TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, February 12, 2015
6:00 p.m.
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.
06:00:10 >> City Council is called to order.
Roll call?
[Roll Call]
06:00:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Here.
06:00:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Here.
06:00:18 >>HARRY COHEN:
Here.
06:00:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Here.
First item, Ms. Capin will make a presentation for
Teens for Haiti.
06:00:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First I'd like to say a little bit about Teens for
Haiti.
What this group has accomplished is amazing.
Teens for Haiti was started in, by two Tampa teens,
Rachel Halfaker and Sarah Cimino in March 2012.
Their vision is to assist the non-profit Renew Haiti
for Haiti's efforts in St. Suzanne for raising funds
for short-term projects that lead to immediate results.
I'm going to read the commendation that we have
prepared.
Tampa City Council is honored to recognize the
dedicated and faithful work of the teens of Haiti
following a Renew Haiti mission trip in 2012, Tampa
teens Rachel Halfaker and Sarah Cimino formed Teens for
Haiti.
Today the group is comprised of 15 member volunteer
board of students from four South Tampa public and
private high schools.
The group supports the efforts of Renew Haiti and its
vision for bettering the lives of the people in Haiti
through funding projects that support basic needs,
improve infrastructure and create economic opportunity.
Teens for Haiti is to be commended for their impressive
accomplishments since 2012.
They have raised over $67,000 for projects ranging from
the purchase of new generators to two sustainable
farms, one a chicken farm and the other one a yam
growing farm.
Their most recent fundraising event was a 13-hour dance
marathon.
They raised $22,000.
It is Tampa City Council's honor to acknowledge the
exemplary work of the Teens for Haiti volunteer group
and to -- I'm sorry -- to commend them each and every
member for the time they have invested making a
difference improving the lives of the people of Haiti.
Thank you.
And I'm going to call your names, if you're here,
please come up.
As I announce the names of the volunteer board, if you
would please come up.
Samantha Awad.
Grace Casper.
Gabriela Accardi.
William Bennett.
Claire Casper.
Mary Desrosiers.
Emilie Evangelista.
Maddi Heese.
Reed Howard.
Isabel Jackson.
Alexander Muscaro.
Julia Reed.
Julia CHAFINO.
Katie Ann Thaxton and John Voiland.
Thank you for being here.
I'd like to invite Samantha Awad and Grace Casper if
they'd like to say a few words.
Don't forget to announce the web site for donations.
Let me go ahead -- we have one for each of you.
Thank you for your hard work and for making Tampa such
a better place by helping the rest of the hemisphere.
06:04:22 >> On behalf of teens for Haiti and everyone here, we
would like to say thank you from the City of Tampa.
We are so proud to be living here and so proud that we
can reach out to our family that's in another country,
from me especially and we have worked really hard,
other presidents this year, just everyone here, we say
thank you from the bottom of our hearts.
We're so glad to be doing this work.
It's not just for all of them, it's for us too.
So thank you.
06:04:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Don't leave.
I need to put your name on the record.
Say your name.
06:04:59 >> Samantha Awad.
06:05:00 >> I'm Grace Casper.
Samantha's copresident.
Like to say thank you to everyone, all the supporters
in the Tampa community.
Nothing would be possible without everyone here.
And our web site for donations teensforHaiti.com.
That has all the information and our social media
account.
Thank you for having us.
[ Applause ]
06:05:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Ms. Awad, if I could, you have to brag a
little bit.
You did much better than your dad usually does.
[ Laughter ]
06:05:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
You have documentary proof this is much
better than he does.
Just make sure you remind him of that.
06:05:44 >> Trying to outshine him.
06:05:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
You're doing a good job.
Thank you.
06:05:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Okay, we go to item number two.
This is a special event permit.
Anyone here from the city or anyone in the audience
care to make comments on item number 2?
Thanks again, all of you, for attending.
We're honored what you all do, every one of you.
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 2,
file 2015-8, CH 28.
Item number 2.
Well, I just lost a quorum, so I have to stop.
Sometimes it's hard to count to four.
All right.
Item number 2.
I have a motion to move item number 2 by Mr. Cohen,
second by Mr. Suarez.
Anyone in the audience care to speak on this item?
I see no one.
Motion on the floor by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez,
moving item number two.
All in favor of the item, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
All right.
We need a motion to open public hearings 3 through 14,
I believe.
Have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.
Further discussion in the opening of the hearing?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
Hearings are now open.
Anyone in the audience who has any idea, thinks they're
going to speak, may want to speak or may want to be
seen on television, please rise and be sworn in.
[Oath administered by Clerk]
06:07:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Okay.
06:07:33 >> Good evening, Abbye Feeley, Land Development
Coordination.
There are two items on your agenda this evening that
need to be continued.
The first is item number 10, REZ 15-04.
And the request for continuance was made by Mr. John
Grandoff.
I believe Mr. Grandoff is present.
06:07:53 >>Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the City
Council.
My name is John Grandoff, suite 3700 Bank of America
Plaza.
I represent the USF federal credit union in this
application.
We ask, respectfully request continuance until the
March 12th evening hearing or later if the Council
prefers.
06:08:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone in the audience care to speak
on continuance portion only of item number 10, REZ
15-04, please come to the podium.
No, I need a motion to continue -- I'm sorry, item
number 10 to March 12 at what hour?
At 6:00 p.m.
I need a motion to that effect.
Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Cohen, to move
item number 10 to March 12 at 6:00 p.m., year 2015.
All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you very much for attending, sir.
06:09:01 >> Thank you.
06:09:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you, Council.
Abbye Feeley, land development.
Item number 11, REZ 15-05 has also been requested for a
continuance through written letter by Robert Sprinkle.
I believe there's also a representative from Sprinkle
Consulting present this evening.
06:09:20 >> Good evening.
My name is Dallas Evans.
Engineer with Sprinkle Consulting.
We're located at 18115 U.S. highway 41 north in Lutz.
And we are also requesting a continuance.
Bob Sprinkle was going to speak on this matter, but
he's out of town today, so we're hoping to have this
rescheduled for March 12th.
06:09:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone in the audience care to speak
on this item, on the continuance portion only?
Only on the continuance from today to March 12th.
I see no one.
I have a motion made by Mr. Reddick to continue to
March 12 at 6:00 p.m., seconded by Ms. Montelione on
item number 11.
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
06:10:16 >> Thank you.
06:10:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes, ma'am?
06:10:22 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I believe that's it.
We could get started then with item number 3.
Item number 3 on your agenda this evening, Council, is
REZ 15-02, located 3903 west San Pedro street.
Request before you is from an RS-60 to an RS-50 zoning
request.
06:10:53 >> Good evening, Councilmembers, David Hay with your
Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
Our first case tonight, we head down to the South Tampa
planning district.
The approximately .42-acre subject site is located on
the northside of west San Pedro street, between South
Church and south Grady Avenues.
And it is located within the Virginia Park
neighborhood.
The closest transit stop is approximately a thousand
feet to the east located on South Dale Mabry Highway.
Which is designated as a transit emphasis coordinator
and transit is provided on that corridor by HART's
route 4, 19 and 36, which connect the subject site to
downtown Tampa, Britton Plaza, MacDill Air Force Base
and the Carrollwood area.
On to the aerial, you can see Bay to Bay Boulevard up
to the north.
And here's South Church Avenue.
You can also just make out some of the commercial uses
along Dale Mabry on the right or east side of the
aerial.
You can see that the surrounding area is almost
exclusively single-family detached in character with a
variety of lot sizes.
And Abbye will go into further detail about that during
her presentation.
On to the future land use map, the subject site and
almost all the properties on the map are designated
that residential 10.
Which is represented by that tan color.
The brown on the right or east side are properties
located along south Dale Mabry and those are at
designated at that residential 20.
Overall Planning Commission staff found that the
proposed rezoning to the residential single-family 50
zoning district which would allow for the development
of two single-family detached residential units would
be in keep being with the development pattern and
envisioned under that residential 10 future land use
category.
The proposed density of 8 units per ache ser consistent
with the underlying future land use category which
allows up to 10.
This portion of West San Pedro Street currently has a
number of existing residential lots similar in size to
what the applicant is proposing.
Their post rezoning does provide opportunity for infill
development allowing for additional housing choices
without altering the overall neighborhood context and
is in character with the single-family detached
development found in this Virginia Park neighborhood.
Therefore, based on those findings and goals,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the rezoning request
consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:13:42 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you, David.
Before I get started with my presentation, I'd like to
correct two errors.
Wong I saw when I smooshed all the PDFs together that
the incorrect compatibility map was placed into your
report, so I'd like to provide you with a correction to
that.
That being said, I'll go over it in my report, but that
changes the percentages that are on the block face for
the subject block face.
So the subject block face when I prepared to discuss it
with you has a 63% nonconforming lot pattern and a 37%
conforming lot pattern.
So -- I'll repeat that again when we get to that
portion, but right along here there's 8 total lots,
five of them conform to the smaller loath size.
The RS-50 lot size.
Those are the blue.
