
18:25:42 considered use for criteria. The other light orange color
18:25:45 is residential 10 which typically signifies single family
18:25:50 detached residential use.
18:25:51 Based on what the request is and what the context is of the
18:25:54 area and the underlying land use Planning Commission found
18:25:58 the proposed request consistent with the comprehensive plan.
18:26:03 Thank you.
18:26:03 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: As I stated, this is a continued case
18:26:11 from the last public hearing that was heard at the June
18:26:15 11th meeting.
18:26:22 (off microphone).
18:26:29 You can see there's a number of planned developments, the
18:26:36 majority of office uses here.
18:26:46 Since the last meeting, the previous proposed site plan was
18:26:52 for a 3-story building.
18:26:54 Now the building has been reduced to two stories.
18:27:05 Some of the waivers have gone away because of the revised
18:27:07 site plan.
18:27:10 Primarily, there is no longer a waiver request for
18:27:15 reduction.
18:27:21 At the last meeting there was discussion about the ingress
18:27:26 from San Pedro.
18:27:28 I believe Ms. Feeley explained that D.O.T., Dale Mabry and
18:27:34 D.O.T. would not allow full access onto Dale Mabry for this
18:27:37 site.
18:27:38 So the property owner could have access to the property,
18:27:43 there's no other result but to give access onto San Pedro.
18:27:47 Therefore, the waiver is not required.
18:27:50 The proposed plan as stated today, there are two waivers.
18:27:54 One to reduce the south Dale Mabry special setback from 45
18:27:59 feet to 35 feet, and cantilevers over, and the other waiver
18:28:07 to reduce the waiver is to reduce the required buffer along
18:28:09 the east side from 15 feet with a 6-foot high concrete wall
18:28:14 to 7 feet with an existing 6-foot high masonry wall.
18:28:18 >>HARRY COHEN: Excuse me, it says on the report that the
18:28:22 existing wall is 8 feet.
18:28:24 >> I'm sorry, it is 8 feet.
18:28:29 8 feet property line.
18:28:31 The building is set back, again residential 15 feet.
18:28:39 The building is set back approximately 12 feet.
18:28:41 The reason for the reduction is the enclosure.
18:28:51 As far as revisions, there are a number of revisions from
18:28:54 Land Development Coordination to be done between first and
18:28:58 second reading, primarily correction for the setbacks,
18:29:05 and -- I have a spelling error.
18:29:08 Other than that, all of the departments found it consistent,
18:29:11 and with the Land Development Coordination there are no
18:29:13 other objections or revisions.
18:29:17 Do you have any questions?
18:29:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions for staff? Seeing none,
18:29:21 petitioner?
18:29:21 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Representing petitioner.
18:29:29 Basically the proposal is to construct a two-story 4017
18:29:35 square foot office building with parking below and the
18:29:39 entrance to the building off the lower level.
18:29:43 This is restricted to business and professional office.
18:29:46 No retail, which in discussion was the neighbors they had a
18:29:49 concern about potential for retail shops in the area.
18:29:52 So we have restricted that.
18:29:55 There will not be any retail shops.
18:29:58 As Mary pointed out, our access on Dale Mabry is limited by
18:30:05 FDOT, and we have to have our entrance on San Pedro.
18:30:09 We are maintaining an 8-foot buffer with masonry wall along
18:30:13 the east side and heavily landscaping that to mitigate any
18:30:17 impact against the adjacent neighbor.
18:30:20 If you try to get an idea of what this is going to look
18:30:23 like, the HAHN Engineering building is not even a block away
18:30:31 to the north on the same side of the street.
18:30:34 And we modeled our proposal so that it would be residential
18:30:38 in scale.
18:30:40 It's limited to 35 feet in height, and it will look more
18:30:43 like a residence than it will an office building.
18:30:47 Basically, this is what we are requesting.
18:30:50 The special setback on Dale Mabry reducing that from 45 to
18:30:54 35 feet, allows us to move the building forward, and further
18:30:58 away from the residences on the east.
18:31:01 Basically that's our proposal.
18:31:03 And we respectfully request your approval.
18:31:06 We will be happy to answer any questions you might have.
18:31:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?
18:31:11 Anyone in the public wish to speak on item number 3?
18:31:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Are these copies to put into the record?
18:31:52 >> Just to show people what I will be showing.
18:31:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So that should be put into the record
18:31:57 then?
18:31:57 >> That's fine, yes.
18:31:59 Good evening.
18:31:59 My name is Phil Schlossnagle, west San Pedro street which is
18:32:05 immediately adjacent to this property on the east.
18:32:09 Back here, my wife and I.
18:32:13 We purchased our house 15 years ago, 16 years ago, 1999.
18:32:19 The year following -- this property that we are talking
18:32:22 about tonight was rezoned from RS-50 to PD.
18:32:26 It was done by an attorney.
18:32:30 And he had proposed to put in a small addition on the
18:32:32 property, three, maybe four people in there.
18:32:37 Mr. Miranda, you might remember, it's been a while, but City
18:32:41 Council said they said the property is not big enough for
18:32:46 anyone more than herself, her assistant, and the client.
18:32:52 (Off microphone) So as proposed, we are going from this 900
18:32:56 square foot building from 15 years ago to-- to an 8,000
18:33:05 square foot building, 4,000, 4,000 below the parking, 900
18:33:12 square feet almost 8,000.
18:33:15 Again, although it meets the F.A.R. requirements, 10 feet
18:33:23 farther to Dale Mabry, and about 8 feet on the east side of
18:33:31 the property.
18:33:32 Again, Mr. Michelini said Hahn Engineering which is a
18:33:38 similar building, but Hahn maintains a 45-foot setback where
18:33:44 this is 10 feet closer to be Dale Mabry.
18:33:47 I think it's going to be too close to Dale Mabry.
18:33:51 So that's -- concerned about traffic coming down San Pedro
18:33:58 street.
18:33:59 With the D.O.T. allowing egress, that's forcing ingress onto
18:34:06 San pedestrian low street B.you there's a lot of people on
18:34:08 the street, a lot of kids on the street. If this has to be
18:34:11 done, I would ask that -- from Dale Mabry to enter the site
18:34:23 instead of allowing people to come down our street to enter
18:34:28 the site.
18:34:34 Thank you.
18:34:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next.
18:34:35 >> My name is Kate Bacon, 3701 west San Pedro.
18:34:44 I'm on the corner of San Pedro and Sterling on the same road
18:34:47 as the proposed development.
18:34:49 I just want to say that I am not opposed to having an office
18:34:52 building on the corner.
18:34:54 The big issue that I have is the proposed addition of access
18:34:57 to the property.
18:34:59 I am not really sure I understand the D.O.T. change.
18:35:02 The property does currently have both ingress and egress
18:35:06 from the commercial property to and from Dale Mabry.
18:35:09 So I would propose that we remain with that same egress.
18:35:13 The problem we have is that it is as stated in the initial
18:35:16 rezoning report is inconsistent with the City of Tampa Land
18:35:19 Development Code for a residential street with commercial
18:35:23 traffic.
18:35:24 Full access is already available on the property.
18:35:27 It adds a risk for the amount of traffic on a very narrow
18:35:30 street for residents, congestion, due to traffic, parking on
18:35:34 the side of the road, as well as road wear and tear.
18:35:38 There is a public school bus stop on our corner, so the
18:35:41 corner of San Pedro and Sterling, which has 8 to 10
18:35:46 schoolchildren waiting for their bus every school morning
18:35:49 sitting on that corner, so it puts them at risk for come to
18:35:52 and from the bus stop not to mention just standing on the
18:35:55 corner waiting.
18:35:56 So increased traffic come around that corner.
18:35:58 We know it's going to happen is with people coming to the
18:36:00 property are going to try to avoid turning left on Dale
18:36:03 Mabry.
18:36:03 They are going to go down Bay to Bay.
18:36:05 They are going to turn onto Sterling.
18:36:07 They are going to turn the corner at San Pedro which is
18:36:10 where the children are waiting for the bus and come up the
18:36:12 road, not to mention the children and the kids and the pets
18:36:15 that live on that street a as it is.
18:36:18 In addition, you will have additional wear and tear on the
18:36:20 road there.
18:36:22 That corner is already on the city's list to repair.
18:36:25 It has considerable flooding with large lanes, the entire
18:36:30 intersection is underwater, is already a concern and a
18:36:33 problem for the people in the neighborhood.
18:36:35 I'm a business person, and I understand the need to utilize
18:36:38 this property, and I look forward to having a new and
18:36:41 revitalized property there, but the fact remains there's
18:36:44 really no need to access the property from a residential
18:36:47 street.
18:36:47 The plan is in violation of the City of Tampa land code.
18:36:52 The additional traffic on the street creates a risk top
18:36:54 schoolchildren and the people living there.
18:36:56 Tampa additional wear and tear on the road is deteriorating
18:37:01 there, and additional congestion is not in the best interest
18:37:03 of the city or the neighborhood.
18:37:05 I respect flip request that the plan be modified to remove
18:37:09 access to or from an Pedro residential street.
18:37:12 Thanks for your time and your service.
18:37:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:37:16 Mrs. Montelione.
18:37:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mrs. Samaniego, can you address the
18:37:22 position of FDOT addressing ingress-egress on Dale Mabry?
18:37:29 >> Yes.
18:37:29 It's my understanding that when the original planned
18:37:31 development was approved, back in 2000, it was the
18:37:36 conversion of an existing house that had access onto Dale
18:37:39 Mabry into an office.
18:37:41 So they had full access.
18:37:43 Given that this is a new project with a greater square
18:37:46 footage, D.O.T. did a reevaluation as far as access and they
18:37:51 have only allowed the site to leave the Dale Mabry, and they
18:37:57 have not allowed ingress into the site to Dale Mabry.
18:38:00 So the only way that for this project to get into the site
18:38:05 is from San Pedro.
18:38:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So as long as the existing building
18:38:11 remains, they can keep the ingress and egress on Dale Mabry.
18:38:18 But with a new construction of the building that --
18:38:24 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, made them reevaluate the driveways.
18:38:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And there's no appealing to FDOT on the
18:38:31 decision?
18:38:32 >> I'm not sure what their appeal process is.
18:38:34 I know they looked at this extensively because this issue
18:38:37 has come up from the public and I do know that Mrs. Feeley
18:38:40 did talk to D.O.T. about it.
18:38:42 I don't know what D.O.T.'s appeal process is.
18:38:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think that's something we need to know
18:38:49 more about for options -- excuse me -- for options, because
18:38:56 if there is an appeal process, and the applicant didn't go
18:39:01 through the appeal process, exhaust every Avenue they have
18:39:06 of getting their ingress and egress on Dale Mabry, then that
18:39:10 would make -- that would I think sometimes make a difference
18:39:15 in my position.
18:39:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: I just know that being a government,
18:39:18 there's always an appeal process for everything.
18:39:20 So I'm sure there's an appeal process for that determination
18:39:23 as well.
18:39:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: When the applicant comes up he might
18:39:28 want to address that.
18:39:29 >>HARRY COHEN: And I think this can wait until the
18:39:32 applicant comes back up.
18:39:33 But the first speaker talked about whether or not if there
18:39:39 has to be access from San Pedro whether or not it could be
18:39:44 directed so that the cars would be encouraged to come off of
18:39:50 Dale Mabry rather than San Pedro traveling west.
18:39:58 I know on some of the developments we have done recently,
18:40:01 the way the curb cuts are done restrict or encourage turns
18:40:07 to be made a certain way.
18:40:08 So maybe the applicant can address the possibility of doing
18:40:12 that when we hear back from them.
18:40:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:40:18 >> Good evening.
18:40:21 My name is John Castro. I live at 3707 west San Pedro
18:40:25 street, approximately five blocks away from this proposed
18:40:29 development.
18:40:30 I too am a small business owner and I am not against new
18:40:33 development.
18:40:34 But what I am against is changing the priorities of what
18:40:37 this neighborhood is about.
18:40:39 This is a residential neighborhood on the corner of the
18:40:42 street, Sterling and San Pedro is a bus stop.
18:40:45 Bus stop as previously mentioned with seven to ten children
18:40:48 every morning and afternoon.
18:40:50 So what is your honorable council here to decide?
18:40:56 What is the priority here?
18:40:58 The priority is to obviously make this corner beautiful.
18:41:02 It's a non-used building.
18:41:06 But it's got to be in compliance with the existing
18:41:08 structures.
18:41:09 This is a neighborhood.
18:41:10 It's Virginia Park.
18:41:10 So at this time I would ask you to consider the impact it
18:41:13 would have on the people on this street.
18:41:16 There's in a doubt that people coming from the east are
18:41:18 going to come on Bay to Bay, south on Sterling.
18:41:23 There's going to be increased traffic on Sterling which
18:41:25 already is a high traffic street.
18:41:28 Then you are going to have those individuals turn onto San
18:41:30 Pedro and into the building.
18:41:32 There's no other way for them to come unless they are coming
18:41:34 from the south.
18:41:36 And they are going to take a right onto San Pedro, not
18:41:39 really impacting many people on that street.
18:41:41 So I ask you, and to determine, what are your priorities
18:41:47 here?
18:41:47 If your priority is to make sure that the zoning of this is
18:41:54 in compliance with the existing area, then I would say that
18:41:56 the current proposal does not do that.
18:42:00 It does not comply with the function of the residential
18:42:04 neighborhood.
18:42:05 You have got 13 parking spaces.
18:42:07 This is a far cry from existing structure where I believe it
18:42:11 has three.
18:42:12 So you have got an increase of four fold from the structure
18:42:16 of the existing building and increase of over five times or
18:42:20 four and a half times of the parking that you are going to
18:42:23 have.
18:42:23 So, again, it's a matter of priority.
18:42:26 And there's other ways to get around this.
18:42:29 It's not impacting the residential neighborhood in a way
18:42:35 that it is now.
18:42:36 Thank you.
18:42:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:42:37 Next.
18:42:44 Anyone else out here that hasn't been sworn in that's going
18:42:47 to speak?