And the red would be the 60-foot or greater.
So the predominant on the block face now that you have
the corrected map, is a 63-37 split.
Percent nonconforming.
David mentioned it to you -- Abbye Feeley, land
development.
The applicant is requesting to rezone the property,
3903 West San Pedro Street from residential
single-family, RS-60, to residential single-family
RS-50, to allow for two single-family residential lots.
The subject property is 101.5 by a hundred feet in
depth for total area of 10,150 square feet.
It is one lot to the west of the intersection of West
San Pedro and Church Avenue.
And it is currently occupied by a detached
single-family dwelling unit.
The lots were originally platted in 1915 as 50 by 100
foot on the west and 50.1 by 100 foot on the east.
These are lots 22 and 23 of the Virginia Park
subdivision, block 41.
The minimum standards in the RS-50 district are 50 by
100 lot with a 20-foot front setback, 7-foot sides and
a 20-foot rear.
Here is the zoning atlas.
And putting that down, I see also that there was a
correction to that.
06:16:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Montelione?
06:16:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Abbye, a second ago you said 65, 37
on the corrected map that you gave us.
What I'm looking at --
06:16:40 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
63, 37 would equal a hundred percent.
06:16:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The one I just saw pass says 65, 35.
65, 35.
65, 35.
06:16:53 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Yes, the map is illustrated properly
with the red and blues.
The numbers were incorrect.
I was verbally correcting them.
06:17:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Oh, I thought you gave us the new
maps because you corrected the numbers.
Okay.
Never mind.
06:17:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Briefly, I just put up the zoning
atlas.
But you may recall this Council approved a PD at the
intersection here.
And that is reflected on your red, blue map here.
The subject is shown here in green, San Pedro to the
south.
Church to the east.
Grady to the west.
San Juan to the north.
It is one block off of Dale Mabry Highway.
You can see there is a mix along Dale Mabry Highway
with non-residential uses.
David pointed out to you, they stay to the north.
Show you an aerial of the site.
There is one single-family residence immediately to the
east of this site before you approach Church.
And this is a blue lot or 50-foot platted lot.
And then the lot immediately to the west of the subject
is also on an original platted lot at the 50-foot.
Here is what would refer to as the red blue map.
This shows you the red lots are lots that conform to
the current zoning of RS-60, which would be a 60 by a
hundred foot lot or greater.
And the blue conforms to the -- sorry about that the
blue conforms to the 50 that we're talking about today,
as an originally platted lot, which is the request
before you.
Based on that, the lot's location, the block space
integration has a 63% nonconforming and 37% conforming
ratio.
Also, this lot at the corner here interfaces with the
other two corner of San Pedro that have lots of similar
size and pattern.
Go ahead and show you some pictures of the site.
If I can just briefly, since it's going to be
predominantly single-family homes I'm going to show
you, I'm going to start at the subject, I'm going to
show you the property immediately to the east.
Then I'm going to travel down San Pedro showing you all
the properties on the north, come back on San Pedro
showing you all the properties on south and then also I
did take some of the corners that I just referred to.
Another shot of the subject.
This is the home immediately to the east on a blue lot.
And it does have a frontage on San Pedro and side load
entry on Church.
This is now moving west.
This is immediately west.
On a blue.
This is moving further west.
That tree comes right up through the front stoop of the
property.
Started to rain on me the day I started taking these,
so I went back out.
This is the corner of Grady and San Pedro.
We're going to come down now the south side moving east
back towards Dale Mabry Highway.
So this is the south.
This would be the southeast corner of Grady and San
Pedro.
Now moving east.
This is now approaching, this would be directly south
of the subject property, approaching the corner of San
Pedro and Church.
This is the northeast corner of Church and San Pedro.
The one next to that and the southeast corner of Church
and San Pedro and the one next to that.
So that's two lots in continuing on San Pedro towards
Dale Mabry.
Based on the existing development pattern of the area,
staff did find the request to rezone consistent.
06:22:08 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of City Council,
Gina Grimes with the law firm of Hill, Ward and
Henderson, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 3700.
And I have been sworn.
Going to let Mr. Shelby finish handing those out before
I begin.
I'm in front of you tonight representing Mobley housing
group, who has a contract to purchase this property
from the current owners, Andrew Rock and Nancy
Natilson.
As Abbye said, this is a request from RS-60 to RS-50.
The current owners purchased this property back in
1992, so they've owned it for the last 23 years.
The Virginia Park plat subdivision was platted back in
1915 and it was platted with predominantly 50-foot
lots.
There are some lots that are slightly larger than that
none of those lots were 60-foot lots.
They were 50 or 55-foot lots.
The home on this site was Brit several years later in
1929.
And in approximately 1950, there appears to have been
an addition put onto the property.
I've included in my packet of materials a survey of the
property because what I wanted to show you was that it
looked as if most of the property was built on just the
one lot.
And this addition right in here was added on in the
'50s that was an additional bedroom.
But when the home was originally built it was built
almost entirely on lot 23 and then the addition
extended over on to lot 22.
As you saw Ms. Feeley showed you the front of the
house.
That's the lot, that is the eastern most lot, lot 23.
And then I took another picture of the west F
western-most side of the lot.
It is of has a lot of vegetation on it.
That's the far western side of it.
As you can see, most of the home is contained on the
lot to the east.
Abbye went through with you the requirements, the
general requirements that you're required to consider
when you consider a rezoning application like this.
I'm not going to go into a lot of detail and repeat it,
but the fourth requirement is really the most critical
one.
And that is a comp plan policy that she cites.
It's policy 18.4.10.
And what it requires is that new residential
development has to be minimally disruptive to the
adjacent areas.
And the comp plan policy says to achieve that, the city
should assess the potential impacts of this project on
two issues.
The physical development pattern and the character of
the surrounding area.
So I'm going to address those two issues very quickly.
Because I know you have a long agenda tonight.
The physical development pattern.
Always she explained, you have -- I included for those
of you that have probably, included a large red blue
map for you in your package of materials so you can see
this a lot better.
But on the immediate block face, which is the same side
of the street which is the subject property, subject
property being in green, you have only three conforming
lots and urban flood advisory five nonconforming lots.
That is not counting the subject lot.
You have eight lots total.
So, you have 63-37 split.
63% of the lots are nonconforming.
And that's the predominant development pattern on this
block face.
As Abbye pointed out, you also have that as is the
predominant development pattern on southeastern and
southwestern blocks just to the south of the subject
site.
On the block face across the street you have a similar
situation as far as the percentages.
You have ten lots across the street.
Only four are conforming, one, two, three, four.
Six are nonconforming, one, two, three, four, five,
six.
So 60% of the lots on the block face across the street
are non-conforming lots.
And we assert that that also establishes a
non-conforming lots are the predominant development
pattern on the opposite block face.
Now, when you go out into other blocks in this area, as
you can see, in this block or this block, clearly
conforming lots are the predominant development pattern
there.
But not so on this block, this block, this block or any
of these other blocks.
What appears to happen, and Abbye pointed this out to
me, as you go from commercial, which is more intensive
along Dale Mabry, you transition from a greater
intensity to a lesser intensity as you go mid block and
then the same thing happens as you get over to the
other side along Manhattan.
But in this situation and in this area, it's almost a
block to block evaluation.
There's no overriding development pattern for the area
as a whole.
But we certainly believe that an RS-50 on these two
50-foot lots is consistent with the development pattern
on our block face and on the block face across the
street.
I also wanted to show you, I think she showed you as
well, but wanted to point out these are on
nonconforming lots.
This is the lot immediately to the south on the corner.
That's on a nonconforming lot.
And this is south across the street from the subject
property.
Likewise, this is directly across the street from the
subject property.
This is immediately to the east of the subject property
on a nonconforming lot.
This is immediately to the west of the subject property
on a nonconforming lot.
And then immediately behind the property, you'll see
there are two homes.
One of which, at least initially I thought was on a con
O nonconforming lot but as it turns out, it's actually
a conforming lot.
Once we corrected the map.
But those are these two homes right there on the
corner.
One on a conforming lot and one on a nonconforming lot.
So that's a conforming lot and this is home is on
non-conforming lot, immediately behind the subject
property.
What you also have and I want to point out, you have
non-conforming lots touching this property on all
sides.
Surrounding on all sides.
The next issue, the character of the surrounding area.
I'll be honest with you, I've driven this area over the
years and again when I was preparing for this rezoning.
It's really difficult to tell which of these homes are
on conforming lots and which are on non-conforming
lots.
It's difficult to tell in these pictures because the
lots really aren't that different in size.
You have a mixture of newer homes and older homes.
That's really the best way to describe the character of
this area.
There's a lot of newer homes, a lot of newer homes and
a lot of older homes.
What we're proposing is two new homes on two 50-foot
lots, consistent with we think the character of this
area.
And the other thing I want you all to consider is as
you all know, the value of lots in South Tampa keeps
escalating.
And if you mandate larger lots, then you're going to
mandate larger homes and McMansions.
Because that is the only way that you can justify a
larger lot, the price that you're going to pay for
larger lot is to build a much larger home.
And for this neighborhood, with so many of the
remaining smaller homes, we believe you're better off
allowing two moderate homes on 50-foot lots than force
the larger lots with the McMansions next to these
remaining smaller homes that were built back in the
'40s and the '50s.
Lastly we have 11 letters of support in your materials.
I've included a map, the same red blue map that shows
with check marks, the homes on which we were able to
obtain letters of support.
Next I'd like to introduce Mr. Rock, who is the current
property owner, who has spoken to many of the neighbors
and he is also the one that obtained the letters of
support and then I'll just make a very short closing
statement after Andrew speaks.
06:31:23 >> Thank you.
I'm Andrew Rock.
I'd like to introduce my wife Nancy Natilson, we're the
property owners at 3903 West San Pedro Street.
Honorable Councilmembers, we appreciate your
consideration.
As Ms. Grimes just indicated, we have letters of
support from 11 of our neighbors, including the
neighbors immediately in front of our house, behind our
house and on either side of our house.
I've spoken to all those people myself and they
understand what we propose and are asking to do.
They see it as consistent with the type of development
that exists and is ongoing on our block and in our
neighborhood and in some cases they see it as enhancing
the value of their property.
Our property, as previously stated, was originally
platted as two 51-foot lots.
Lot 22 and lot 23 of Virginia Park.
When we bought the property in 1992, that was how the
deed read and how it still reads, lot 22 and 23.
And frankly, that was one of the attractive features
when we bought the property and we had every
anticipation that when the time came eventually to sell
the property, we would be able to sill it as two lots.
It's only as we have begun to go through this process
that we understood we would need to go through a
rezoning application.
For us, the time has now come when we need to sell this
property.
We're getting older.
We're looking to downsize.
We'd like to build a small energy efficient house on a
small lot.
Our house is neither small nor efficient.
The lot is, it's just more than we need or want or soon
may be able to cope with.
So, and the type of rezoning and development that we're
proposing is what we see going on all around us in our
neighborhood.
We think it's time for us to move on, but there are
two, probably two younger families that would love to
live in new houses in this location.
If this rezoning makes that possible.
It's already been I think demonstrated that the
rezoning is consistent with the existing lots and
frankly, we see this as beneficial for everyone.
Because it is what's happening in the area.
It doesn't work for us but it will work for some
others.
So, we appreciate very much your consideration and I
hope your support for this rezoning and we'd be happy
to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
06:34:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much.
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 3,
REZ 15-205, please come forward.
You have closing arguments?
06:35:11 >> We respectfully request your approval.
We're available if you have any questions.
06:35:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much.
I have a motion.
06:35:17 >> I move to close.
06:35:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Moss close by Mr. Capin.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Ms. Capin, since you closed, you want to read the
ordinance?
06:35:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
of 3903 West San Pedro Street in the City of Tampa,
Florida, more particularly described in section 1, from
zoning district classifications RS-60 residential
single-family to RS-50, residential single-family,
providing an effective date.
06:35:50 >> Second.
06:35:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by Ms. Capin, second on a tie
vote, I'm going to go with Mr. Suarez over Mr. Cohen
because my left ear hears better than my right.
But it's the other way around when facing you.
All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
06:36:06 >> Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be March 5th,
9:30 a.m.
06:36:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much.
Item number four.
06:36:17 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you, Council.
Abbye Feeley, Land Development Coordination.
Item number 4 is a rezoning request, REZ 15-03, it's
located at 3515 West Iowa Avenue.
The request before you this evening is an RS-60 to an
RS-50 residential single-family.
06:36:41 >>DAVID HAY:
Good evening, Councilmembers, David Hay
with your Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
We remain in that South Tampa planning district for
this next case, moving at this time moving south to the
Gandy Sun Bay South neighborhood.
The problems one acre parcel is located just east of
Himes avenue between west Iowa and west Wisconsin
avenues.
The closest transit stop is approximately 1,800 feet to
the west along South Dale Mabry Highway.
And transit is provided by the route 36 connecting the
subject site to Britton Plaza, the MacDill Air Force
Base and up to Carrollwood.
On to the aerial.
We have south Himes avenue running north-south.
We have Chiaramonte elementary.
This is the utility station up here for TECO.
As you can see, the surrounding area contains a mixture
of single-family detached duplexes and town homes.
With a variety of lot sizes.
There are also a number of neighborhood serving uses
such as churches within the general area and Abbye will
go into more detail a little later.
On to the future land use map, the subject site and
almost all the properties on the map are designated
residential 10, which is that tan color.
The blue in the upper left is the public semi public
representing Chiaramonte elementary.
While the brown in the upper right is the residential
20 future land use category representing the Sheridan
Woods condos.
Overall the Planning Commission staff found the
proposed rezoning to is the residential single-family
50 zoning district would allow for development of,
which would allow for the development of six
single-family detached residential units would be in
keeping with that development pattern envisioned under
that residential 10.
The proposed density of six units per acre is
consistent with the underlying category which allows up
to ten.
The proposed rezoning just like the other one provides
an opportunity for infill development, lying for
additional housing choices without altering the overall
neighborhood context.
And is in character with the mixture of housing types
found within this portion of the Gandy Sun Bay South
neighborhood.
Therefore, based on those findings and the goals,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the rezoning request
consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:39:11 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Oh, no Gina left her glasses.
Thanks, David.
Abbye Feeley, Land Development Coordination.
David gave you a brief overview of the area surrounding
properties, mix of uses.
This is a request to create six single-family
residential zoning lots.
The property does span and has frontage on Wisconsin
and on Iowa.
I was informed that my report was incorrect with
300-foot frontage.
It's 300 feet combined.
150 on Iowa and 150 on Wisconsin.
So, that would allow for the creation of three 50-foot
lots on both frontage.
Minimum criteria is the same, 50 by 100 lot, 20 foot
front, 7 foot sides.
Go ahead and show you the zoning atlas.
Wisconsin to the north.
Iowa to the south.
Himes to the west.
Sherwood to the east.
There is a PD immediately to the northwest.
That is multi-family residential.
You have four lots of RS-50, in this area and series of
RS-50 lots that were created.
These were created by rezoning in '04 '05 and one in
'06.
I could go through those for you as well.
It's kind of an odd -- it's not your typical red blue
because the maps, the blocks don't exactly line up the
way that we're used to seeing them.
With that angle in there.
Here's an aerial of the site.
It is currently vacant.
There are some trees on it.
Several, couple located in the middle, more along the
perimeter.
And another red blue map.
You can see everything located to the east, the
predominant pattern to the east is the 50-foot lot.
The subject block, which interfaces with multi-family
and then several smaller lots, these are zoned RS-50
but some of them are larger than the 50-foot lot.
They actually conform to a 60.
And then to the south where that angle is, which is
part of this subdivision, also has a mix.
The ones on the angle typically were the larger lots.
The total number of lots that we analyzed were 119.
There were 47 conforming to the RS-50, which was 40%.
And there was 72 of the 119 that were non-conforming,
which was 60% of the overall area that we analyzed for
the development pattern.
On the subject block, it was split where eight lots
were conforming to the RS-60 and three lots, three
blue, two immediately adjacent to the subject and then
one at the southwest corner of Wisconsin and Sherwood
that had the 50-foot.
In addition to add on to that, the two lots over on
Sherwood are oriented to Sherwood.
So, they don't have a face on the Iowa block.
Go ahead and show you some pictures of the site.
I'm sorry, these are a little dark.
This is where it really started to rain on me.
So I had to head back to the office.
So we're going to start down on Iowa and then we're
going to come up around onto Wisconsin.
Here is the subject site.
This is the western portion, the eastern portion.
Moving east.
This is -- actually I'm going to show you here these
western ones.
Then I'll come up and go around the block.
So this would be to the west.
This is at the corner of Iowa and Himes.
The northeast corner.
One other shot of that house.
Now immediately to the east on the larger red lot you
see on your red blue map is this home here.
And then there is the one home at the corner of the
northwest corner of Sherwood and Iowa.
This is one that is configured east-west but the house
is oriented north-south.
Up on Wisconsin now, heading west toward Himes.
There are two homes and then subject property.
This is still moving west.
This is approaching the intersection of Wisconsin and
Himes.
Based on the historic plat and the existing development
pattern of the area, staff did find the request
consistent and we're available for any questions.
06:45:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers?
Thank you very much.
Petitioner?
You have up to 15 minutes and then five minutes for
rebuttal if necessary.
06:45:31 >> Good evening, Council.
Kevin Robles.
I reside 2107 chestnut forest drive, Tampa.
33618 and I have been sworn in.
Abbye pretty much covered everything that I would have
to cover except I did want to add, we're very diligent
in this particular rezone.
We represent the owners, which are here tonight.
We have been especially sensitive to the homeowners
association or the neighborhood association, Sun Bay
South in that area, and we have been in telephone
contact and had a personal meeting.
Additionally on Saturday, September the 7th from,
9:00 to 11.