18:42:48 Will you please stand to be sworn in?
18:42:50 (Oath administered by Clerk)
18:42:53 >> My name is Eric Ocho Terina.
18:43:01 I was before you all back in June, waited eight hours before
18:43:08 it came to us to be heard.
18:43:11 >> We have heard that.
18:43:12 >> If they are all like that, I don't think I am coming
18:43:15 anymore.
18:43:15 But I appreciate you all taking the time.
18:43:18 But before I forget, one of the other residents in the
18:43:21 neighborhood who I don't know who I just met two minutes
18:43:24 ago, just up and down the street and got a lot of folks to
18:43:28 sign a petition.
18:43:33 So I present you with that.
18:43:36 I don't want to take up too much time and sort of
18:43:39 regurgitate or repeat things that were already said.
18:43:43 What I can tell you is when I moved to that neighborhood I
18:43:45 did so because my wife got pregnant, and we have a two and a
18:43:48 half-year-old boy who runs around all the time.
18:43:51 And the houses on that street are built pretty closely to
18:43:56 the street.
18:43:56 I can I can tell you, there are already a lot of cars that
18:43:59 speed through that neighborhood, especially at rush hour,
18:44:03 when they are trying to avoid Bay to Bay, and Dale Mabry.
18:44:07 And I don't like becoming the old guy from when I was
18:44:17 younger, Tampa cars speed down the road.
18:44:21 I can tell you this, adding a building like this to our
18:44:23 neighborhood has -- there's nothing else they can do.
18:44:33 It's not going to decrease traffic.
18:44:35 There's no argument.
18:44:36 It's impossible.
18:44:37 Everyone can agree.
18:44:38 It's not going to decrease traffic.
18:44:40 It will increase traffic.
18:44:41 And I'm not going to pretend that I understand all the rules
18:44:44 and FDOT and all that.
18:44:45 I don't know why FDOT is not approving ingress and egress
18:44:50 from Dale Mabry.
18:44:51 I guess they are approving exiting from Dale Mabry but not
18:44:54 entering from Dale Mabry.
18:44:56 So what are we saying here?
18:44:58 The question is, are we increasing traffic on Dale Mabry
18:45:02 versus increasing traffic on a residential street?
18:45:06 That's the debate.
18:45:08 We row rather increase traffic on a residential street where
18:45:11 I have a two-year-old and I know for a fact there are about
18:45:14 eight other kids under the age of five just on those two
18:45:17 blocks alone.
18:45:19 Is there really a reason to do that?
18:45:21 Is the reason that FDOT will not approve ingress and egress
18:45:25 on Dale Mabry specifically because they want to build the
18:45:28 building so big that they need a variance or whatever you
18:45:30 guys call it for getting too close to Dale Mabry, because if
18:45:34 be they make it go a little farther then there's no reason
18:45:38 for them to have ingress and egress from San pedestrian row.
18:45:41 They can come in and they can go out.
18:45:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: On Dale Mabry.
18:45:44 They can have their building and have their business and we
18:45:47 make sure that our streets are safety.
18:45:49 Alternatively -- and again I don't know if this is the right
18:45:52 forum for this, but maybe they can pay to put in a couple of
18:45:55 speed bumps on the street.
18:45:58 I have heard of something called impact fees.
18:46:00 Could they pay to put one speed bump on the block of San
18:46:03 Pedro between Dale Mabry and Sterling and then one on the
18:46:06 block of San Pedro between Sterling and Himes?
18:46:10 And that way if they want ingress and egress, great, have at
18:46:15 it, don't speed through our neighborhood.
18:46:17 So with that, I will just -- from my perspective, I don't
18:46:23 see there being any reason why they should be able to enter
18:46:27 and exit from San Pedro and increase the risk to our
18:46:33 children.
18:46:33 Thank you.
18:46:33 (Bell sounds).
18:46:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:46:35 Next.
18:46:35 >> My name is April Neil, 3711 west San Louis street and I
18:46:43 want you to know that I don't live on this specific block
18:46:47 but I do live in the neighborhood and I am representing
18:46:50 numerous families in this neighborhood that are not maybe
18:46:53 not on the adjacent property but we are all feeling very
18:46:56 frustrated by this property that is being considered.
18:47:02 I could repeat a lot of these things but I am so glad that
18:47:05 people mentioned the bus stop because two of the kids are
18:47:07 mine, and they do sit at that bus stop for upwards of 15 to
18:47:12 25 minutes depending on bus delays every single morning.
18:47:16 And because of the nature of our neighborhood and our
18:47:19 community, when they get dropped off, a lot of them will be
18:47:27 in the driveway or sit in the grass and visit, and I'm glad
18:47:29 that my kids feel safe and I feel safe that my children can
18:47:31 do that.
18:47:32 That will change if this gets passed as is proposed.
18:47:38 As well, I am not opposed to commercial properties, on our
18:47:42 side of town I know that's a part of it and it does add to
18:47:45 some of the things about our neighborhood that I do enjoy.
18:47:48 But I can also say that I live on a block where there is
18:47:52 retail and commercial on Dale Mabry, and I guarantee you
18:47:55 that they use my street as their driveway.
18:47:58 They don't live in our neighborhood.
18:48:00 They don't seem to care that my children are in the yard or
18:48:04 riding their bike down the street.
18:48:05 We have inconsistent sidewalks so no one can even say, well,
18:48:08 they should be walking or riding on the sidewalks.
18:48:11 We don't have those consistently through the neighborhood.
18:48:16 I agree with the increased traffic through the entire
18:48:18 neighborhood, not just on San Pedro.
18:48:21 I also am opposed to the scale of this building.
18:48:25 I don't believe that it's consistent with the charm or
18:48:29 character of our neighborhood.
18:48:31 And this will be used as a precedent if you all pass this
18:48:35 the way it's proposed, people for future developments will
18:48:40 point to this property and say, look, you allowed them to
18:48:43 put their refuge behind the building right on a residential
18:48:47 property, we want that on our properties as well.
18:48:51 I just implore -- and ladies and gentlemen of City Council,
18:48:55 council can make a mindful decision to maintain the
18:48:57 character and charm of my neighborhood, and keep my children
18:49:01 safe.
18:49:02 Thank you for your consideration tonight.
18:49:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:49:04 Next.
18:49:04 >> Mark Odom, 3720 west San Pedro street, which is directly
18:49:15 across the street and one house over.
18:49:18 My disappointment here is that this is the second property
18:49:22 that's up for consideration to have a business.
18:49:25 One of them went from residential, and we are starting to
18:49:28 add more and more of these businesses now onto San Pedro
18:49:33 street.
18:49:33 I'm worried for the children in the neighborhood.
18:49:36 I have children.
18:49:36 They are grown now.
18:49:38 But I'm still worried about when I see the kids play.
18:49:41 I'm close with these kids in the neighborhood.
18:49:43 And I just find it very disappointing and I'm almost sorry
18:49:46 that I moved into this property.
18:49:47 If I had known this was going to happen.
18:49:49 I can tell you that much.
18:49:50 Thank you.
18:49:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:49:52 Next.
18:49:52 >> Joseph Fisher, 4608 West Bayvilla Avenue.
18:50:02 If Ms. Neil was representing children in the neighborhood, I
18:50:05 guess I'm representing my godchildren that live in the
18:50:07 neighborhood as well.
18:50:09 So the number of children and families in the neighborhood,
18:50:12 particularly on San Pedro street, is significant.
18:50:15 And if you have the entrance and exit for this business you
18:50:22 are going to be increasing traffic.
18:50:24 Young children are playing before school, during the day, in
18:50:27 their neighborhoods.
18:50:28 Beyond the bus stop, preschool is very close by and they are
18:50:33 all walking to school in the morning with their parents.
18:50:35 And young children as well.
18:50:39 So if a new structure has to have entrance or exit from San
18:50:44 Pedro, please consider ways to worry about the traffic.
18:50:48 Secondly, when the City Council looked at this property and
18:50:52 changed it from residential use to a business use, you
18:50:55 showed concern for the neighbors.
18:50:57 The concern manifested itself in having a new business
18:51:01 property owner build an 8-foot wall as opposed to the
18:51:04 required 6-foot wall.
18:51:07 The wall has helped the residential aspect of the
18:51:10 neighborhood by insulating the business property.
18:51:12 The 8-foot wall was a compromise to change the proposal.
18:51:20 There is not a way to deal with the same concerns for a
18:51:24 multi-story structure constructed on this small property.
18:51:29 Based upon the changes of the proposal from a 3-story to a
18:51:33 2-story, I do wonder if the original proposed 3-story
18:51:37 structure was negotiating strategy to make a 2-story
18:51:40 structure seem less invasive.
18:51:42 After all, ask for way more than you want, and sort of
18:51:47 compromise in the middle you want because that's what you
18:51:49 originally wanted.
18:51:50 Please do all in your power as a council to respect the
18:51:55 privacy of the residents in this neighborhood.
18:51:57 And lastly, while the proposed building of an elevated
18:52:02 structure is a creative way to deal with the small property,
18:52:05 it's also a way to skirt rules governing parking.
18:52:08 To me, this is an indication that the property is not large
18:52:12 enough to support a structure with more tenants, more
18:52:16 businesses, and more employees.
18:52:19 Another indication of this structure being too large is the
18:52:22 requested setback waiver from Dale Mabry and the adjacent
18:52:25 property.
18:52:26 A third example of it being too large is the trash
18:52:32 receptacles.
18:52:33 Please consider keeping it a single story structure the same
18:52:37 size that it currently is.
18:52:38 Thank you for your consideration.
18:52:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:52:41 Next.
18:52:41 >> My name is Chris Schlossnagle, 3715 west San Pedro, the
18:52:49 property right next door to the proposed rezoning.
18:52:54 I'm not going to sit here and talk again about the safety.
18:52:58 We have three children that range in age from 13 to 8.
18:53:02 Two of those wait for the bus stop.
18:53:03 One of them walks to school every morning with my husband.
18:53:09 But obviously safety is a big concern for our kids.
18:53:13 And the scale of the building and inconsistency in the
18:53:18 neighborhood is another thing that has been talked about
18:53:21 frequently.
18:53:23 And when we moved in back in 1999, the property next to us
18:53:27 was a residential property.
18:53:31 We had no clue that the possibility was going to exist that
18:53:33 it would ever rezone to a commercial or professional
18:53:36 development.
18:53:38 And we made some compromises back then.
18:53:40 We were here.
18:53:40 We did the same thing.
18:53:41 Got our neighbors together, and the outcome was this 8-foot
18:53:46 wall.
18:53:49 This is my property looking out my bathroom window.
18:53:55 The structure right here, the existing structure that's
18:54:00 proposed to be two stories now.
18:54:03 This is the 8-foot wall.
18:54:07 Tried to make that look a little more like home by adding
18:54:10 the greenery there.
18:54:12 Now, with this two-story building, it's going to be -- this
18:54:23 is going to be the line of site.
18:54:24 So there are several windows along that wall, all along this
18:54:28 wall is my house right here.
18:54:33 I have two of my three kids' bedrooms and both of the
18:54:37 bathrooms in my house.
18:54:38 So all of their windows that sit up here, their line of
18:54:42 sight is directly into our windows.
18:54:45 Right now I don't even have blinds on it because it's not
18:54:48 needed.
18:54:49 We have an 8-foot wall there.
18:54:50 So that's one of our concerns.
18:54:55 Lived there for 16 years.
18:54:56 We have been a member of this neighborhood. We are putting
18:54:57 a renovation, putting a small renovation on our property
18:55:00 now.
18:55:01 We have no intentions of leaving.
18:55:03 I'm not opposed to the rezoning.
18:55:05 Just ask that you take into consideration what many of the
18:55:09 neighbors have put together and have concerns about.
18:55:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:55:12 Anyone else wish to speak at this time?
18:55:15 All right.
18:55:15 Anybody going to speak, please line up so that we know how
18:55:19 many are left.
18:55:20 >> My name is Alexis, 2714 west San Pedro.
18:55:25 I just purchased the property about ten months ago.
18:55:28 It's an amazing neighborhood.
18:55:34 Came to my former property at the plaza.
18:55:36 I moved out of there because of the construction and to this
18:55:43 amazing neighborhood and so happy to have all of my
18:55:46 neighbors here.
18:55:47 The other neighbors are not here because they are at home
18:55:48 with their children.
18:55:49 We have a lot of children in this neighborhood.
18:55:51 I have an 8 and 11-year-old.
18:55:54 And I'm just asking you to please set a precedent today to
18:55:57 stop this deterioration of our neighborhood with the
18:56:01 businesses.
18:56:02 I'm all for businesses.
18:56:03 I'm a small business person.
18:56:05 But this is not a charming residential-type business
18:56:10 building.
18:56:10 It's very commercial.
18:56:14 Dale Mabry is so backed up already right now.
18:56:17 And it directs traffic our way and takes away from -- it's
18:56:25 ironic.
18:56:29 I got my tax bill this week.
18:56:31 And it's only $2,000 less than what I was paying at Harbor
18:56:35 Island.
18:56:35 And I wonder if these things are happening there. I also
18:56:39 wonder about dealing with did same problem.
18:56:44 I don't see a lot of businesses on Dale Mabry in that area.
18:56:47 We have a great neighborhood.
18:56:48 And I ask you to keep it that way.
18:56:52 Thank you.
18:56:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
18:56:53 Petitioner.
18:56:54 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Council, we worked very hard, and there
18:57:03 was no subterfuge involved in proposing a 3-story versus a
18:57:09 2-story and we approached D.O.T. long ago.
18:57:12 We submitted a preliminary plan to them which they rejected.
18:57:15 We went back to them and asked again, which they rejected.
18:57:19 We went to the city staff and asked the city staff to help
18:57:23 us intervene with them which is what Abbye did and they
18:57:26 rejected her appeal as well.
18:57:30 Let me just take one of the issues off the table
18:57:32 immediately.
18:57:33 I talked to the neighbors at the last hearing about a
18:57:36 directional drive, which I told them we would commit to.
18:57:40 And we will make that change between first and second
18:57:44 reading with a directional drive, does not allow for traffic
18:57:48 to turn into the site coming from the east side.
18:57:52 I spent a lot of time talking to them in the six or seven
18:57:57 hours that we were here with you that evening.
18:57:59 And I made that commitment to them then and we are going to
18:58:05 be stand by that.
18:58:06 With respect to the size and scale of this project, it is
18:58:09 residential size and scale.
18:58:11 It's 35 feet in height.
18:58:12 The same as any other residential property would be entitled
18:58:15 to build at.
18:58:18 With respect to Dale Mabry, and the setback there, that was
18:58:23 to provide more relief in the rear.
18:58:25 And covering screen not visible from the other properties.
18:58:31 That's not designed to squeeze more into the property.
18:58:34 It's simply whether you have square footage or reduced
18:58:38 square footage you have to cover it and you have to screen
18:58:41 in from the residential areas.
18:58:42 That's part of the policies that we are facing with.
18:58:46 We also committed that we weren't going to have any windows
18:58:49 that were overlooking onto the east side of the property.
18:58:55 They were all supposed to be transom windows.
18:58:57 With he we changed that, I think probably the design changed
18:59:01 as well with some of the windows being back thereby but we
18:59:03 can look at that.
18:59:07 The building is not 8,000 square feet.
18:59:09 It's 4,000 square feet.
18:59:12 If you look at some of the homes and you look at some of the
18:59:14 Heights of some of the homes, they are very similar to what
18:59:18 we are proposing here.
18:59:23 I went around and got more pictures.
18:59:26 That's one within a block or so of this project.
18:59:29 That building there is 35 feet in height.
18:59:34 We are trying to make the project look more residential in
18:59:39 scale.
18:59:39 It's not designed to be an intrusive commercial property.
18:59:44 That's why I showed you this picture of Hahn Engineering
18:59:48 which is not even a block away.
18:59:50 It's immediately north of this property on the same side of
18:59:52 the street.
18:59:54 The land use is REZ 20 which allows for business uses and
19:00:00 currently has a business use designation with a PD.
19:00:03 And we are respectfully requesting that are we be allowed to
19:00:05 have redevelop the project.
19:00:07 Any redevelopment on that site, D.O.T. it remove that
19:00:12 access.
19:00:13 If you touch that building and you seek a permit, D.O.T.
19:00:17 will B intervene and deny you full access.
19:00:20 But as I have said, I would take that off the table
19:00:22 immediately as proposed between first and second reading
19:00:27 that we redesign the driveway so it's a directional drive
19:00:29 and entrance coming off of Dale Mabry and turning into the
19:00:32 property.
19:00:34 So the property accessed from the east side would not be
19:00:40 possible.
19:00:40 And I'm sensitive to the fact that there are children in the
19:00:42 area.
19:00:43 And the fact that they also wanted additional busing.
19:00:46 And we talked about that as well.
19:00:48 So we were maintaining the 8-foot masonry wall and were also
19:00:52 going to put in some very heavy landscaping along the back
19:00:56 wall.
19:00:57 I think that's pretty much everything we can talk about.
19:01:03 I'm certainly available to answer any questions.
19:01:05 >>HARRY COHEN: One question.
19:01:12 I have a concern about where the trash receptacle is
19:01:15 located.
19:01:16 It seems like it's being put right next to the residential
19:01:20 house.
19:01:20 >>STEVE MICHELINI: It's inside an 8-foot masonry wall.
19:01:26 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there any reason it couldn't be on the
19:01:29 other side?
19:01:31 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Which other side?
19:01:36 >> Your garbage access, your pickup is on -- if you look
19:01:44 right here, it's down here.
19:01:45 >>HARRY COHEN: It's far inside the property.
19:01:51 I'm wondering --
19:01:54 >>STEVE MICHELINI: It's basically 7 and a half feet from an
19:01:57 8-foot masonry wall.
19:01:59 You don't even see that.
19:02:04 It's not a restaurant.
19:02:06 It doesn't have garbage and typical food stuff.
19:02:09 You are talking about paper products.
19:02:16 And if it's about where to put it --
19:02:18 >>HARRY COHEN: I'm really asking whether or not there are
19:02:20 any alternatives to where it's currently located.
19:02:22 I guess that's what I am asking.
19:02:24 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Well, solid waste required us to have it
19:02:28 easily accessible for pickup.
19:02:29 And that's the reason.
19:02:31 We have now removed the full access drive off of San Pedro
19:02:35 so there's only one place where that can happen.
19:02:38 It can't happen on Dale Mabry.
19:02:39 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, I mean, the way I am looking at it,
19:02:46 it's going to be picked up from the inside of the garage,
19:02:48 correct?
19:02:49 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Rolled out, correct.
19:02:51 >>HARRY COHEN: So what difference does it make which side
19:02:54 of the garage, I guess? That's all.
19:02:56 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Do you have a suggestion ever?
19:02:59 >>HARRY COHEN: I'm saying if it was on the other side of
19:03:01 the garage it wouldn't be next to the house.
19:03:03 That's all.
19:03:03 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: It could be moved up here.
19:03:22 They can roll the garbage can all the way down.
19:03:26 So, yes, it could be moved to the north side of the
19:03:29 property.
19:03:29 >>STEVE MICHELINI: That's a stairwell but that's fine.
19:03:35 >>HARRY COHEN: It might be an improvement.
19:03:38 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Well, we can live with that.
19:03:41 We don't have any objection.
19:03:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Suarez?
19:03:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm a little bit confused about something,
19:03:47 Mr. Michelini.
19:03:48 The applicant is growth financial?
19:03:52 >> It's in be receivership.
19:03:53 The property was foreclosed on.
19:03:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So grove is building the building?
19:04:01 >>STEVE MICHELINI: No, no, no.
19:04:02 It's a contractor's office, a builder's office.
19:04:06 A contractor, builder's office.
19:04:09 >> So why is Grove the applicant?
19:04:11 I'm not really sure why they would do it like that.
19:04:17 >> >>STEVE MICHELINI: I don't have any choice because they
19:04:18 were the owners of record when this was filed.
19:04:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So Grove has to get everything approved?
19:04:26 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Grove has nothing to do with getting
19:04:28 this approved.
19:04:29 It was simply the petitioner to get it to move forward.
19:04:35 >> It says Grove Financial.
19:04:38 >> TB Homes.
19:04:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: TB Homes, okay.
19:04:46 Let me ask staff a quick question.
19:04:48 We had this discussion every time there is a change from a
19:04:54 residential development or a small office development to a
19:04:58 larger type of parcel that's on the end of a neighborhood
19:05:05 that has along San Pedro and whatever is on the other side.
19:05:10 Tell me exactly what happens with FDOT when we have to
19:05:16 rezone these particular properties in terms of ingress and
19:05:19 egress, if you don't mind.
19:05:22 So that we are clear.
19:05:23 I want to be clear.
19:05:24 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: That's fine.
19:05:27 D.O.T. is part of the rezone commission along with about 25
19:05:33 other agencies.
19:05:34 When there is a project that is on a D.O.T. road, we forward
19:05:37 a copy of the site plan and application to them, and we
19:05:41 instruct the applicant to contact them directly to make a
19:05:44 determination where if any and a what type of access they
19:05:47 can have from the road, their road, because obviously it has
19:05:50 to be incorporated in the site plan.
19:05:54 So every State Road that goes to D.O.T., no access, and all
19:06:01 of this so they are reflected in the site plan.
19:06:06 >> In your experience have you ever season a time that we
19:06:08 have been able to push back at FDOT and say, no, we actually
19:06:13 think it should be ingress and egress off of Dale Mabry?
19:06:17 >> In my experience, no.
19:06:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And the reason I am asking is because in my
19:06:23 experience up here, we have never gotten a positive response
19:06:26 from FDOT concerning that.
19:06:28 And it's one of my problems I have with FDOT.
19:06:33 What it means for neighborhoods when we have entrances off
19:06:36 of neighborhood roads as opposed top a State Road like it is
19:06:40 now.
19:06:41 One more question I am going to ask Mrs. Kert.
19:06:45 She knew I was going to ask her a question.
19:06:47 She was sitting there just waiting for me to ask her a
19:06:50 question, weren't you?
19:06:54 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.
19:06:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: In terms of our legal issues, in terms of
19:06:59 what our responsibilities are versus what the state road,
19:07:06 state Department of Transportation is allowing us to do, has
19:07:09 there ever been a case where we can say, look, we aren't
19:07:12 going to allow this on this side road, and we are going to
19:07:15 allow the zoning to have ingress and egress off of Dale
19:07:18 Mabry.
19:07:19 Has that ever happened?
19:07:22 >> No, and it would not be a very good idea to happen
19:07:25 because then you would have a landlocked property because we
19:07:28 would probably be involved in and paying for.
19:07:30 >> So it wouldn't have land lock.
19:07:32 It would have ingress and egress off of Dale Mabry.
19:07:37 >> And the state doesn't allow it.
19:07:39 >> That's my point.
19:07:40 We can keep asking for it.
19:07:43 They say no.
19:07:44 We have no legal recourse.
19:07:45 But to allow someone off of another road, one of ours, to
19:07:48 get onto the property, is that correct?
19:07:51 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, sir, that is correct.
19:07:53 >> And that is a problem I have with them, because we never
19:07:57 get any kind of -- I won't say respect, but any kind of --
19:08:04 (Laughter)
19:08:04 Well, won't say no respect on TV anyway.
19:08:10 But we are trying to build neighborhoods and trying to build
19:08:12 our city as best we can, and their response is always, in my
19:08:16 mind, that when we go from point A to point B we want people
19:08:20 to be able to go without many stops.
19:08:22 And that's kind of the way -- I mean from my experience.
19:08:26 And I don't want you to answer anything.
19:08:32 Okay.
19:08:33 Thank you, Mrs. Kert.
19:08:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mrs. Capin.
19:08:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
19:08:36 On the receptacle for the trash, you are saying it can be
19:08:42 moved to the back of the building, and you said that that --
19:08:49 put that back up.
19:08:50 You agreed.
19:08:51 But you are saying that that's the stairs.
19:08:53 This is the stairs on the left.
19:08:56 >>STEVE MICHELINI: It wouldn't interfere with anything.
19:09:01 It's a space that's okay.
19:09:02 >> I heard you say stairs.
19:09:06 >> >>STEVE MICHELINI: No, I was just --
19:09:07 >>STEVE MICHELINI: No, I was just pointing out stairs are
19:09:10 over here.
19:09:11 This is a backup space with the parking.
19:09:14 This would be a good spot.
19:09:16 >> And you all are agreeable to that?
19:09:18 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We are agreeable to that.
19:09:19 >> Thank you.
19:09:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Michelini, let me be clear.
19:09:25 You are between first and second reading, you are going to
19:09:29 modify the site plan to include the trash receptacle be
19:09:35 moved.
19:09:36 Is that correct?
19:09:37 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Yes, sir.
19:09:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: You also mentioned, I think, directional --
19:09:45 >> Directional driveway.
19:09:46 We are going to reconfigure the driveway so it's directional
19:09:49 and only accessible from the west.
19:09:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: And that would also be modified in the site
19:09:55 plan between first and second reading?
19:09:59 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Yes, sir.
19:10:00 >>HARRY COHEN: A short follow-up on what Councilman Reddick
19:10:04 is asking.
19:10:06 When this comes back on second reading, we are going to be
19:10:08 able to see the site plan?
19:10:11 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Yes, sir.
19:10:13 The motions that are made today, they will be reflected in
19:10:15 the site plan that the staff has to review and approve.
19:10:18 And if they are not consistent with your motion, then they
19:10:21 won't certify the site plan.
19:10:22 >>HARRY COHEN: So what you are proposing is a -- I want us
19:10:27 all to be very clear on that -- a directional driveway that
19:10:30 would make it -- would it be impossible to turn in coming
19:10:34 from the street or would it just be extremely inconvenient
19:10:37 and difficult?
19:10:38 >> You have to meet the standards for the city and the
19:10:42 technical manual but usually it's a very high directional
19:10:46 curb.
19:10:47 So if you decided that you wanted to drive over it, you
19:10:50 would probably tear the bottom of your car off.
19:10:52 >>HARRY COHEN: In the process of doing that, would it be
19:10:56 possible to shift the entrance over a little bit to the left
19:11:01 toward Dale Mabry?
19:11:06 It seems to me from looking at it that it might be.
19:11:08 >> That's a Jonathan Scott question.
19:11:12 >>HARRY COHEN: And I just think that if you are going to
19:11:16 reconfigure the driveway to alleviate one of the main
19:11:19 concerns that everyone mentioned, it's closer to Dale Mabry,
19:11:25 the better, I guess, is all I'm saying.
19:11:27 >> One of the issues that we have to deal with is corner
19:11:30 clearance.
19:11:31 And queuing, backing up into a state right-of-way.
19:11:36 But we can look at moving it further to the west, you know,
19:11:42 in accordance with the city technical standards.
19:11:48 I don't know what that mention would be, but we can try to
19:11:51 shift it somewhat.
19:11:52 >> Jonathan Scott, transportation planning.
19:11:58 The corner clearance issue, it needs to be as far away from
19:12:02 Dale Mabry as possible.
19:12:05 We already have it as close as possible.
19:12:07 We don't want to move it any closer to Dale Mabry.
19:12:09 As far as channelizing the driveway, we don't have any
19:12:15 technical standards for that. Typically if someone is going
19:12:17 to channelize the driveway, a lot of times it's out.
19:12:21 We are going to have to look at that.
19:12:22 I'm not sure -- it might not be a good idea to do.
19:12:27 That I just want to say that. We will to look at that
19:12:30 between first and second reading and possibly confer that or
19:12:33 not.
19:12:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mrs. Capin?
19:12:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No, it struck me when you said we have to
19:12:41 consider queuing into Dale Mabry.