We held a meeting on-site for any of the neighbors that
might want to have questions.
We were able to meet with Sun Bay South Al Steenson on
that day.
Otherwise at that point we had no opposition or anybody
inquiring on the particular, the particulars of the
rezone.
That's what I have at this point and if Council has any
questions.
06:46:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers?
Anyone in the audience care to speak on this file 4,
REZ 15-03, please come forward.
06:46:41 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman.
Al Steenson, 4100 west Leila avenue, Tampa, 33616.
And I have not been sworn, Mr. Shelby.
[Oath administered by Clerk]
06:47:06 >> As I have for many, many years, I'm representing the
Gandy Sun Bay South civic association.
We had the discussion about this last Monday night.
I met with Kevin that Saturday that he referenced to.
We really have no objections to this rezoning.
However, I think we'd like to put on the record that as
these lots are developed, because there's nothing there
now.
There's six lots.
As these lots are developed, that we hope that those
are doing the development will as closely as they can
adhere to the policy on the policy number 13.1.3 that
what is built there will try to fit in with the
neighborhood, the context of the neighborhood.
Other than that and of course there's no way we're
going to get a guarantee on that, but we would
certainly ask the developers to be cognizant of the
surroundings that they're in.
And build accordingly.
For that, we have no objection.
Thank you.
06:48:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the audience?
Party, you're allowed rebuttal if you care to do so.
06:48:19 >> I have nothing else, Council, other than humbly
request your support on this rezone.
06:48:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Need a motion to close.
Motion to close by Ms. Montelione, second bring
Reddick.
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Suarez, would you kindly read item number 4, file
15-03.
06:48:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you, chair I present an ordinance
for first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning
property in the general vicinity of 3515 West Iowa
Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida and mother
particularly described?
Section 1, from zoning district classifications, RS-60
residential single-family to RS-50 residential
single-family, providing an effective date.
06:49:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Have a motion by Mr. Suarez, tie
vote again, this time I'm going to give it to Mr. Cohen
over Mr. Reddick.
All in favor of that motion, signify by saying aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
06:49:17 >> Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading and adoption will be March 5th at
9:30 a.m.
06:49:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Item number 5.
06:49:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you, Council.
Abbye Feeley, Land Development Coordination.
Item number 5 is REZ 15-06, located at 3207 and 3209
West Price Avenue.
The request before you this evening is from an RS-60
residential single-family to an RS-50 residential
single-family.
06:49:53 >>DAVID HAY:
Good evening, Councilmembers, David Hay
with your Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
Hopefully I don't sound like a broken record, but we're
still in the South Tampa planning district, still
within the Gandy Sun Bay South neighborhood.
The approximately .48-acre subject site is located on
the northside of West Price Street between south
Sheridan road and south sixth street.
Closest transit stop is approximately 1,200 feet to the
east located along South MacDill Avenue and transit
service on MacDill is provided by the route 4 connect
the subject site to Britton Plaza, MacDill Air Force
Base and downtown Tampa.
Onto the aerial.
We have got here Price Street, south Sheridan road.
South six.
MacDill is off the aerial over to the right.
As you can see, the surrounding area is predominantly
single-family detached in character with the variety of
lot sizes.
Many similar to what the applicant is seeking this
evening.
Next on to the future land use map, all of that tan,
which the subject site is also, is that residential 10.
The lavender color that you can see in the upper right
is that community mixed use 35.
Up at the intersection of MacDill and Gandy.
Overall similar to that last case, Planning Commission
staff found that the proposed rezoning to the
residential single-family 50 zoning district which
would allow for the development of three single-family
detached residential units would be in keeping with the
development pattern envisioned under that REZ 10 future
land use category.
The proposed density of 6 units per acre is consistent
with the underlying category, which allows up to 10.
And just like the other ones, proposed rezoning
provides opportunity for infill, allowing for
additional housing choices without altering the overall
neighborhood context and is in character with the
mixture of housing types and lot sizes found within
this portion of the Gandy Sun Bay South neighborhood.
Therefore, based on those findings, the eagles,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the rezoning request
consistent with Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:52:24 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you, David.
The request before you tonight at 3207 and 3209 west
price is from residential single-family RS-60 to
residential single-family RS-50 to allow for three
single-family residential lots.
The subject property is 150 by 141.
So as I've mentioned to you in the first two
applications, the minimum lot requirement for the RS-50
is 50 by a hundred.
These would be 50 by 141 feet deep.
So these lots were platted substantially large area
than what our minimum lot size requires within the
zoning code.
This area was platted in 1925 and unlike the previous
applications you've heard this evening, this is
actually the analysis area that we provided you is made
up of three different subdivisions because the original
subdivision that is associated with this application
Tampa -- these two lots that are not analyzed for this
analysis, but your next application is up a block, so
it will include, so the original subdivision was these
five lots here.
So in order to analyze the surrounding area, which I
believe was a request by Council at last month's
hearing, we did spread out.
However, that means that it's now including
subdivisions that were platted at a different time and
that may or may not include lots of a similar nature.
So I just wanted to illustrate that to you.
So when I put up the other maps and it looks like they
were all part of the same subdivisions or plats, you
can understand that it's actually including three
different ones.
And I'll go over this in just a minute.
Property is shown here in green.
Price to the south.
Paul to the north.
Fifth to the east and Sheridan to the west.
There's an aerial of the property.
There are some trees on this property as well.
There was a single-family residence on the property.
It was demolished.
The end of 2013.
And I'm going to go ahead now and give you a view of
the area.
When you're looking at the pictures that I'm about to
show you, I would ask you to keep in mind, I am going
to show you all of price, both the north and south
side.
For the analysis area, we analyzed 159 lots and 101 of
them were conforming.
Those are the red, which was 64%.
Again, I just showed you when I set this up for you
that this is made of three different subdivisions and
if you were to take out the one to the west, which was
not part of this original tropical terrace unit number
one, you would see that the predominant pattern is
actually a blue pattern.
So sometimes going to those surrounding subdivisions,
they're not included in the original, may be a little
bit misleading.
Lots from the subject lot, subject lot here, there are
18 lots.
7 of them are red.
That would be conforming RS-50, that's 39%.
Eleven of them are nonconforming at the 50, including
the ones immediately adjacent to this property on the
west.
So of the subject lots, 61% and of the block face, I
don't know -- off the top of my head.
Eight and six of them, so roughly 70 -- 75% are blue.
And the two immediately to the east are red.
I'm going to start at the northeast corner of price and
Sheridan and I'm going to go ahead and work my way down
the block and then bring you back down the other side.
So this is the northeast corner.
And this is that cluster of blues that are on the
western portion of the block.
And we're moving our way east towards sixth street.
This is the fourth lot in.
The sixth.
And then you're approaching the subject property.
This is a picture of the subject.
This is also a picture of the subject.
And remember again these are 141 feet deep.
So there's a lot of depth to these lots.
This is the red lot to the east of the subject.
And this is the corner of price and 6th.
Now, on the south side, this is immediately south at
the southwest corner of price and 5th moving back west
towards Sheridan, so, that first one was a red.
Everything now I'm going to show you till get to the
next corner is a blue.
Beautiful trees down in this area.
This is across at the corner of the -- southwest corner
of Sheridan and price.
Based on the analysis of the surrounding area and the
exist being block pattern on the block face both on the
north and south side of price, staff did find the
request consistent.
We're available for any questions.
06:59:49 >> Good evening, Council.
Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale Mabry Highway, Tampa,
representing the applicants this evening.
I have been sworn.
Boy, this seems to be the evening for RS-50, so I'd
like to keep this roll going if we could.
With me tonight is Mr. Jim Stutzman and Mr. Todd Marks,
counsel and representation for the other party to this
matter.
I am representing the eastern lot owners.
Abbye referenced Mr. Cotter and Ms. Orns.
This is a unique situation.
Not going to bore you with all the details.
We have been working on this case well over two years.
My clients and Mr. Stutzman and Mr. Mark's clients find
themselves in a position where they have no
entitlements to this property, these lots.
And that was primarily due to the actions of a prior
property owner that had unified ownership, that decided
in sometime subsequent to my client's purchase in May
of 2010, to convey ten feet from the west to the east.
So the 150 -- excuse me, the 90 and the 60 became 150.
So, my client had no knowledge.
My client went on the reliance of the representations
made by the real estate agent and the owner, indicated
that they had the right to build.
It was a conforming -- strike that -- was a
non-conforming lot.
Ignore the RS-60 and you'll be fine to pull your
permit.
My client closed, my client financed.
Went through the appropriate steps and then heard in
the wings that there was some concerns in the City of
Tampa and some of these RS-50, RS-60 lots.
My client approached the city and found out that he had
no legal rights to construct a house on this lot.
He was most frustrated.
We then approached the city and realized very quickly
that that was true, that my client, even though it's
REZ 10, even though it's 50 feet, even though he's
RS-60, he thought was legal non-conforming and across
the street from 50-foot lots, could not pull permits.