19:12:44 And a State Road.
19:12:47 It's ironic.
19:12:51 As opposed to queuing into a neighborhood.
19:12:53 >>STEVE MICHELINI: No, it wouldn't -- excuse me, but it
19:12:58 wouldn't be queuing into the neighborhood.
19:13:02 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understand.
19:13:02 I understand.
19:13:03 You are talking about the driveway --
19:13:05 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Right.
19:13:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And if the cut is there, then you would not
19:13:11 have that issue.
19:13:13 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We were never trying to adversely impact
19:13:16 the neighborhood.
19:13:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm not saying that.
19:13:18 I'm saying the state road is the one that does not want the
19:13:22 queuing on a state road.
19:13:24 And the reason we are doing this is because FDOT will not
19:13:28 allow us to do anything else.
19:13:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Miranda?
19:13:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19:13:37 Everything has been said.
19:13:38 It's hard to digest sometimes when you look at the
19:13:42 Department of Transportation.
19:13:43 Certainly I am not speaking for them.
19:13:45 But to my knowledge, they never allowed any ingress and
19:13:50 egress on the a small parcel of property unless you are a
19:13:54 WalMart and you have got, you know, half a mile or quarter
19:13:56 of a mile or whatever size property you have, and you have a
19:13:59 traffic light, or somebody buys it and puts in the along
19:14:03 with other entities to support it.
19:14:06 So this is very difficult.
19:14:09 We understand the neighborhood's plea.
19:14:11 We understand what they said.
19:14:13 We understand -- and these things sometimes, how do you work
19:14:19 it out?
19:14:20 It's almost impossible.
19:14:21 And as the legal department stated, very politely, property
19:14:31 rights, we are certainly going in that direction, and what
19:14:37 the property is zoned and what one block away from what's
19:14:42 already there, where you can't cut in the middle of the
19:14:46 street would be beautiful.
19:14:49 Then you would have one ingress and egress on Dale Mabry and
19:14:53 20 or 30 feet, then what happens, you have two wheels coming
19:14:57 up.
19:14:57 I guess that's what the Department of Transportation looks
19:14:59 at.
19:15:01 There would be more accidents, things of that nature through
19:15:05 their studies.
19:15:06 Those what they suggest.
19:15:07 That's why they don't do it.
19:15:08 But again I'm not speaking for the Department of
19:15:10 Transportation but the colleagues here have asked some of
19:15:14 these questions, and these are not easy.
19:15:18 None of them are easy.
19:15:19 Sometimes you come in and say, well, I don't see nothing too
19:15:22 controversial until you get to the facts.
19:15:24 And sometimes the doctor say somebody going to be all right
19:15:29 but when you look inside and you say, what did I say that
19:15:32 for?
19:15:33 And this is what happened, one of those cases.
19:15:35 >> That's a good example.
19:15:38 (Laughter)
19:15:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, talking about my own case.
19:15:43 I'm talking about my seven weeks.
19:15:48 (Laughter)
19:15:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
19:15:52 Anything else you what don't say?
19:15:54 >>STEVE MICHELINI: No, sir.
19:15:55 I think of that we have done the best that we can, and we
19:15:58 have agreed to make some modifications which I think are
19:16:00 agreeable to the neighbors.
19:16:03 And we would like to move forward.
19:16:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: There was one thing I think you said
19:16:11 about the windows.
19:16:12 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'll check that and see what our design
19:16:17 criteria is on that.
19:16:19 But we had talked --
19:16:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: There's a lot amount of fenestration you
19:16:24 have to have by building code and depending on what the
19:16:27 interior use is, if it's a restroom or something.
19:16:30 But the -- I mean, there are other ways to bring sunlight in
19:16:38 than a full-blown window.
19:16:41 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I met with them and told them we would
19:16:43 minimize any kind of windows on their side.
19:16:47 We even talked about using glass block.
19:16:50 >> Right.
19:16:51 I was thinking about that as well.
19:16:52 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Internally.
19:16:54 So I will look at that and do whatever we can to minimize
19:16:58 any direct views on the east side.
19:17:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Certain type of glass block you can't
19:17:04 see.
19:17:05 I mean, light comes in you but can't see.
19:17:07 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Like Vaseline on your glasses.
19:17:12 >> That's all I have.
19:17:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
19:17:19 Get a motion?
19:17:20 >> Move to close.
19:17:22 >> Second.
19:17:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Cohen, seconded by Mrs.
19:17:26 Montelione.
19:17:26 All in favor say aye.
19:17:28 Opposed?
19:17:29 All right.
19:17:30 Mr. Maniscalco, will you read number 3?
19:17:34 >> We have an ordinance being presented for first reading
19:17:37 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:17:39 vicinity of 3110 South Dale Mabry Highway in the city of
19:17:43 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1
19:17:45 from zoning district classifications PD planned development,
19:17:48 office, business, professional, to PD, planned development,
19:17:51 office, business, professional, providing an effective date.
19:17:57 With the changes that will be brought before us for the
19:18:03 second reading.
19:18:03 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: If I may, can I state the changes so it's
19:18:09 clear for the record? That there will be consideration of a
19:18:14 directional drive off of San Pedro, that the trash
19:18:21 receptacle will be moved to the north part of the structure,
19:18:24 that waiver number 2 will be revised for a use buffer of 11
19:18:29 feet with an 8-foot wall as opposed to the previously
19:18:31 approved 7 feet, and that the setbacks on the north side
19:18:39 will be adjusted for the enclosure as well as the setback
19:18:43 for the east side will be revised to reflect the enclosure.
19:18:52 >>HARRY COHEN: And the windows.
19:19:05 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
19:19:06 I think what he committed to is he would look at that.
19:19:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Maniscalco.
19:19:17 Did we get a second?
19:19:18 A second from Mrs. Montelione.
19:19:20 Any further discussion on the motion?
19:19:21 All those in favor say aye.
19:19:23 Opposed?
19:19:27 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Suarez and Maniscalco
19:19:30 voting no.
19:19:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, you can't make a motion and
19:19:35 vote against the motion.
19:19:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen.
19:19:42 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for
19:19:48 first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property
19:19:50 in the general vicinity of 3110 South Dale Mabry Highway in
19:19:54 the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described
19:19:56 in section 1 from zoning district classifications PD planned
19:20:00 development, office, business, professional, to PD, planned
19:20:03 development, office, business, professional, providing an
19:20:06 effective date.
19:20:07 And incorporating the changes between first and second
19:20:10 reading that were just enunciated by the staff and agreed to
19:20:15 by Mr. Michelini.
19:20:17 >> Second.
19:20:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Parliamentary question.
19:20:21 Does Mr. Maniscalco have to be withdraw that motion he made
19:20:24 for the record?
19:20:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
19:20:27 The motion was out of order.
19:20:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: So we got a motion by Mr. Cohen.
19:20:32 Second by Mrs. Montelione.
19:20:34 All in favor? Opposed?
19:20:35 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Suarez and Maniscalco
19:20:39 voting no. Second reading and adoption will be on September
19:20:42 3rd at 9:30 a.m.
19:20:45 And Mr. Chairman, for the record, I apologize, I failed to
19:20:48 announce the vote on the previous hearing file AB 2-15-15,
19:20:53 item 2, that was a unanimous approval on first reading.
19:20:56 Second reading and adoption will be on September 3rd for
19:20:59 that.
19:21:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
19:21:04 Item number 6.
19:21:05 >> Item number 6 in your agenda is REZ-15-38, a rezoning
19:21:13 request from planned development to allow for place of
19:21:16 religious assembly, multifamily residential, and business
19:21:19 professional office at 308 East 7th Avenue.
19:21:34 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:21:35 I have been sworn in.
19:21:36 The proposed request is located in the central planning
19:21:39 district, City of Tampa.
19:21:41 This is one of your three growth districts including
19:21:44 Westshore and university.
19:21:45 The central one is where normally we see the most activity
19:21:48 regarding potential redevelopment opportunity.
19:21:56 From an aerial perspective one can have see the site is
19:22:00 located on the north face of 7th Avenue with Oak Avenue
19:22:04 to the north, bounded on the east by Jefferson, and on the
19:22:08 west by north Morgan street.
19:22:11 The site is located just outside of the CBD, central
19:22:14 business district, just north of the interstate.
19:22:21 Regarding your future land use categories, this has unique
19:22:24 hand use category than we don't see very often around the
19:22:27 city where you do have a concentration of it right over
19:22:29 here.
19:22:30 This area was primarily redesigned and reconfigured for the
19:22:33 potential office use district during the Greco
19:22:39 administration.
19:22:39 This allows a variety of different uses as has already been
19:22:43 stated by Mrs. Samaniego.
19:22:45 The proposed use is the change of use for church related
19:22:48 uses in addition to the additional multi-story residential
19:22:52 that it currently has.
19:22:53 Planning Commission staff based on these findings of facts
19:22:57 find the proposed request consistent with the comprehensive
19:22:59 plan.
19:23:00 Thank you.
19:23:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
19:23:01 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Again this is a request -- it's currently
19:23:07 zoned planned development as part of the larger Tampa
19:23:09 Heights office, village, planned development, that was
19:23:14 approved back in '99.
19:23:23 Here is an aerial photograph of the existing property.
19:23:28 This is the existing two-story house, reviewed and
19:23:36 unanimously recommended for approval from the ARC.
19:23:45 Hold on.
19:23:46 (off microphone)
19:23:48 Here is 7th Avenue and Morgan street.
19:23:53 There's a large parking lot to the west and vacant
19:23:56 properties to the north.
19:23:57 To the east is another office zoning.
19:24:04 Office PD to the south.
19:24:06 Multifamily residential.
19:24:09 Here is the same property listed that was approved in '99.
19:24:24 Here is the subject property again.
19:24:27 Two story, residential structure.
19:24:35 The applicant is requesting to use it for a place of
19:24:39 religious assembly.
19:24:41 Here is the existing property from the back alleyway.
19:24:48 Here is the photograph of the back alleyway.
19:24:57 Here is the multifamily development to the south.
19:25:01 To the west is the parking lot for the development to the
19:25:07 south.
19:25:09 Around the corner.
19:25:14 On Morgan street.
19:25:18 Another development with existing house, an office.
19:25:24 On the corner again.
19:25:27 A single-family residential structure.
19:25:28 Vacant property.
19:25:29 Again another piece of property.
19:25:33 Part of it whats the Tampa Heights office PD where they
19:25:36 approved historic house for offices.
19:25:43 And in the distance, to show you more examples of the PD
19:25:49 where the existing PD where the existing house is, converted
19:25:56 office.
19:26:02 Here is the site plan.
19:26:07 Here is the existing PD for reference.
19:26:13 Approved in 1999 again.
19:26:14 A number of existing historic houses that could be allowed
19:26:18 for multifamily, for office uses.
19:26:24 Our property is to the southwest.
19:26:28 According to the original planned development approval,
19:26:37 access on the alleyway and parking to the rear of the
19:26:40 property.
19:26:46 Site plan follows the same development pattern.
19:26:48 The existing house.
19:26:53 Place of religious assembly.
19:26:58 (off microphone)
19:27:05 There are no major modifications to the structure.
19:27:08 There are two, three previously approved waivers that are
19:27:13 relevant to this site.
19:27:14 From the previous PD.
19:27:19 99-27.
19:27:20 They are number one, parking reduction to allow reduction of
19:27:23 20% in the total number of parking spaces required.
19:27:26 Number two, maneuvering backing up directly from the alley
19:27:29 into an out of parking spaces.
19:27:31 Number three, to allow for the use of one parking space for
19:27:39 residential.
19:27:39 The only new waiver being requested is to 27-283.12 to allow
19:27:44 for unpaved parking, grass spaces and drive aisles for the
19:27:48 parking lot and that's a typical waiver for place of
19:27:50 religious assembly use.
19:27:53 As far as revisions between first and second reading, the
19:27:58 only revision was revisions to the waiver table to clarify
19:28:05 some of the previously waivers weren't corrected on the site
19:28:08 plan.
19:28:09 Other than that there are no other revisions required, and
19:28:12 the land development and review, staff found it consistent
19:28:17 with the comprehensive plan and the Land Development Code.
19:28:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mrs. Montelione?
19:28:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mrs. Samaniego, we received an e-mail
19:28:26 from Joanie Stewart, and she was asking -- it just came to
19:28:38 us.
19:28:38 It didn't go to staff.
19:28:40 >> I have not received that.
19:28:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: She was requesting that the master plan
19:28:44 be enforced and that the guidelines which were set forth be
19:28:48 held at the same standard for all owners of property, and
19:28:53 then requesting a clarification before the appropriate use
19:28:56 of this area, a church, a temple meet the requirements of
19:28:59 the master plan?
19:29:08 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: A place of religious assembly was not a
19:29:11 proper use.
19:29:12 However, the intensity --
19:29:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You say planned development, you are
19:29:14 referring to the master plan?
19:29:18 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: The overall planned development for the
19:29:22 Tampa Heights.
19:29:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think she's referring to the business
19:29:24 office.
19:29:25 I'm trying to -- Tampa Heights office village master plan.
19:29:32 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
19:29:33 That is the existing PD.
19:29:35 PD 99-27.
19:29:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Referred to it as the Tampa Heights
19:29:41 office village, PD-99, whatever the number is.
19:29:47 >> Right.
19:29:48 Place of religious assembly was not a permitted use.
19:29:50 However, staff's analysis, that a place of religious -- use
19:29:56 is a comparable use to be a medical or business office.
19:29:59 It is a permitted use.
19:30:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's comparable to a medical or business
19:30:09 office?
19:30:12 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes.
19:30:13 As far as intensity.
19:30:16 Typically places of religious assembly are permitted uses in
19:30:19 zoning districts that also allow office uses as permitted
19:30:23 uses.
19:30:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, got it.
19:30:25 Thank you.
19:30:25 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Any other questions?
19:30:29 Thank you.
19:30:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Petitioner?
19:30:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for clarifying that.
19:30:34 >> I'm Judith Richards, 14920 Filmore road Tampa, Florida on
19:30:46 behalf of petitioner, Parbawatiya Buddhist center
19:30:55 incorporated.
19:30:57 I have no changes are going to be planned for the bit
19:31:02 building.
19:31:04 As Mary explained, it's already a PD.
19:31:09 We are requesting to allow the PD for religious uses.
19:31:20 I believe on the site plan, we are asking for parking.
19:31:35 And there will be ten parking spaces on the rear of the
19:31:38 property.
19:31:41 There is a tree approved for removal which will allow access
19:31:46 to the parking spaces at the rear of the building, providing
19:31:50 adequate parking spaces.
19:31:53 The request of the waiver allows non-paved parking in the
19:31:59 back.
19:32:02 Because it does have the religious zoning law, will not be
19:32:09 required to have an ADA, just not ...
19:32:19 I have residents to come up and speak after I am done with
19:32:27 my presentation.
19:32:28 And if there are any questions, I would be happy to answer
19:32:31 them.
19:32:36 The chain link fence along the side and the back are not
19:32:44 going to be removed.
19:32:45 Not making any changes other than maybe painting on the
19:32:54 outside of the building.
19:32:55 Other than that, the only request is to allow for religious
19:32:57 assembly. Thank you.
19:33:06 >> Good evening.
19:33:07 My name is Gen Kelsang Chokyan, the resident teacher at the
19:33:15 Parbawatiya Kadampa center.
19:33:20 Our original location was in Palm Harbor in 96 and we are
19:33:25 happy to be expanding into Tampa.
19:33:27 We have had members commuting from Tampa for the last 18
19:33:31 years to come to our classes in Safety Harbor, and they have
19:33:34 been requesting for many years to open a location in Tampa.
19:33:37 And we finally found a property which we are very happy and
19:33:42 honored to be part of the Tampa Heights area, to be able to
19:33:48 serve the people in downtown Tampa.
19:33:51 Our mission is to -- we are part of the International
19:33:54 organization, our mission to create world peace by teaching
19:33:59 people how to develop inner peace.
19:34:02 So our classes an programs are open to the public.
19:34:08 Most of our classes are small groups throughout the week.
19:34:12 With an occasional special event.
19:34:16 And when we do have a large special event, usually rent an
19:34:21 outside venue such as the Tampa Museum of Art which we use
19:34:25 for multiple events.
19:34:27 So I just wanted to say that everybody will be welcome.
19:34:32 Of course, please stop by.
19:34:33 Myself, I will be residing at the property.
19:34:38 As well as our new director and the other main volunteers.
19:34:42 And you can stop by anytime to join our programs or meet us
19:34:49 and I would just like to say thank you for your support and
19:34:53 request your approval.
19:34:54 >> Additionally, I would like to enter into support that we
19:35:04 received from the Tampa Heights civic association.
19:35:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
19:35:26 Any questions by council?
19:35:28 Mr. Suarez.
19:35:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: A couple of quick questions.
19:35:31 It's nice to have someone who has real inner peace to bring
19:35:35 us a zoning proposal, believe me.
19:35:40 Ms. Samaniego, a quick question and I just thought of it now
19:35:45 when you mentioned you will be living there.
19:35:47 There is no restriction for place of religious assembly to
19:35:50 also have someone living there as part of the zoning
19:35:54 classification, correct?
19:35:56 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Correct.
19:35:57 The definition for place of religious assembly allows a
19:36:00 parsonage.
19:36:01 >> I just want to make sure.
19:36:08 I never thought of it before until right now.
19:36:10 Terrific.
19:36:11 Thank you.
19:36:11 I appreciate that.
19:36:12 >> You're welcome.
19:36:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any other questions by council?
19:36:15 Anyone in the public wishing to speak on item number 6,
19:36:18 please come forward.
19:36:18 >> Rochelle Gross, 1602 East Third avenue.
19:36:27 I own the property directly adjacent and to the east of 308
19:36:31 East 7th Avenue, and I have to say that thus far they have
19:36:37 been great neighbors.
19:36:38 There have been a number of religious buildings in the area
19:36:41 throughout the history of Tampa Heights.
19:36:43 So I feel like so many of them have gone.
19:36:46 I feel like having the Buddhist Center in Tampa Heights is
19:36:50 actually a nice addition to the neighborhood.
19:36:54 And I feel it would be a good place for them.
19:36:57 Also, the house hat gotten a little run down over the past
19:37:01 ten years, and they have made a concerted effort to fix it
19:37:05 up and it's historically sensitive, and I look forward to
19:37:11 having them as neighbors.
19:37:13 Thanks.
19:37:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
19:37:15 Anyone else wishing to speak on item number 6?
19:37:17 >> Move to close.
19:37:18 >> Second.
19:37:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Before that, petitioner, do you wish to
19:37:22 respond to anything?
19:37:23 Got any comments?
19:37:25 All right.
19:37:26 So got a motion from Mrs. Montelione.
19:37:27 Second by Mr. Cohen.
19:37:29 Any further discussion by council?
19:37:31 Seeing none all in favor say aye.
19:37:34 Opposed?
19:37:35 All right.
19:37:35 Mrs. Capin.
19:37:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
19:37:39 An ordinance being presented for first reading
19:37:42 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:37:45 vicinity of 308 East 7th Avenue in the city of Tampa,
19:37:49 Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from
19:37:53 zoning district classifications PD, planned development,
19:37:56 professional office, medical office, residential, mixed use
19:38:01 professional/medical, to PD, planned development, place of
19:38:04 religious assembly, multifamily residential, and office,
19:38:08 business/professional, providing an effective date.
19:38:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion from Mrs. Capin, seconded
19:38:13 by Mr. Suarez.
19:38:14 All those in favor of the motion say aye.
19:38:16 Opposed?
19:38:18 All right.
19:38:18 Thank you.
19:38:18 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
19:38:21 Second reading and adoption will be on September 3rd at
19:38:24 9:30 a.m.
19:38:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 8.
19:38:32 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 8 on your agenda
19:38:34 single-family REZ 15-43, rezoning request from PD to PD to
19:38:38 allow for business and medical professional office, retail,
19:38:42 hotel, restaurant, venue, bank, personal services,
19:38:47 vocational and business school, commercial, recreational
19:38:51 facility hydroponic garens. The property is located at 1220
19:38:55 and 1280 North O'Brien Street.
19:39:07 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:39:08 I have been sworn in.
19:39:15 The proposed request is located in one of your three growth
19:39:18 areas of your five planning districts on your long-range
19:39:21 comprehensive plan vision map which is located in the
19:39:24 Westshore planning district.
19:39:25 One of the opportunities for job creation and commercial
19:39:30 redevelopment.
19:39:35 The site is a little more specifically located within the
19:39:41 Avian park development which is just to the west of O'Brien
19:39:44 street as you can see on the intersection of Laurel just to
19:39:46 the north.
19:39:48 The site already has a PD.
19:39:53 They have additional uses they have requested be attached to
19:39:55 the PD.
19:40:00 Regarding the long-range future land use category, the land
19:40:04 use category as you can see is light gray, which represents
19:40:08 the municipal airport, or Tampa International Airport area.
19:40:15 It's a public quasi-public for the airport site proper.
19:40:19 There's a request for the types of uses, the request is
19:40:23 consistent with the request based on the municipal airport
19:40:27 future land use category.
19:40:28 Thank you.
19:40:29 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Again, this is a rezoning request from
19:40:42 planned development to planned development to amend the
19:40:46 proposed site plan.
19:40:51 There is an aerial photograph of the property.
19:40:54 As you can see, it's wooded undeveloped.
19:41:00 There's two wetland areas to the northeast as well as a
19:41:02 small one to the southeast.
19:41:06 And the surrounding zoning again is an existing planned
19:41:09 development.
19:41:10 There's a planned development to the north which is Avian
19:41:12 park.
19:41:12 I believe last year you saw Avian park through the city
19:41:16 process. To the east is a PD for an office building and
19:41:21 then the other adjoining property, zoned MAP-1, because of
19:41:27 their proximity to the airport.
19:41:32 With the linking of the photograph to the adjoining area,
19:41:35 again the site is currently vacant and wooded.
19:41:38 There is the subject property.
19:41:40 And this is across looking towards the airport across Laurel
19:41:45 street.
19:41:47 If you can follow along, here is my subject property.
19:41:52 Looking in this direction to the northeasterly.
19:41:54 I am going to go up and down Laurel and then up and down
19:41:57 O'Brien.
19:41:58 This is looking across at the intersection of Laurel and
19:42:01 O'Brien at the structure of the Avian park development.
19:42:05 Another shot of that.
19:42:09 There's an office building further across down Laurel.
19:42:12 A second existing office building.
19:42:15 And it's developed in office building.
19:42:21 On O'Brien there's another office building.
19:42:23 Now we are going down O'Brien.
19:42:24 Here is a couple of single-family residential developments
19:42:27 on the east side of O'Brien across from the subject
19:42:31 property.
19:42:32 Multifamily to the south.
19:42:37 To Cypress Street.
19:42:39 This is on the corner of Cypress Street and office and
19:42:42 retail bidding.
19:42:43 Then another office building on the same side of O'Brien as
19:42:48 the subject property.
19:42:51 If you look at the aerial photograph, here is the subject
19:42:54 property again as stated.
19:42:58 Large office use.
19:42:59 Another large warehousing use.
19:43:02 Here is the single-family house I just showed.
19:43:05 There's another office, retail use.
19:43:06 A large office use.
19:43:07 And office, office, office, office.
19:43:10 The proposed development plan is split up into six different
19:43:28 buildings.
19:43:30 There will be a six-story hotel, retail building, a
19:43:33 restaurant that is approximately 8900 square feet with an
19:43:38 attached ballroom.
19:43:40 A venue which will be 8900 square feet, and a 5,000 square
19:43:46 foot two-story hydroponic garden that I believe is
19:43:51 associated with the restaurant use.
19:43:55 There's a site plan, and the applicant's representative will
19:44:01 go into far more detail than I.
19:44:09 Here is a large wetland that was protected with the original
19:44:13 land development.
19:44:14 It will continue to be protected as well as the setbacks.
19:44:17 There's a small wetland here that will be -- mitigation will
19:44:28 have to be done as the parking garage is encroaching into
19:44:30 that wetland area.
19:44:32 Here is the restaurant bar.
19:44:33 Here is the venue.
19:44:36 Here is hydroponic garden building, then two wings of the
19:44:40 hotel.
19:44:42 As far as the review itself, I do have revised revision
19:44:50 sheets for your consideration.
19:44:55 The first revised revision deals with the encroachment into
19:45:04 the southern wetlands.
19:45:17 Staff requests the following.
19:45:19 Any wetland mitigation determined to be required by the EPC
19:45:23 will be mitigate by the developer as per EPC and other
19:45:26 regulatory agency requirements.
19:45:28 The developer has agreed to work with staff to arrive at an
19:45:31 accessible wetland mitigation plan consistent with the
19:45:34 requirements of the applicable regulatory bodies.
19:45:37 A mitigation plan that does not contain sufficient
19:45:40 mitigation inside the city limits as determined by the city
19:45:43 staff in light of the EPC determination, determines
19:45:47 mitigation requirements, will be determined to be a
19:45:51 substantial change of the PD.
19:45:53 So what that notice is saying is that they have to go to the
19:45:56 EPC to allow the encroachment, and part removal of that
19:46:02 wetland for the parking garage.
19:46:03 When that occurs, they have to mitigate through wetlands
19:46:10 bank within the city limits as opposed to putting them into
19:46:12 wetland banks for some other part of the county.
19:46:17 If in the event when that time comes, and they have to
19:46:19 mitigate, and there are no available space or credits for
19:46:24 the wetland bank, they would have to come back through the
19:46:27 PD process because that would be determined to be a
19:46:30 substantial change.
19:46:32 There are some modifications required.
19:46:35 Because there is at O'Brien, additional right-of-way is
19:46:43 required, so one of the changes between first and second
19:46:46 reading is this parking building will be moved slightly to
19:46:48 the south as well as to the west.
19:46:55 The urban design --
19:46:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Excuse me one second.
19:46:58 Mr. Suarez.
19:46:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You mentioned about the widening project.
19:47:01 The question I have, I'm very familiar with where this
19:47:04 property is at.
19:47:05 I'm very familiar with the backup of traffic during rush
19:47:08 hour time.
19:47:09 And I'm curious, do we ask an applicant that is going to
19:47:17 this for additional studies regarding traffic patterns or
19:47:20 impact in terms of the surrounding area?
19:47:23 We do have a lot of -- we have got a lot of buildings and a
19:47:26 lot of stuff going on over here.
19:47:29 So just curious about that.
19:47:32 Do we require anything?
19:47:33 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: I do not believe they require a traffic
19:47:38 study as far as mitigation.
19:47:41 Is that correct?
19:47:43 >> Scott, Transportation Planning.
19:47:45 They are required to do a traffic study, and those impacts
19:47:49 will be mitigated, but for this project they have to have
19:47:51 permitting, so that was a stipulation of the previous
19:47:56 rezoning for the property, so it kind of carries over.
19:47:59 To answer your question, yes, they will have to deal with
19:48:04 the actual permitting.
19:48:06 >> And when is that done in our process? That's what I am
19:48:08 curious about.
19:48:09 >> It Won't take place until after this is approved.
19:48:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me ask Mary another question.
19:48:19 If we don't figure out what the impact will be until after
19:48:22 it's approved isn't that a little backwards?
19:48:24 I'm just curious.
19:48:26 I don't know if that's a question you can even answer.
19:48:30 I'm curious about it because it's a significant development,
19:48:33 in an area where another significant development is already
19:48:36 being -- has already been zoned, you know.
19:48:40 And the impact, we are already doing a widening project.
19:48:43 Primarily, my guess for that first project, some other uses
19:48:48 around there.
19:48:49 So how do we determine the impact of that particular
19:48:52 property, this one here, in relation to the rest of the
19:48:55 properties surrounding it?