Over the last year, Ms. Feeley and myself and the
clients and then the subsequent purchaser to the west,
Ms. Arroyo, both proceeded to find a way to resolve
this problem.
It ultimately ended up for Ms. Feeley being you better
work together or you're not going to have any legal
basis to move forward.
After about 150 e-mails, Jim and I sat down and said
why don't we just hold hands and do this thing
together.
So here we are for an RS-50 application.
The winner in all this, Council, I suppose is the
property owner that took all the money and left town.
The losers, unfortunately, are our two respective
clients, who through no efforts on their own certainly
found themselves in a position where they have made a
substantial investment, in Mrs. Arroyo's behalf, she
paid cash and then found out that she has no basis to
file for any permits.
She razed the house to the west, as Ms. Feeley noted.
And now beautiful lots are there vacant.
And we would like to cure that defect.
So, Ms. Feeley, you have a very thorough presentation.
I'm not going to reiterate that.
There's no question that historical plat was primarily
50 feet.
Goes back to 1925.
This particular subdivision block 5 has a preponderance
of lots.
That are 50 feet, 60, well under 60 feet.
In fact, as noted by Abbye as well that these minimum
lots are about 7,000 square feet.
Overall 21,000 square feet.
This substantially exceeds the minimum lot size
requirements RS-50, which is 5,000 square feet.
That being said, we ask for your support to cure this
defect so our clients can rest easy.
My client is out of town.
He said I can't be there, I can't watch this, text me
as soon as it's done so I can have a nice remaining
part of my vacation.
So with that, I'm going to close.
Have jim Stutzman just comment briefly and we
appreciate your support.
Thank you.
07:04:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any comments by Councilmembers?
07:04:19 >> Good evening, Council.
My name is Jim Stutzman.
My mailing address is PO Box 320323 in Tampa, 33679.
And I have been sworn.
I'll concur with everything that Mike said and also, he
did mention that attorney Todd Marks and myself do
represent the owners of the property at 3207, which is
lots 19 and 20.
And the Arroyos bought the property with the
understanding they could develop the two lots.
And when they purchased, as Abbye mentioned, there was
a house on lot 20 when they purchased.
I do have a copy of an old survey that shows that is on
lot 20.
So naturally they assumed that they could build another
house on lot 19.
They did subsequently tear down the house on lot 20,
which that created some of these problems.
We did our own lot analysis as we were putting the
application together and we basically concur with
Abbye's findings.
The three blocks that we analyzed were the one north
and south of the subject lot block and we found it was
about 70% of the developed lots were less than 60 feet.
So we feel that the request is compatible and
consistent with the development trends in this
neighborhood.
And it would be consistent with the comp plan as David
mentioned.
So be happy to answer any questions.
07:06:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any comments or questions by
Councilmembers?
Thank you.
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 5,
REZ 15-06, please come forward.
07:06:11 >> Again, Al Steenson.
4100 west Leila, Tampa, 33616.
And I have been sworn.
This is another one that we discussed at our meeting,
our last meeting.
And we have no objections to this one.
However, again, as I said to my previous remarks, we
would hope and we have no guarantees, that as they
develop this, they will be, keep the policy 13.33.3.3
in mind and build accordingly to what's around them.
As an old saying, when you go to Coast Guard school,
please be aware of your surroundings.
All we are asking, as they develop this, to please kind
of look around, see what's around them, as they start
to build.
So, thank you very much.
07:07:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.
You have five minutes for rebuttal if you care to
choose.
07:07:08 >> Michael Horner again.
No rebuttal.
We did speak with Mr. Steenson.
I've had no calls in opposition and several calls in
support.
We appreciate your support.
07:07:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Just for the record, anyone in the
audience care to speak on this item?
Motion to close by Mr. Cohen, second by Ms. Montelione.
All in favor of the motion to close, please indicate by
saying aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Reddick, would you kindly read number five, please.
07:07:35 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Move an ordinance being presented for
first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning the
property in general vicinity of 3207 and 3209 West
Price Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida and more
particularly described in section 1, from zoning
district classification has RS-60 residential
single-family to RS-50 residential single-family,
providing an effective date.
07:07:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by Mr. Ready, second by Mr.
Cohen.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you all very much for attending.
07:08:05 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading and adoption March 5th, 30:00 a.m.
07:08:12 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Item number 6, REZ is a-07, located at
3205 west Paul avenue.
That's just one block north of where you just were on
the previous application.
At 3207 west price.
The request before you tonight is from RS-60
residential single-family to RS-50, residential
single-family.
07:08:39 >>DAVID HAY:
Good evening, Councilmember also.
David Hay with your Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
Still on the same neighborhood.
Gandy Sun Bay South down in the South Tampa planning
district.
The approximately .31-acre subject site is located on
the north side of west Paul avenue between south
Sheridan road and south sixth street.
Again, the closest transit is over on that MacDill
Avenue about 900 feet to the east.
Onto the aerial, sorry for the quality, we were having
some technical issues.
Little pixel lated.
Hopefully you can see than the surrounding areas
predominantly single-family detached in character with
a variety of lot sizes.
You can see Gandy Boulevard up here to the north.
That has a mixture of retail, commercial, office and
residential uses.
Just for reference, this is the CVS and the ABC liquors
right on the corner there.
Of South MacDill Avenue and west Gandy.
On to the future land use map, the subject site,
although that same color again, residential 10, the
tan, all along here.
Up on Gandy, we have the community mixed use 35 land
use category.
Shouldn't surprise anyone, but the Planning Commission
staff found that the proposed rezoning to allow for the
two single-family detached residential units under that
RS-50 zoning district would be in keeping with that
development pattern under that REZ 10, just like the
others.
The proposed density of 6 units per ache ser consistent
with the underlying land use category, which allows up
to 10.
And like the others, the rezoning provides an
opportunity for the infill development, allowing for
additional housing choices without altering the overall
neighborhood context.
And therefore based on those findings and the goals,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the proposed rezoning
consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
07:10:58 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thanks, David.
I wanted to show you this last time that original
subdivision that goes all the way up to Gandy, when I
showed you the three.
The red blue map on this is similar as well, given that
we're just one block north of where we were on the last
hearing.
The request before you tonight at 3205 west Paul is to
allow for two single-family residential lots.
The subject property is 100 by 135.
So these also again are deeper lots than the 100-foot
in depth that our minimum lot size requirement in the
code allows.
Or requires.
I'm sorry.
These lots would be 6,750 square feet apiece.
Therefore, meeting the area of the RS-60 but meeting
the width of the RS-50.
This property shown in green, Paul to the south.
Price one block south, so the prior application was
just to the south here.
Marlin to the north.
And Gandy just north of that.
This PD here, this Council approved just a few years
ago and it's been constructed.
It is multi-family residential.
And off two RS-50 lots just northeast of the subject
property.
Aerial of the site.
Single-family residence.
I'm going to again show you the houses that are located
on this area.
Unlike the block to the south that we have just
discussed, this block is predominantly red lots to the
west of it.
It has predominantly smaller lots to the north of it as
a transition off of the Gandy Boulevard corridor, which
has a mix of commercial and residential.
Residential town homes and then the PD I just mentioned
to you that was approved by this Council a few years
ago, to the northwest of the site.
So, my finding on this one was bound to be consistent,
although the percentages along the block face were
conforming because it is more of a transitional block
to the Gandy corridor area.
Go ahead and show you the property.
One I did a little different.
I did start with the subject.
This is adjacent to the east.
This is the northwest corner of Paul and 6th.
This is to the west of the site.
Still moving west.
This is approaching the corner of Sheridan and Paul.
This is the southwest corner of Paul.
So, this is actually immediately across and now moving
back.
Along the south side.
This is immediately south of the subject.
Moving back towards Sheridan.
Approaching the intersection of Sheridan and Paul and
then this is the corner of Sheridan and Paul.
Staff found the request consistent and we are available
for any questions.
07:15:36 >> Any questions by Councilmembers?
Petitioner?
07:15:39 >> Good evening, Council.
My name is Cliff Fernandez.
I reside at 3318 South Westshore Boulevard.
And I have been sworn.
I have nothing further to add to Abbye's presentation.
So I'm available for any questions.
07:16:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Questions by Councilmembers?
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 6, REZ
15-07, please come forward.
07:16:06 >> This is a recording.
[ Laughter ]
07:16:12 >> Al Steenson, 41 west Leila and I have been sworn.
The same thing is true.
Ditto what I just said.
We have no objection to this.
However, we would ask them when they develop this, is
to be aware of their surroundings, notwithstanding that
fire engine red house.
But, build something that's marketable, but also be
aware of your neighbors.
Thank you very much.
07:16:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone else?
Need a motion to close.
Have a motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by
Mr. Cohen.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Ms. Mulhern, would you kindly take number 6, please?
07:16:56 >>MARY MULHERN:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I move an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 3205 west Paul avenue in the City
of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly described in
section 1, from zoning district classifications RS-60
residential single-family to RS-50 residential
single-family, providing an effective date.