19:48:58 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Typically, in a large project, a study is
19:49:03 required as part of the planned development.
19:49:05 I think perhaps the applicant can speak to this.
19:49:08 The only light I can shed on this is the existing PD that's
19:49:12 on the record now is 400,000 square feet.
19:49:15 This project is down to 144,000 square feet.
19:49:22 The original PD was done in 04.
19:49:25 So eleven years.
19:49:27 >> Significant changes.
19:49:28 That's all I wanted to ask.
19:49:30 Thank you, Mary.
19:49:30 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: So back to the revised revision sheet.
19:49:35 Transportation wants a notation added between first and
19:49:39 second reading that development acknowledges the planned per
19:49:44 the city's capital improvement project, number 00028,
19:49:48 widening to occur from West Cypress street to West Spruce
19:49:52 Street.
19:49:53 Remove the sidewalk note under the waiver section, and add
19:49:56 the following, will comply with the department section
19:49:59 22-103, and to remove the waiver number 4 as it's no longer
19:50:05 needed.
19:50:07 Let's go through the waivers quickly.
19:50:08 There are two waivers carrying over from the previous
19:50:10 approved project.
19:50:18 The first one is section 1345, to allow for removal of grand
19:50:22 trees and protected trees, on the site plan.
19:50:28 27-285 to allow no additional trees along O'Brien due to the
19:50:34 presence of the wetland.
19:50:35 And they do note as far as trees, it would be contributed to
19:50:41 the tree trust fund.
19:50:42 The new waivers, two now, number 3, 27-283.14 the reduce the
19:50:48 number of loading berths from 5 to 4 and reduction
19:50:52 previously approved with the 07.50.
19:50:58 As I just stated, the number 4 waiver for parking reduction
19:51:01 will go away.
19:51:02 What the applicant has done is they have elected to make all
19:51:08 of these parking were regular parking spaces.
19:51:11 They are allowed to go up to 60% of the parking as compact.
19:51:15 They have agreed to do that.
19:51:16 And because of that in the smaller size of the compact
19:51:19 spaces, they in fact meet parking so the waiver is no longer
19:51:23 necessary.
19:51:24 And the last waiver is 13-155 to allow payment in lieu of
19:51:29 the tree trust fund for trees not mitigated on-site.
19:51:35 I believe that completes my presentation.
19:51:39 If you have any additional questions I would be happy.
19:51:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any additional questions?
19:51:43 Okay.
19:51:47 Petitioner?
19:51:52 >> David Smith, 401 East Jackson Street, Gray Robinson,
19:51:55 representing petitioner, RSG 2014 Ventures.
19:52:01 Also with me tonight are the owners of RSG Ventures.
19:52:05 It is basically Richard and Gloria Gunta, and they are in
19:52:10 the back of the room with us.
19:52:12 Also with our team is Dallas Evans, sprinkle engineering,
19:52:17 been involved with doing a lot of the site planning,
19:52:19 engineering related work.
19:52:21 We also have Albert Alfonso and Rob Miles from Alfonso
19:52:27 Architects.
19:52:28 You will hear from Albert in a minute.
19:52:29 We have Kasey Ellison with EWI that will be part of the job
19:52:33 that will be created when we build this project if you
19:52:36 should approve it.
19:52:37 One thing that I think is very important to realize is that
19:52:41 we have been working on this project, the city staff, for
19:52:44 several months, and we have been asked to do a variety of
19:52:46 things, and we have agreed to do all of those.
19:52:49 And I think we have arrived at a proposal that is acceptable
19:52:52 to staff and yet is feasible.
19:52:54 And that's a good accomplishment.
19:52:55 I think it's also to recognize that this rezoning has a
19:52:59 significant down-zoning.
19:53:01 The original rezoning had two seven-story office buildings,
19:53:08 210,000 and 208,000, for a total of 418,000 square feet, a
19:53:12 nine-level parking garage, of 446,832 square feet.
19:53:17 The proposal tonight in front of you having two story
19:53:22 restaurant and ballroom comprising approximately 14,000
19:53:25 feet, and associated entertainment venue of approximately
19:53:30 8900 square feet, and two story hydroponic growing facility
19:53:34 of 5,000 square feet, and you will hear with why that's
19:53:38 essential to the project, two hotel buildings comprising six
19:53:42 stories and approximately 112,400 square feet. The parking
19:53:46 garage will have only five levels and will be 130,000 square
19:53:47 feet.
19:53:48 So essentially there's a reduction of the original zoning of
19:53:52 447,000 square feet to 130,000 for the parking.
19:53:57 The buildings are reduced from 418,000 square feet to
19:54:01 140,000 square feet.
19:54:03 So the project we are submitting for your consideration
19:54:05 tonight is approximately a quarter of the size of the
19:54:09 project that was previously approved for this site.
19:54:13 You have already heard from Mary regarding the waivers.
19:54:17 They are fairly attenuated.
19:54:18 They are either consistent with what was previously approved
19:54:20 or they are less.
19:54:24 We are only reducing one loading bay rather than two that
19:54:27 was the previous request.
19:54:29 And what we have done and what you have in your revision
19:54:32 material -- I don't know if you have the site plan in front
19:54:35 of you.
19:54:36 So maybe what I will do is I will put the slightly smaller
19:54:39 scale.
19:54:42 Excuse my highlighting.
19:54:45 The important thing about what you are looking at is
19:54:48 additional changes that we made to the site plan pursuant to
19:54:51 requests by the city.
19:54:52 The building you are looking at is the parking garage.
19:54:55 Because O'Brien is going to be widened, the parking garage
19:54:58 where it was would have made a construction activity fairly
19:55:03 tight.
19:55:03 And although we didn't have to move it and we could have
19:55:06 arrived at that approach, we thought it was appropriate to
19:55:08 move the parking garage to the west and the south so that we
19:55:12 could accommodate widening of O'Brien in a more effective
19:55:18 manner.
19:55:18 And we are NOW meeting with your staff now to deal with the
19:55:21 transition issues among other things.
19:55:22 I don't think Mary mentioned this, but we are going to agree
19:55:25 to a temporary landscaping plan that will be put onto the
19:55:31 site plan between this reading and the second reading.
19:55:33 We met with staff today, as a matter of fact, to deal with
19:55:36 the issues, for some wetlands associated with the widening
19:55:41 of O'Brien.
19:55:41 The landscape on O'Brien. There's also a sidewalk. We are
19:55:45 working with staff to make sure we don't put in a sidewalk
19:55:47 that they have to turn around and tear out six months later
19:55:49 when they are widening O'Brien.
19:55:53 So we are going to coordinate all of that with your staff.
19:55:58 You will also notice, maybe if you haven't got the site plan
19:56:01 in front of you, the entrance is off of O'Brien.
19:56:03 And other than a garage, it's fairly significantly to the
19:56:06 west.
19:56:06 It's very important to our client of that we retain the
19:56:10 wooded amenities that this project offers.
19:56:13 This is a very unique project, and I am going to have Albert
19:56:17 Alfonso who has been intimately involved in the conception,
19:56:21 design, and bringing this project to life over a significant
19:56:24 period of time.
19:56:25 So we will provide you an explanation exactly what this
19:56:28 project will entail.
19:56:29 >> Albert Alfonso, 1705-16th Street.
19:56:39 Sometimes as a long-time Tampa resident, as an architect, I
19:56:43 get the pleasure to present a project like this, since this
19:56:46 is what I would call a legacy project for Tampa.
19:56:49 It's great to see things happening like this and citizens
19:56:52 like Richard and Gloria Junta who give back to the
19:56:58 community.
19:56:58 They by right, as you heard Mr. Smith say, they could build
19:57:02 400,000 square feet here, but that's not what this project
19:57:05 is about.
19:57:05 This project is about building a first-class high-quality
19:57:12 boutique hotel, food and live music venue, that the city
19:57:18 will -- it raises the bar one more time.
19:57:22 We know it's happening in our city currently.
19:57:24 And I think this is just another piece on the chess board.
19:57:27 The project has in its program a what I would call an
19:57:33 International Michelin star restaurant, and that Michelin
19:57:37 restaurant would also operate the live music and cafe venue
19:57:43 which is a little bit more casual.
19:57:45 We have designed the project to try to preserve as much of
19:57:48 the oak hammock as possible.
19:57:51 And there is a rooftop bar that looks to that wonderful west
19:57:56 sunset view out over the water, hovers above the canopy.
19:58:00 So I believe that again this project is one of those great
19:58:05 legacy projects that we are seeing occurring in our city.
19:58:10 It's a very exciting time right now.
19:58:11 And I think that everyone will be able to enjoy this and
19:58:18 find inner peace, Mr. Suarez.
19:58:20 (Laughter)
19:58:28 >> I think Rob is going to show you some additional
19:58:32 renderings of exactly what this project is anticipated to
19:58:34 look like.
19:58:35 >> I know there's a disclaimer that says we are in schematic
19:58:42 design right now and what you are seeing here is really more
19:58:46 about massing.
19:58:48 We are trying to really concentrate the project around the
19:58:52 central piazza with some people watching and make a scale of
19:58:56 the project.
19:58:59 Going to need some help.
19:59:01 >> It's so massive in scale you can't even hold up the
19:59:06 picture.
19:59:07 (Laughter)
19:59:07 >> But as you can see the project sort of nestles among the
19:59:10 trees, and, you know, Richard and Gloria, when we first
19:59:15 walked the site, we just fell in love with it, and as some
19:59:18 of you said you are familiar with the site.
19:59:20 It's really a sound sanctuary.
19:59:23 I didn't know it existed along that Boy Scout corridor.
19:59:26 And so as I said before, they are really trying to preserve
19:59:29 it and create a real place of nature on the site.
19:59:35 And so we have really made it like a dense little mini
19:59:39 almost urban project and really preserved the rest of the
19:59:43 site in a very nice way.
20:00:00 There's our beautiful sunset view.
20:00:03 Thank you, council.
20:00:03 >> Just by way of a little further explanation you will
20:00:11 notice on the site plan there is a two-story
20:00:12 5,000-square-foot hydroponic garden for the purpose of
20:00:16 growing the vegetables that will be served in the restaurant
20:00:20 on-site.
20:00:21 There will also be other farm-to-table opportunities
20:00:26 associated with this restaurant.
20:00:29 It is going to be a truly exceptional venue.
20:00:32 We aspire to be the best Italian restaurant in the southeast
20:00:37 if not further.
20:00:37 I have heard from Abbye there's some competition at Beau
20:00:39 Rivage, but we'll see.
20:00:41 So essentially that is the nature of the improvements that
20:00:44 are going to be made.
20:00:47 You can see the site plan here.
20:00:52 That's the open space.
20:00:53 It's going to have a connectedness and feel that's fairly
20:00:56 unique that we think we need to be bring to Tampa more.
20:00:59 We have got some competition across the bay so it's nice to
20:01:02 have venues that are pedestrian friendly, open, warm and
20:01:05 accepting.
20:01:06 So we encourage you to agree with your staff and recommend
20:01:10 approval for this request this evening.
20:01:13 If you have any questions, we will be happy to try to answer
20:01:16 them.
20:01:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mrs. Montelione.
20:01:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, sir.
20:01:21 There's a line on the revised revision sheet that states a
20:01:26 mitigation plan that does not contain sufficient mitigation
20:01:29 inside the city limits -- spoke about that earlier -- as
20:01:35 determined by the city staff in light of EPC determinated
20:01:38 mitigation requirements that substantially changes the PD.
20:01:43 It's my understanding we don't have mitigation within the
20:01:46 city limits.
20:01:46 >> That's exactly right, which is why that --
20:01:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
20:01:51 So I was wondering why staff was stating that there would be
20:01:54 an option to have mitigation within the city limits.
20:01:56 >> No, they are making it as a requirement.
20:01:59 They say if we didn't agree to that language, we would not
20:02:01 get a recommendation of approval.
20:02:05 Here is what we are doing.
20:02:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But you are agreeing that there is no
20:02:11 mitigation?
20:02:12 >> There is no mitigation bank available in the city.
20:02:17 We have researched it.
20:02:18 But what we are doing is putting ourselves at risk.
20:02:20 We are going to have to mitigate on-site.
20:02:22 That's not an easy process.
20:02:24 It's a very expensive process.
20:02:26 But it's a process that we committed to do in order to make
20:02:29 this project work.
20:02:32 We would love to do that but we couldn't so far. I don't
20:02:35 know if there's coming down the line.
20:02:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I agree with you, I think it's wonderful
20:02:41 I love the project.
20:02:42 Mitigation on-site, yes, it is difficult.
20:02:45 It is expensive.
20:02:46 And I'm glad that you are preserving and really elevating
20:02:52 the raising the bar as someone said earlier.
20:02:57 But it bothers me that we would put on, or staff would put
20:03:05 on a piece of paper and submit it as a formal record of
20:03:11 something that we know doesn't exist.
20:03:15 That was my issue.
20:03:16 Not with you.
20:03:18 Because you didn't write this.
20:03:24 But that bothers me.
20:03:25 Because I knew for a fact there wasn't any mitigation in the
20:03:27 city.
20:03:27 >> Smith: We had suggested different language, but we did
20:03:31 agree to a rewrite and we are going to make it work.
20:03:34 >> You are a good man, Mr. Smith.
20:03:44 Well, to agree to something we know doesn't exist.
20:03:51 >>HARRY COHEN: A quick question about the project itself.
20:03:54 You have a special event space, ballroom space?
20:03:57 >> There is ballroom space.
20:03:59 >>HARRY COHEN: How large is that?
20:04:01 >> 8990 square feet.
20:04:02 >> And what does that mean capacitywise?
20:04:05 What's the size of that?
20:04:07 >> It would be to handle the hotel.
20:04:11 So it's not sort of added body count.
20:04:14 But it would also probably, you know, switch into now and
20:04:17 then a live music venue when it's not being used as ballroom
20:04:21 space.
20:04:22 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.
20:04:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Suarez?