07:17:19 >> Second.
07:17:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Have a motion by Ms. Mulhern, a
second by Ms. Montelione.
Further discussion by councilmembers in all in favor of
the motion please indicate by saying aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
07:17:32 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried understand lie.
Second reading and adoption March 5th, 9:30 a.m.
07:17:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much.
Item number 7.
07:17:40 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Item number 7, we are done with the red
blue portion of our program for this evening.
The item number 7 is REZ 14-80, it's located at 4806
and 4810 West McElroy Avenue and 4807 west Paul avenue.
The request before you tonight is the CI, commercial
intensive, going to a PD, planned development for
residential single-family attached, or what we
typically know as a town home style development.
07:18:14 >>DAVID HAY:
Good evening, Councilmember also.
David Hay with your Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
We remain down in South Tampa planning district for
this case.
This time we move a little to the northwest from our
last case.
The problems .34-acre subject site is located west of
South Westshore Boulevard and is located between West
McElroy Avenue and west Paul avenue in the Gandy Sun
Bay South neighborhood.
West Gandy Boulevard is designated a transit emphasis
corridor.
Express bus service is provided along that corridor,
provided by PSTA connecting Pinellas County to downtown
Tampa.
Also South Westshore transit provided along that
portion by HART and that connects Port Tampa city with
downtown.
On to the aerial, I'm going to use the city's because
we're still having some issues at the planning
commission about our aerials.
You can see that the subject site is located within
proximity to Gandy Boulevard and South Westshore.
The area contains a mixture of light industrial, office
and commercial uses.
Some residential uses are scattered along the corridor
and are also located east of South Westshore.
Those typically east of South Westshore are more
single-family detached.
Abbye will be going into more detail about that during
her presentation.
Just for reference, this is Walgreen's at South
Westshore and Gandy.
On to the future land use map, the subject site in all
the surrounding parcels in that lavender color are all
designated urban mentioned use 60.
It's one of the most intensive land use categories in
South Tampa.
The pink along the east side of South Westshore are
properties designated that community mixed use 35.
While the tan further east is that residential 10
representing the single-family detached.
It should be noted though not shown on this map,
parcels do fall within the coastal high hazard area,
the subject does.
Overall planning commission staff found the proposed
rezoning to allow for 33 town home units and effective
density of 24 units per acre is in keeping with the
intent of that urban mixed use 60 future land use
designation.
The applicant has worked with staff to ensure buildings
appropriately address adjacent public right of ways by
providing for building entrances oriented to the public
street as called for under a number of the policies
within the mixed use corridor section of the comp plan.
The rezoning continues the transformation of the area
that was once formerly a light industrial in character
into a hire density mixed use residential neighborhood.
As called for under the comprehensive plan and the
urban mixed use 60 future land use category.
And therefore based on those findings and the eagles,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the rezoning request
consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
07:21:37 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
The request before you tonight at 4806
and 4810 West McElroy Avenue and 4807 west Paul avenue
is from CI, commercial intensive to PD, planned
development.
Residential within the CI is actually a special use.
It's an administrative special use that you can request
through land development.
Given that this is going to a PD, the criteria that
would govern under that special use still travel with
the request before you.
So there are a couple waivers.
And I'm going to go through those waivers now before I
make my presentation so you can be considering those as
you're listening to the details of the application.
The first is to allow for access onto a local street
instead of the required arterial or collector.
And that is one of those special use criteria, the
second is buffer waivers.
The first is to allow the south from 15-foot landscape
buffer with a six foot wall to an 11-foot landscape
buffer with an eight foot PVC fence.
The second is to allow for the east use buffer from
15-foot landscape buffer with a six foot wall to a six
foot landscape buffer with an eight feet PVC fence.
That eight foot is due to a change in grade and the
fill.
You'll see this is a lower lying area of the city and
it is going to require that.
Also, there are industrial uses on the east side of
this property, not industrial, but definitely a heavy
commercial in an auto repair type use.
So I'll go ahead and show you some pictures of that.
The third is along the western property line from 15
with a six foot wall to six foot with an eight foot PVC
fence.
The third waiver is to reduce the backup width from six
to zero and the last is to reduce the required vehicle
use area green space from 20% to 18%.
The request before you tonight is an 1.34-acre site and
it is currently occupied by a single-family dwelling
and two storage buildings.
This again, this property spans from McElroy to Paul.
The residential is on the Paul side and the commercial
is on the McElroy side.
It seeks to construct a total of 33 town homes,
configured in ten buildings, including three buildings
each with three units along west McElroy, two
buildings with three and four units along west Paul and
five buildings with three to four units internal to the
site.
The property is surrounded by warehouse and hotel trade
uses to the east, west and south, with CI zoning and
the property to the north across McElroy is zoned CG
with a large multi-family residential development.
Go ahead and show you the zoning atlas.
The subject is here in green, like I said, it does go
all the way through, McElroy to the north, Paul to
the south.
Westshore to the east.
This large PDA to the west is the Newport development
that is, remains to be seen.
Also to the west in the CG is freedom village, which I
just mentioned to you that you can have residential
within CG and CI districts.
It is a special use, so there is residential use to the
west also.
I'll show you a picture of that.
Residential use do the north and then office complex to
the northeast.
Auto repair here to the east.
And there's a series of different open storage and
warehousing uses along Paul as well as residential
along Paul to the south.
Going to show you all those pictures.
David showed you our aerials.
So I'll just briefly again go over that.
McElroy, Westshore, Paul.
It does kind of dead end.
This would be where the Newport development would pick
up.
This was the Newport sales vendor.
Multi-family.
This is office.
Auto repair and you have open storage around here and
then that freedom village I referred to over to the
west.
Go ahead and show you some pictures of the site.
This is the subject property.
One of the storage buildings behind there, there is
currently parking in the right-of-way along McElroy.
This is the subject parcel as well, moving west.
Subject.
Another of the subjects up on McElroy, going to show
you both sides, and then go down to Paul.
This is at the corner of McElroy and Westshore, so
immediately to the east of the property.
This is west of the subject.
Also is marketed for residential.
I don't know if they have a special use on there or
what's going on yet.
This is approaching the dead end.
There is that little cut-through from Gandy in this
area.
This is the freedom village.
Coming back down McElroy, back toward Westshore is
the Westshore club.
This is residential.
And then the Westshore office complex, which is as you
approach.
This has frontage both on Gandy and McElroy.
This is approaching the intersection.
You can see the Walgreen's from there.
Now going down in between McElroy and Paul on
Westshore, this is the use that fronts Westshore.
So warehousing use.
This is now coming onto, coming onto Paul.
This is the continuation of that use that I just showed
you the warehousing use.
So this is the northside of Paul traveling west
approaching the subject.
Here's the subject.
Property.
And again, the subject.
And then this is to the west of the subject.
Also to the west of the subject on the northside of
Paul.
This is at the end of Paul looking back east toward
Westshore.
This is the south side of Paul.
And then there is residential on the south side of Paul
approaching Westshore.
The proposed setbacks on the project before you this
evening are 7-foot north, two foot south, six foot east
and six foot west.
The maximum building height is proposed at 40 feet.
Based on the proposed development, a total of 75
parking spaces are required.
And 76 are being provided.
Each unit is designed with a two car garage and there
are ten visitor spaces that are being provided as well.
Should it be the pleasure of Council to approach this
application this evening, there are so modification
that is need to be made in between first and second
reading.
Under Land Development Coordination, they need to
revise the waivers that are listed in our report,
restate the address on the site plan as 4807 and
correct the setbacks as listed.
For natural resources, they do need to provide the
minimum required trees for the multi-family use.
One per 1500 square feet, or major fraction thereof.
In relation to solid waste, there are a series of notes
as indicated on page three of the report that need to
be revised and placed onto the site plan.
The site is 1.3 acres, always David mentioned, it's in
the UM-60 which would allow up to 60 units an acre and
they are with a maximum F.A.R. of 2 and they are under
that at mid 20s.
So, they're not using the maximum potential.
They have the adequate parking and staff provided you
an annual sis on pages 4, 5 and 6 of your report.
We did find this request consistent.
We believe it would provide some infill, transition to
the Gandy corridor.
It is surrounded by some like uses and would be
consistent with the comp plan.
Thank you.
07:30:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by cames?
Petitioner?
07:30:45 >> Thank you, Council, Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale
Mabry highway, Tampa, Florida, 33618 representing icon
real estate ventures.
With me is Mr. Chris McNeal, McNeal Engineering for
any engineering questions.
Also, Mr. Ryan Studzinski is also here for any
questions.
Council, I don't think most of you were on in 2006 -- I
have been sworn.
Mr. Miranda, you may recall in 2006, we had a special
use back then it required a Council approval and the
plan on the overhead was filed, reviewed and approved
unanimously by council back in 2005 for 25 town homes.
Unfortunately, the market in 2006, 2007 dropped.
The special use expired, clients could not close.
And the owner of Jack's Marine and repair, who is still
the owner, has been waiting patiently for the market to
come back.
And we're proud to stand before you this evening to say
we think the market is back and we have revised our
plan, gone back to the drawing board and brought a plan
back before you and staff that we think achieves a
number of things.
Infill development, appropriate residential transition
in what is largely commercial general area and we think
this will be the catalyst for that development.
As Abbye noted, UMU 60, 1.34 acres, 60 units per acre.
We could do three, four, even five stories.
My client is not a tower developer.
My client is not a multi-family developer.
My client does single-family attached town homes.
67 units would not give any open space.
67 units would not provide any real meaningful
pedestrian connections, particularly in a single-family
opportunity.
Stacked units is not where that market is right now,
although there are stacked units along the Gandy
Boulevard corridor.
These will be very attractive elevation.
I'll show those in a moment.
They were part of our filed plans.
These will be at least 2,025 to 3,300 square feet, 3
stories, open floor plans, contemporary design, 300,000
plus, closer to $400,000.
These will have stainless steel appliances.
These will be upscale units that this area needs and
was ready for.
Newport has been sleeping for a while.
We all wait for Newport, we might not getting old fast.
My client saw this opportunity, has come back in and
we're excited to present this plan before you this
evening.
07:33:37 >> Staff, we have gone -- Council -- worked with staff
so long.
Mary Samaniego was our staff planner.
We appreciate all her efforts and David Hay as well.
We filed a number of plans.
We have had two DRC Development Review Committee
meetings and their initial concerns quite honestly were
less than favorable because they thought our first
attempt did not treat the right-of-way with front face
the oriented units to the right-of-way.
They felt that they needed to provide and require us to
have more pedestrian internal circulation and also some
tree preservation efforts.
My client took those comments to heart.
Went back, we asked for continuance of a couple hearing
cycles.
And acquired the southeast corner, this parcel here,
and incorporated that into the PD.
What that did is change the orientation of those units
from perpendicular to parallel that relate to the
right-of-way in both Paul and McElroy as well.
The important thing to note here is we have actually
provided the largest units.
3300 square feet on those right-of-way facing units.
With sidewalks, with pedestrian connections and with
those orientations and design.
Let me simply finish by saying this is a project that I
think is going to serve as a catalyst of this area.
We have spoken with the neighbors.
I've received a nice letter in the mail from a
gentleman who owns all the property in the south side
of Paul avenue.
They fully support this.
He did not attend tonight's hearing but I have a letter
in the file I'll enter into the record shortly.
We have a number of waivers but they are minor.
I would say almost scrivener type correcting, although
we're at 80, 90% of compliance, they still require
formal waivers.
We are preserving the trees along the right of way.
We have to extend public water and sewer, build
sidewalks, we have to bring in fill.
A number of requirements including underground
stormwater management systems.
So, this I think our client should be commended for
sticking his neck out and coming into this type of area
that is zoned CI and has some difficult transitions.
If I can just show a graphic, Council.
This is an elevation proposed.
Contemporary design.
Also provided the elevations on the second sheet of the
site plan, three story fill, with balconies as well.
You know the zoning pattern.
This is the relationship Ms. Feeley was making
reference to.
You are -- McElroy facing south, this is my client's
property.
This is John's service repair and auto service.
Not most attractive land use.
My client has asked for an increase of two feet to the
wall.
You can see the grade change almost by three feet.
While we have an opportunity to take that up on
retainer wall later on the front portion.
This is the extent of the six foot wall.
This should be 8-foot wall, which is still several feet
under the existing fence of John's service.
So with that we appreciate your support.
Be happy to answer any questions.
We have complete unanimous approval recommendations.
Mr. Steenson and I have talked several times and I
believe he's prepared to offer his recorded message as
well.
Thank you very much.
07:37:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers?
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 7,
REZ 14-80.
But Mr. Steenson.
Anyone else but Mr. Steenson?
I'm only joking with you.
Come on up.
I want to see if all of us were awake.
07:37:26 >> Al Steenson, 4100 west Leila, Tampa, 33616.
We discussed this at the last meeting.
I believe back in 2006, Mr. Horner referred to, we had
no issues with this particular development.
But as he stated, time ran out and so did the market.
And as you can see tonight, this is my fourth trip to
the microphones.
Things are looking up down there.
We have no objection to this.
There was a conversation, not a lengthy one, regarding
the possible effects on traffic on Westshore.
But as I tried to explain to the membership, there are
planned improvements down the pike for Gandy and
Westshore.
And hopefully that will relieve some of this.
33 units in our view does not create a great deal many
more trips than what's going on further down the
street.
So, with that being said, we have no objections to it
and good night.
That's the last you're going to see of me this evening.
07:38:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
We are all disappointed.
[ Laughter ]
07:38:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mr. Horner, you got rebuttal if you
care to use it.
07:38:42 >> Only to say, Mr. Miranda, I misspoke when indicated
eight-foot wall was being proposed.
It's an eight-foot fence, which is noted in the site
plan.
07:38:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone else in the audience care to
speak on this item, REZ 14-80?
Motion to close by Mr. Suarez, second by Mr. Reddick on
a close vote with Ms. Mulhern.
All in favor of the motion to close, please indicate by
saying aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Cohen, would you kindly take number 7, please.
07:39:13 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Move an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 4806 and 4810 West McElroy Avenue
and 4807 west Paul avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida
and more particularly described in section 1, from
zoning district classifications CI commercial intensive
to PD planned development, residential, single-family
attached, providing an effective date.
07:39:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Have a motion by Mr. Cohen, sorry, I
think Mr. Reddick beat out Mr. Suarez for second.
All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
07:39:51 >> Motion carried with Capin being absent.
Second reading and adoption on March 5th, 9:30 a.m.
07:40:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you very much for attending.
Item number 8.
07:40:05 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Item number 8.
Abbye Feeley, land development.
Item number 8, REZ 14-81.
It is located at 1003, 1007, 1009, 1011, 1015 east
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. boulevard and 1002, 1004,
1006, 1008, 1012 and 1014 East 33rd Avenue.
It is located in the east Tampa overlay district.
The request before you tonight is an RS-50, residential
single-family and CG commercial general to PD planned
development office, business professional warehouse and
wholesale trade, climate controlled mini warehouse and
residential single-family detached.
07:40:49 >> Good evening, Councilmembers, David Hay with your
planning commission staff.
I have been sworn.
We head out of South Tampa and move over to the central
Tampa planning district.
The approximately 2.19-acre subject site is located on
the south side of east Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard between north 10th street and north
12th street.
In the Ybor Heights neighborhood.
The subject site falls within the boundaries of the
East Tampa urban village, the East Tampa CRA and is
located within a mixed use corridor as defined by the
Tampa comprehensive plan.
East Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard is
designated transit emphasis corner and HART's route 32
connects to the West Tampa transfer station and that
park and a number of other transit routes are located
within the proximity to the subject site.
Onto the aerial.
Here we have east Dr. Martin Luther King, 33rd avenue,
Nebraska Avenue is off the map to the left.
The area contains a mixture of light and heavy
commercial uses and residential support uses, like day
cares and churches along east Dr. Martin Luther King
junior Boulevard.
Single detached uses could be found from east 33rd
avenue south and from east Ida Street north.
In the aerial, you can also make out the nearby
Walgreen's at the southeast corner of Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. Boulevard and north Nebraska avenue.
You can also make out the Tampa Bay federal credit
union building to the southeast of the subject site.
Finally onto the future land use map, the subject site
has two future land use designations.
The red on the northside of the subject site and
running along east Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard is that community commercial 35 future land
use category.
The tan on the south side of the subject site and to
the south is the residential 10 future land use
category.
The pink color on the map are parcels designated that
community mixed use 35.
Since the parcel comprises two future land use
categories and the site is located within a designated
urban village, the subject site is given additional
flexibility to promote redevelopment.
Policy is a .1.7 lies planned developments that
incorporate lands within multiple land use designations
to proportionately weigh the overall floor area ratio
over the entire site and place any of the allowable
uses under those designations anywhere within the
proposed planned development.
With the clear understanding that all potential impacts
are adequately mitigated in accordance with objectives
and policies of the comprehensive plan and in
compliance with the city's land development code.
Applicant has worked with staff of the planning
commission and the city to ensure that the proposed
redevelopment mitigates for all potential impacts on
adjacent uses and the applicant has preserved a number
of trees and has always provided some affordable
housing.
Therefore, based on those findings and the eagles,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
Planning Commission staff finds the request consistent
with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
07:44:18 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Not going tow repeat the addresses for
you.
The request is from the RS-50 residential single-family
and commercial general district to PD planned
development.
Going to go ahead and show you the zoning atlas because
it puts this in a little more perspective I think from
what you can see on the plat that you have before you.
The property located in green, 33 to the south, 10th to
the west, the large PD is the Tampa Bay federal credit
union.
You can see that and I'll show you on the aerial that
the queuing area for the credit union extends almost
parallel to the proposed location for the uses that are
before you tonight.