20:04:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Smith, the question I was asking before,
20:04:31 do you know the answer to what I was asking in terms of the
20:04:33 traffic?
20:04:35 I'm just curious.
20:04:36 When you have a project that's already been going a certain
20:04:39 way, and then there's been larger developments or more
20:04:43 developments within proximity of a previously zoned piece of
20:04:47 property that has not been built on, is there a requirement
20:04:51 to do any kind of traffic study or anything like that?
20:04:53 >> There is, and we'll have to make sure we accommodate what
20:04:56 that traffic study shows.
20:04:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Got it.
20:05:00 I was just curious.
20:05:01 It's beautiful and large, and what I can understand because
20:05:06 the encroachment of traffic now has been pretty significant
20:05:09 in that area.
20:05:10 I was just curious.
20:05:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: And a development of that magnitude, what
20:05:19 kind of money are we talking about?
20:05:20 (Laughter)
20:05:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, that is a purely curious
20:05:31 question, but I would suggest that it's not relevant to the
20:05:34 decision --
20:05:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: No, I know.
20:05:38 >> They are saying don't do it so there will be inner peace.
20:05:45 (Laughter)
20:05:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone in the audience want to speak on
20:05:48 item number 8?
20:05:51 I got a motion from Mr. Miranda.
20:05:53 Second by Mrs. Montelione.
20:05:55 All those in favor of the motion say aye.
20:05:57 Opposed?
20:05:58 Mr. Suarez?
20:05:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I want to make sure with staff there's no
20:06:02 other revision, revised revision sheet?
20:06:06 That's just those two?
20:06:08 Okay, thank you, chair.
20:06:09 I move an ordinance for first reading consideration, an
20:06:11 ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 1220
20:06:14 and 1280 North O'Brien street in the city of Tampa, Florida
20:06:19 and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning
20:06:22 district classifications PD, planned development, office,
20:06:25 business/professional and medical, retail, hotel,
20:06:29 commercial, recreational facility indoor,
20:06:32 vocational/business school, to PD, planned development,
20:06:35 office, business/professional and medical, retail, hotel,
20:06:39 restaurant, venue, place of assembly, bank, without
20:06:42 drive-through, personal services, vocational/business
20:06:46 school, commercial recreational facility, indoor, HYDROPONIC
20:06:50 garden providing an effective date and including the
20:06:52 revision sheet as provided by staff.
20:06:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: We got a motion by Mr. Suarez, seconded by
20:07:00 Mr. Cohen.
20:07:00 All in favor of that motion say aye.
20:07:02 Opposed?
20:07:03 Thank you, sir.
20:07:04 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent at
20:07:07 vote.
20:07:07 Second reading and adoption will be on September 3rd at 9:30
20:07:10 a.m.
20:07:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Last item of the night.
20:07:14 Number 9.
20:07:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: For the record.
20:07:20 Number 9 on your agenda is REZ 15-40, rezoning request from
20:07:25 heavy industrial IH to land development to allow for air
20:07:29 conditioned storage and open storage of the property located
20:07:32 at 102 and 110 North 20th Street.
20:07:45 >>TONY GARCIA: For your last item this evening, we make it.
20:07:52 This site is located in the central planning district of the
20:07:55 three growth planning districts, the one that offers the
20:07:58 greatest promise for job cross-examination and new growth in
20:08:01 the area.
20:08:05 This is located on the east side of port Ybor.
20:08:11 As everyone can see right there to the west of north
20:08:14 21st street, just west of the neighborhood of Palmetto
20:08:19 Beach.
20:08:21 I'm sure many of you are familiar with.
20:08:23 The site does have a land use designation of heavy
20:08:27 industrial for consideration of the use of air conditioning,
20:08:32 storage and external storage, based on that, the Planning
20:08:36 Commission found the proposed request consistent with the
20:08:38 comprehensive plan.
20:08:39 Thank you.
20:08:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: It's pretty thinned out here.
20:08:51 This is a rezoning request.
20:08:52 The reason why we are actually even here, because air
20:08:55 conditioned storage and open storage, to exercise the
20:09:01 ability to go up to the maximum F.A.R. of 1.5.
20:09:07 They are proposing 1.02.
20:09:14 But they have the option to go to 1.5.
20:09:16 But that exceeds what would normally be allowed under the
20:09:22 zoning.
20:09:23 Here is the subject property.
20:09:24 It's an old warehouse building.
20:09:26 Here is the storage tanks to the south.
20:09:29 This is in Palmetto Beach on that industrial area, south of
20:09:33 Adamo Drive, south of Ybor.
20:09:37 As you can see it's an industrial area.
20:09:42 Here is the zoning map.
20:09:43 All this property is zoned heavy industrial.
20:09:47 There's commercial general down this main corridor here, as
20:09:53 well as some multifamily.
20:09:56 It's in this established neighborhood.
20:10:03 Here is a photograph of the subject property.
20:10:07 I think I took those pictures the day of the big rain that
20:10:10 we had a couple of weeks ago.
20:10:14 The existing warehouse.
20:10:17 To the south are some storage tanks.
20:10:19 Across the street on 20th is a gasket warehouse.
20:10:25 Across the street is another office warehouse use.
20:10:35 Sherwin Williams paint store on the corner here.
20:10:37 Another office use further down.
20:10:45 Here is the site plan they are proposing again.
20:10:48 It is for air conditioned storage, which is like mini
20:10:53 storage, as well as open storage associated.
20:11:02 Two existing access onto 20th street.
20:11:05 This is a one-story building that would have storage units
20:11:09 within it.
20:11:12 They are proposing a three-story building, again for storage
20:11:16 in this area.
20:11:18 There is a note on the site plan that if they do elect to
20:11:21 have open storage areas, it would be placed in this building
20:11:26 so this area has the option of either this building as shown
20:11:29 or allow for open storage.
20:11:32 The only other unique characteristic of this site is there
20:11:36 is a small wetland along the south property line, then it
20:11:41 expands slightly to the east as it gets to 20th street.
20:11:45 The applicant has preliminary determination that, A, it
20:11:52 doesn't affect the wetland and they have agreed to comply
20:11:56 with be approximate the 25-foot wetland setback, this line
20:12:02 right here.
20:12:03 You can see the building is out of it.
20:12:07 The revisions that would be required is minor revisions to
20:12:20 the site plan from Land Development Coordination, an update
20:12:25 of the waivers, revise the landscape buffer to the east,
20:12:31 which it is, at the proposed hate.
20:12:37 One of the revisions that land development that I asked for
20:12:39 is to state the proposed setbacks to go up to the building
20:12:44 as shown on the site plan.
20:12:46 The applicant can speak to this.
20:12:48 They are reflecting concerns to have the setbacks of that
20:12:51 which would be allowed under IH, which is typically to the
20:12:57 north and south, and to the west of 10 feet.
20:13:03 Other revisions that are required with, transportation did
20:13:09 find it inconsistent because they were asking for parking
20:13:11 waivers.
20:13:12 Based on their use they are required 40 parking spaces.
20:13:15 They are proposing 22 spaces so that's a parking reduction
20:13:18 of 45%.
20:13:19 I know they will speak to that for justification in a
20:13:23 moment.
20:13:24 Cleaning up a couple of waivers, correcting the driveway
20:13:31 flair, natural resources has a couple of requirements
20:13:34 between first and second reading, they to do find it
20:13:38 consistent, provided these changes are made, and another
20:13:40 commitment that they will obtain the final EPC review and
20:13:46 approval at time of permitting, and a note that says that
20:13:48 just because -- the approval of this PD does not guarantee
20:13:52 EPC will issue final approval.
20:13:58 The waivers are -- there are four.
20:14:00 27-283.7 to meet the required parking from 40 to 22.
20:14:06 To reduce the number of loading berths required from 3 to 2.
20:14:10 And to allow for two, 12 by 30 spaces. Typically one is 12
20:14:16 by 30.
20:14:17 One is I believe 12 by 60.
20:14:19 So they are asking to not have the 60-foot, to allow two
20:14:24 30-foots.
20:14:25 And lastly to reduce the green space from 5,552 square feet
20:14:30 to 4,578.
20:14:32 Payment in lieu at time of permitting.
20:14:40 The land development staff did find it inconsistent, again
20:14:44 only because of the reduction of the parking spaces and the
20:14:49 driveway specifications.
20:14:51 Jonathan Scott is available to speak to those if you have
20:14:58 any questions.
20:15:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Questions by council?
20:15:01 Petitioner?
20:15:07 >> Truett Gardner, 400 North Ashley drive, here along with
20:15:12 Clay Watkins, and Raphael, civil engineers, and this is not
20:15:18 as sexy as a hydroponic garden, but perhaps equally
20:15:25 necessary.
20:15:26 This is basically a self-storage facility that services the
20:15:29 needs of all the residential uses that are going into
20:15:32 downtown in the Channel District.
20:15:34 Interestingly, the CBD does not allow for a self storage
20:15:38 facility which is probably a good thing.
20:15:40 The Channel District technically allows it but practically
20:15:43 it's impossible.
20:15:44 My client did look at Ybor City but felt that given the
20:15:47 historic nature of those buildings it just wasn't a fit.
20:15:51 Found this property which is close and seems to be the
20:15:55 Goldilocks scenario.
20:15:57 So it's a self-storage facility to service that need.
20:16:01 And as Mary said, the area around us is far more than what
20:16:13 we are permitting here.
20:16:14 One clarification on something that she made is we are not
20:16:16 asking at all to max out the F.A.R.
20:16:19 We are asking for 1.02 which is on the site plan of 1.5
20:16:24 would be permitted.
20:16:25 I just wanted to clarify that.
20:16:28 But this is our property here that's highlighted in red.
20:16:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Focus the camera on it.
20:16:39 There you go.
20:16:40 >> Now it's orange, but it's red on my page which is this
20:16:47 right here.
20:16:47 The property immediately to our north is an industrial
20:16:51 marine supply company.
20:16:53 I have a letter of support from him.
20:16:55 And I am going to get into an issue that we are trying to
20:16:58 help him with at the end of our presentation.
20:17:09 And then we got a letter of support from them immediately to
20:17:12 our south with these gas tanks.
20:17:14 They did not express an opinion one way or the other on our
20:17:18 proposal.
20:17:18 And so we are in between those two.
20:17:20 We are absolutely fine with all of the changes that Mary has
20:17:25 proposed.
20:17:27 Two things, one of which egress, and then I would like to
20:17:30 tighten down on our site plan with respect to the wetland.
20:17:35 It states that we have got an approximate 25-foot wetlands
20:17:39 setback line.
20:17:40 EPC has not come out yet.
20:17:42 We are trying to get them out.
20:17:44 What we are hoping is that they will find that it's not a
20:17:47 wetland at all.
20:17:48 What's going on here is the gas tanks are set up at a very
20:17:53 high grade.
20:17:55 All the stormwater is rolling off onto our property and has
20:17:58 created a ditch.
20:17:59 And we feel like we have got a good opportunity for not
20:18:02 being a wetland.
20:18:03 But on that, I think what I would like to do is to state
20:18:08 that we will just comply with respect to that wetland buffer
20:18:12 with 27-286 which is in the code, and it allows us to
20:18:16 average the setback, and average 25 gives us flexibility.
20:18:23 The greatest need for the flexibility is our neighbor to the
20:18:29 north.
20:18:33 You can see the red line here.
20:18:39 This is our property line.
20:18:41 Our neighbor to the north, unfortunately, always operated
20:18:45 under the assumption that their property line went to here,
20:18:48 and they were incorrect in that, and so they came to us and
20:18:53 asked if there's anything to do because this is their
20:18:56 service bay for the trucks to get in and out.
20:18:58 And my client actually -- I know the neighbor to the north
20:19:04 and I have a very nice client that's willing to accommodate
20:19:06 him.
20:19:06 What we would like to do if pat all possible, and a lot
20:19:09 depends on those EPC determinations, is to slide the
20:19:13 existing building that's going to go away but it's basically
20:19:15 the same footprint of where the new building would go.
20:19:18 We would like to slide the building and all the development
20:19:20 to the south which will allow us to either grant access
20:19:25 easement or sell some of this property to our neighbor to
20:19:28 the north which will give them better circulation and
20:19:30 access, and that one touches on the wetland setback.
20:19:35 But then, too, an issue that Mary discussed, and I think you
20:19:39 guys can set a little policy tonight, is we have what's
20:19:44 called out in our site data table something more restrictive
20:19:47 than the IH category, which are setbacks of zero feet on the
20:19:52 north and the south, our side yard, and then IH they require
20:19:58 zero feet as well.
20:20:00 On the front yard, IH requires 10.
20:20:03 We are going to max that.
20:20:04 And the rear yard IH requires zero.
20:20:07 We are going to have ten there.
20:20:08 So it was our hope than that was the box that we are
20:20:11 creating.
20:20:13 We have shown the development as the developer intended it
20:20:16 originally bum this issue with you the property owner to the
20:20:18 north came up later.
20:20:19 So we will would love the flexibility to be able to adjust
20:20:23 that down.
20:20:23 There's an internal debate within staff as to whether we are
20:20:27 locked into the footprint of the building as shown here.
20:20:30 We would like the site table to control.
20:20:34 I think it can be handled that way.
20:20:36 Also between first and second reading we could amend this
20:20:39 and kind of blur the lines a bit, make it more of the
20:20:43 bubble-type plan that had you guys have seen in the past.
20:20:45 We could handle it that way.
20:20:47 Or thirdly, I thought we could drop a note in the site plan
20:20:50 saying the footprint of the building is consensual in nature
20:20:54 but will meet or exceed the standards of the IH district.
20:20:57 So whatever is your pleasure we are happy to go with and the
20:21:01 reason is to try to help this property owner to the north.
20:21:05 And that's all I have unless you have questions.
20:21:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, any questions from council?
20:21:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would just like to have staff comment
20:21:14 on the setback issue.
20:21:19 I want to know what the intent of debate is.
20:21:21 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: I don't know if it was a debate.
20:21:30 It was a discussion.
20:21:31 Looking at setbacks for the planned developments
20:21:34 And if I could get -- okay, so when you have a planned
20:21:41 development use with setback, and this is again with the
20:21:50 planned development, the site plan controlled zoning
20:21:52 district.
20:21:53 So when and if this is what proved they are locked into this
20:21:57 approval.
20:21:58 That means they have to comply with it.
20:21:59 The code allows for nonsubstantial changes where you can
20:22:03 increase by 5%.
20:22:04 You can move this over here a little bit.
20:22:06 You can move that over here a little bit.
20:22:08 But basically you have to stay within design as is approved
20:22:12 at the public hearing.
20:22:13 If you see the perimeters, it's considered a substantial
20:22:16 change and you have to come back to the public hearing
20:22:18 process.
20:22:20 There are several criteria for substantial change, one of
20:22:24 which is that you are increasing the perimeter setbacks.
20:22:31 So in a lot of cases, we have the setbacks that are
20:22:35 established with this PD goes to within a foot or two of
20:22:39 their building that they are showing on the site plan to, in
20:22:42 effect, lock them in to the site plan with the setbacks, if
20:22:46 they want to move the building all the way over here and
20:22:49 flip the parking, that would be a substantial change,
20:22:53 because they are exceeding those setbacks we just
20:22:55 established and they would have to come back through the
20:22:57 public hearing process.
20:22:58 Another way that it could be done is that you establish a
20:23:03 building envelope where there are broader setbacks for which
20:23:06 the applicant can move buildings and parking around with
20:23:11 more flexibility.
20:23:13 So there was discussion among staff and the planners as to
20:23:17 how much flexibility, I guess, should be built into the
20:23:20 planned development that would be allowed at the staff
20:23:22 level, as opposed to going back to the public hearing
20:23:24 process.
20:23:28 Did that answer your question?
20:23:30 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, I guess it would be helpful -- I mean,
20:23:36 Mr. Gardner has explained what the issue is.
20:23:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
20:23:41 >>HARRY COHEN: It would be helpful if you could maybe give
20:23:44 us some guidance on how we can direct him or request of him
20:23:50 so that he won't have to come back through this process
20:23:53 again.
20:23:56 I mean, would going in the second direction that you
20:24:00 outlined, would that be helpful?
20:24:02 Or the third alternative with the note on the site plan?
20:24:06 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No, if the City Council's pleasure is to
20:24:12 build in enough flexibility so that they can move the
20:24:17 building given the access, and whether or not the wetland
20:24:21 goes away to the south, then your motion would be to remove
20:24:27 the revision sheet, number 3 under Land Development
20:24:32 Coordination that says revise the setbacks, because as the
20:24:36 setbacks stand, the site plan in front of you thy then say
20:24:40 zero-zero.
20:24:41 You would just eliminate that request from to revise the
20:24:45 setbacks to be on the building.
20:24:51 Any other questions?
20:24:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Was it meet, not to exceed, would give
20:25:05 the most flexibility of just removing that bullet.
20:25:11 Do they equate to the same thing?
20:25:12 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: The note that says meet but not exceed?
20:25:23 Back to zero and meet the variance.
20:25:29 It's the same thing, correct?
20:25:30 >> Truett Gardner: I think what we actually proposed is
20:25:35 more restrictive.
20:25:36 I would be fine with that.
20:25:37 I would be fine with saying we will not exceed the IH
20:25:41 standards even though what we are proposing is more
20:25:44 restrictive.
20:25:45 We believe the table exactly as it is, which is calling for
20:25:50 more restrictive setbacks than IH.
20:25:52 And I think on this issue has kind of been free flowing
20:25:57 today, and I was in a meeting all day and didn't have an
20:26:03 opportunity before I came over, but I think he's got the
20:26:06 ability to do exactly what we are talking about as well,
20:26:09 less restrictive and easier.
20:26:11 And it's in 27-148, it talks about what's going to occur
20:26:14 between first and second reading and minor site plan
20:26:20 revision, there's a paragraph in it which highlighted here
20:26:24 says for the purposes of this section, minor site plan
20:26:28 revisions shall consist of text or graphical changes to the
20:26:31 site plan which do not exceed the minimum threshold set
20:26:36 forth in 4-B-3 above.
20:26:37 Looking back to 4-B-3, what we are talking about doing is
20:26:40 not even considered in there, which would seem to indicate
20:26:43 that we have got the ability to do it.
20:26:45 What is considered in there is an increase of 5% of the
20:26:49 total number of dwelling units, which we are not proposing
20:26:51 to do, an increase 5% of the total floor area, which we are
20:26:55 not proposing to do, a decrease of 5% or more of the open
20:26:59 space, which we are not proposing to do, a modification of
20:27:03 the original design concept layout such as substantial
20:27:08 change in relationship among uses, addition of a permitted
20:27:11 use on initially reviewed, substantial change in the traffic
20:27:14 pattern,
20:27:16 For ingress and egress, total external trips, and then the
20:27:21 next one deals with stormwater facilities, or cumulative
20:27:25 version of that.
20:27:27 So I don't think setbacks aren't mentioned.
20:27:30 I think you have the power and not for what it's worth or
20:27:35 very much, but you have the power to allow us to do what we
20:27:38 are asking to do.
20:27:41 But I will leave that for Rebecca.
20:27:45 I didn't mean to put you on the spot.
20:27:46 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
20:27:48 We have no problem with making changes in setbacks between
20:27:51 first and second reading.
20:27:52 I don't think that was ever a question.
20:27:54 I think the question is what should those setbacks for that
20:27:57 be revised to allow for flexibility that they wanted.
20:28:01 And the IH standard, if that provides you the flexibility,
20:28:09 and if that's what City Council wants to do between first
20:28:14 and second reading.
20:28:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
20:28:16 Anyone from the public wish to speak on item number 9?
20:28:21 All right.
20:28:21 >> Happy to answer any questions.
20:28:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
20:28:28 Any questions from council?
20:28:30 Seeing none, we have a motion from Mr. Miranda, seconded by
20:28:33 Mr. Cohen.
20:28:34 All in favor of the motion say aye.
20:28:36 Opposed?
20:28:37 Mr. Miranda.
20:28:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: (Off microphone) I'll read it and then
20:28:47 we'll get to the others.
20:28:48 Item number 9, file REZ 15-40, move an ordinance presented
20:28:53 for first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning
20:28:55 property in the general vicinity of 102 and 110 north
20:28:58 20th street, city of Tampa, Florida more particularly
20:29:01 described in section 1 from zoning district classifications
20:29:03 IH industrial heavy to PD planned development, air
20:29:09 conditioned storage and open storage, providing an effective
20:29:11 date, along with the --
20:29:15 >> Removal from the revision sheet to revise the setbacks.
20:29:19 So the setbacks as stated on the site plan would remain.
20:29:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As stated here.
20:29:27 >> Second.
20:29:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Miranda.
20:29:29 Second by Mr. Cohen.
20:29:30 All those in favor of the motion say aye.
20:29:32 Opposed?
20:29:33 All right.
20:29:33 Motion carried.
20:29:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin absent at vote.
20:29:38 Second reading and adoption will be on September 3rd at
20:29:41 9:30 a.m.
20:29:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
20:29:47 At this time, we go to information, new business.
20:29:51 Mr. Miranda.
20:29:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
20:29:54 Right now, none.
20:29:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
20:29:59 Mr. Suarez.
20:29:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion to present a commendation to
20:30:04 the Florida Association of Social School Workers, FASSW,
20:30:11 professional organization promotes quality education to
20:30:14 enhance the role of school social workers in the State of
20:30:18 Florida, intervention and collaboration.
20:30:21 If the FASSW provides a vital link between schools and
20:30:26 community.
20:30:26 They will be hosting their 69th annual conference, a
20:30:29 state wide conference here on October 26th, and the
20:30:33 theme will be change mental health, emotional wellness and
20:30:36 student engagement.
20:30:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would second that but I would like to
20:30:41 discuss the motion because I think you meant to say School
20:30:44 Social Workers, not Social School Workers.
20:30:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No.
20:30:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think -- (Laughter)
20:30:57 >> School Social Workers will be fine.
20:30:59 How is that?
20:31:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: A motion by Mr. Suarez.
20:31:02 Second by Mrs. Montelione.
20:31:03 Discussion on the motion?
20:31:04 All those in favor say aye.
20:31:06 Opposed?
20:31:06 Anything else?
20:31:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One other thing, just personal privilege on
20:31:09 my part.
20:31:10 This past weekend we celebrated by parents' 60th wedding
20:31:14 anniversary, something not celebrated by many families
20:31:19 anymore, and I just want to congratulate them. Having a son
20:31:22 like me to get to 60 years means a lot.
20:31:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: There's going to be trouble.
20:31:31 Congratulations.
20:31:33 Anything else?
20:31:35 Mrs. Capin?
20:31:40 I see you.
20:31:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Hold on. Thank you.
20:31:51 >>HARRY COHEN: Nothing but congratulations to Mike's
20:31:58 parents for 60 years.
20:31:59 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Nothing.
20:32:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will repeat the motion I made at CRA
20:32:03 this morning, and that is to direct legal staff to come back
20:32:06 to us at the September 10th meeting of City Council at
20:32:09 9 a.m. with a staff report on the utilization of go-to
20:32:13 meetings to allow electronic public comment periods at our
20:32:17 City Council meetings.
20:32:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: We got a motion from Mrs. Montelione.
20:32:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to explain further as I
20:32:24 listened to it and I just have some doubt what happens if
20:32:27 somebody finds the whole system goes down.
20:32:33 It happens all the time.
20:32:36 The State Department, national security. In fact somebody
20:32:40 running for president is a problem.
20:32:43 I don't know.
20:32:44 I will go along to be see where it goes.
20:32:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Unless the entire Internet crashes, we
20:32:50 shouldn't have a problem.
20:32:51 >> Jim Crew, city clerk's office.
20:32:57 There is no morning council meeting.
20:32:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Oh, I'm sorry.
20:33:01 I had the 10th ingrained from this morning.
20:33:03 The 17th you say?
20:33:04 Yes, sir.
20:33:04 >>THE CLERK: Yes.
20:33:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: All right.
20:33:11 The motion for the both the CRA and the agency could use the
20:33:15 system and this council could use the system.
20:33:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
20:33:24 (multiple conversations).
20:33:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Moved by Mrs. Montelione.
20:33:32 Seconded by Mr. Suarez.
20:33:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, what is the date?
20:33:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: September 17th at 9 a.m.
20:33:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: All in favor of the motion say aye.
20:33:45 Opposed?
20:33:46 All right.
20:33:47 Anything else?
20:33:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, that's it, sir.
20:33:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I would like to make a motion to discuss the
20:33:57 city parking garage ordinance, the minimum-maximum charges,
20:34:03 I would like to include it in our workshop for the 24th
20:34:09 when we are discussing parking.
20:34:11 >> 24th of?
20:34:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: September.
20:34:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: 9 a.m.?
20:34:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 9 a.m.
20:34:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mrs. Capin, seconded by Mrs.
20:34:19 Montelione.
20:34:20 Discussion on the motion?
20:34:21 All in favor?
20:34:22 Opposed?
20:34:23 Motion carried.
20:34:25 Anything else, Mrs. Capin?
20:34:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That's it.
20:34:28 Thank you so much for indulging me.
20:34:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: Last Thursday, we didn't have a council
20:34:34 meeting and the request came in about accommodation for the
20:34:41 Beaulah Baptist 150th anniversary.
20:34:43 So I wanted to request that from council, and they can have
20:34:49 that.
20:34:49 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion by Councilman Reddick.
20:34:52 Second by Mrs. Councilman Miranda.
20:34:54 All in favor?
20:34:54 Opposed?
20:34:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I want to see, during summer break, I
20:35:03 believe there was a girl's softball team that was composed
20:35:06 of three different areas in South Tampa that won the world
20:35:09 championship.
20:35:09 Before I make that motion I want to make sure who they were.
20:35:12 And I believe I may be speaking out of turn, because I think
20:35:16 Bayshore, South Tampa, and one other of the teams that play
20:35:22 in that district that won the championship.
20:35:26 And I will do that another day.
20:35:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
20:35:30 All right. Motion to receive and file?
20:35:42 Motion by Mr. Cohen. Seconded by Mrs. Montelione.
20:35:45 All in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed?
20:35:48 >> TONY GARCIA: Thank you for indulging me, Mr. Chairman.
20:35:53 I had requested in speaking with City of Tampa staff today,
20:35:56 you probably will recall that you transmitted three plan
20:36:00 amendments for review.
20:36:03 I did receive a letter from BEO.
20:36:05 We were expecting a letter around August 12th, have not
20:36:09 received that yet but it has been past 30 days.
20:36:12 So I should be receiving that letter in time.
20:36:15 Part of those amendments include doing a land use change and
20:36:20 associated text change for the West River CRA plan.
20:36:24 So I would like to make a request, if someone would like to
20:36:28 make a motion, to set the public hearing for those three
20:36:31 plan amendments for like in October 22nd date.
20:36:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Is this West Tampa CRA?
20:36:45 >>TONY GARCIA: Whatever it's labeled, Mrs. Capin.
20:36:46 >>HARRY COHEN: We have a meeting on the 22nd which would be
20:36:49 the meeting when we take up land use changes because that's
20:36:52 what we do on the second.
20:36:54 The fourth Thursday evening of the month.
20:36:55 So that will be an appropriate time to have do that.
20:36:58 >> Appropriate or inappropriate?
20:37:03 >> 6 p.m. on October 22nd.
20:37:04 >> Motion by Mr. Cohen. Second by Mr. Miranda.
20:37:10 All in favor say aye. Opposed?
20:37:11 >> And I will get with the clerk's office as far as getting
20:37:14 more detailed information on the second reading for that.
20:37:18 Thank you very much for initiating that.
20:37:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
20:37:21 We stand adjourned.
20:37:26
DISCLAIMER:
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.