Given that this property is within the East Tampa CRA
and the comprehensive plan policy allows for the
spreading of the intensity of this use throughout the
property, so, although this south end of the property
is a residential type of use, given that that policy,
that's why on the site plans before you see some
proposed open storage in that area, some proposed
parking in that area, some of those commercial uses may
be allowed to be spread, given the land use category
and the location of this property within the city.
Aerial is here.
The business that owns this property is looking to
locate there is actually located just to the east of
the subject site.
And the subject site is shown here for new yellow.
Again, the credit union and parcel you'll see, I'm
going to show you some pictures of the area.
One of the things I'd like you to consider when I'm
showing you the pictures is that tenth avenue there, is
a proposed access on that tenth avenue.
Transportation is objecting to that access.
Tenth is -- tenth street, I'm sorry, it's a very narrow
right-of-way.
I'll show that to you.
There is concern from transportation related to the
access that is proposed there.
You can see some auto turn on your site plan that shows
the semi moving in to that area.
There is no commercial access proposed on 33rd.
There is a single-family residence being proposed from
the southeast corner of the subject property that being
said, this application that is before you tonight is
the lowest density.
F.A.R. is a maximum of one by right up to two if you
the execute the bonus provisions are part of the city's
code, which will be three of the ten bonus provisions.
That development agreement will be coming back before
you with second reading of this application.
The applicant can speak to those.
My report or Mary's report before you tonight speaks to
those bonus criteria as well.
One of them, and the reason I digress to that is
because one of them is to keep the residential unit and
affordable housing unit.
So that would be committed to in the development
agreement it is one of the ten provisions you are
allowed to utilize to achieve bonus density.
Going to go ahead through the pictures.
I have a lot of them.
Large site.
I'm going to start over on Martin Luther King, this
area here.
If you have had a speeding ticket, that area there,
we're going to work our way, come around, come down
33rd.
I'll show you the south side of 33rd, then bring you
back up tenth and show you the northside of MLK.
This is driving, and this is CGM services current
location.
This is the start of the subject property.
Everything moving forward I'm going to show you is the
subject property.
Let you know when we get done with the subject
property, it's a large site.
So, this is moving west along MLK, approaching tenth.
This is all subject property.
This is at the intersection of tenth and MLK.
We're now going to go down tenth and I'm going to show
this is the east side of tenth.
Traveling south.
Approaching 33rd.
This is at the corner of 33rd and tenth.
So, coming around.
Here is 33rd and tenth and come down the street now.
This is the northside of 33rd.
This is still subject property.
This is subject property you can see almost up to MLK.
And I believe this would be adjacent to the subject
property to the east and to the east.
This is the south side of 33rd, now moving back toward
tenth.
So this is going to be approaching the rear of the
credit union.
You'll see three properties there and then you get to
the retention and the beginning of the parking queuing
for the credit union.
This fence then picks up and this is a look back at
Nebraska from 33rd.
So it is kind of a mix of uses in that area as far as
the south side of 33rd.
And the MLK portion.
This is at the northwest corner of MLK -- I mean of
tenth and 33rd.
So we're going to come back up tenth now.
This is that narrow street I was telling you about.
There are only like three properties on that west side.
So this is approaching MLK.
We're already back at MLK.
On tenth.
The view back.
Thought I had another photo.
This is the northside of MLK.
There is some residential on the northside of MLK.
Also a place of religious assembly immediately across
the street.
With preschool and parking for the College Hill
conference center is there and then there is some
retail there as well.
The request before you tonight does have four waivers.
I'll go over those.
The first one is a parking waiver.
The request is from 57 to 44 parking spaces.
This is a 23% reduction.
The second is to allow commercial traffic access to a
local.
And that's that tenth street access.
The third is to reduce the required number of loading
berths from five to three.
And the last is to reduce the required tree retention
from 50% to 35%.
This is a 2.19-acre site and as I stated to you
previously, they are requesting office business
professional, warehouse, warehouse trade, climate
controlled mini warehouse and residential single-family
detached, which is that one lot in the southeast
corner.
It has a split zoning right now with CG and the RS-50.
It does have the three street frontages on MLK, tenth
and 33rd.
All existing structures that are on the property would
be demolished.
And a new 97,800 square foot building with accessory
open storage and the detached dwelling unit would be
constructed on the site.
The proposed commercial building setbacks are north
along MLK, ten feet.
South along 33rd would be 100 feet.
The east would be 80 feet and the west would be
75 feet.
The proposed maximum building height is 50-foot.
The residential lot, the setbacks would be consistent
with the RS-50 with a 20-foot front, 20-foot rear and
7-foot side.
Maximum residential height would be 35 feet.
The property is surrounded by commercial general
zoning, place of religious assembly that I showed you,
training center and warehousing and then the credit
union and single-family dwellings.
Pursuant to the proposed intensity, the project is
required to comply with 27140 of the code.
This is those bonus criteria mentioned to you.
This property as I mentioned would have an opportunity
to go to a bonus of two.
They're at 1.08 F.A.R.
So they are just over the allowable one F.A.R.
We had discussed with the applicant the potential to
lower some of the square footage and be at the one,
which would not require any bonus.
It is their intent to move forward with the 1.08, which
does require them to do three of the ten bonus
criteria.
They are committing to, one is the development in area
of chronic economic distress.
This is in the East Tampa CRA so it does qualify for
that as a bonus.
This second is a transit stop and the last is the
detached single-family residential, which will be
maintained as affordable housing.
These commitments are being facilitated through
development agreement and that will be before you at
the time of second reading.
Should it be the pleasure of Council to approve the
request before you tonight, there are some
modifications in the staff report that need to be hand.
There are a couple from Land Development Coordination,
which is to address setbacks for the dumpster
enclosure.
Also to revise their F.A.R. calculations and lastly, to
revise their waiver.
There is a standing objection from transportation
related to the access to the local street and Jonathan
Scott is here to speak to that they also need to add
some notations that they will remove the abandoned
driveway from the site plan.
That the area below the loading space needs to be
modified.
I do have a revised revision sheet four and a mocked up
site plan for you with those revisions as well.
And that the revised provided parking to be 44 paces.
Lastly, natural resources needs a revised tree table
and that will be done in between first and second
reading as well.
Staff findings can be found on pages 4, 5 and 6 of your
report and we are available for any questions.
Thank you.
07:56:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Montelione?
, thank you, sir.
One of the questions I was going to ask you, you
already addressed, which is the, what were the three of
the ten criteria for the bonus density credits that
were being met.
Can you tell me what a transit accommodations are?
Because all I see is a bicycle.
07:56:21 >> typically the transit accommodations go into the
development agreement as a commitment to HART.
Sometimes they are made as a direct payment to HART.
And then HART applies that payment to a shelter within
the area.
Typically it's a commitment that goes into the
development agreement to complete those and then the
applicant works with HART at the time of permitting to
establish which shelter that would be and where it
would be located.
07:56:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Do we know where the closest bus
stop is to this property?
[Inaudible]
07:56:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Well, we'll ask the same question
when you get up to the podium.
Okay.
And.
07:57:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I do.
It is right in front of that blue and white.
There was a girl sitting on the bench when I took the
pictures.
That's a bad picture.
Hold on.
I have a better shot.
That's funny.
She was on her phone.
I was watching.
This is the southwest corner of MLK and tenth.
And that would be the nearest shelter, or the nearest
stop.
So, if they could work with HART, they would commit to
improving that shelter and other improvements for the
transit stop.
Sometimes it's direct improvements and the applicant
actually makes them at the time of construction.
Sometimes it is a contribution to HART and HART will
then install the improvements themselves.
07:58:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.
And there's one other thing that I have just a little
consternation about.
And that is, you said Jonathan is going to speak about
access on the tenth street, on the side street well,
looking at the site plan, the way the ingress and
egress falls, it's right in front of that sole
single-family residence on the block.
If it were a little bit further north, it would be in
front of the vocational training facility and not in
front of the single-family residence.
And I'm not sure...
07:59:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I may have another shot of that from
tenth.
I'll let Jonathan speak to that I also put up the site
plan because I momentarily want to speak for a moment.
One of the revisions is the revision she talked about
the removal of these spaces here.
The loading spaces for the business are going to be
here at the northeast side of the building.
So, that being -- they need this space here for
maneuvering.
So we're going to renew -- we were going to relocate
them here.
Mary did meet with Mary, to make sure that the
relocation was not impacting any of the trees, and they
spoke today and that was good too.
So I'm going to sketch you out the revised revision
sheet and this site plan that would be attached.
So these would be some additional modifications that we
would be looking for as well.
08:00:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
That's all the questions I have.
Thank you.
08:00:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Reddick?
08:00:13 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you.
I just want to follow up reservation I have and than is
about the transportation on tenth street.
I don't know if Jonathan is going to answer these
questions.
I do agree with transportation that that is a very,
very narrow street, tenth.
And if they're going to utilize commercial vehicles to
come down tenth street, I don't see how that's going to
be feasible.
And I don't know if -- do you have a recommendation for
alternative route?
Because tenth street is too narrow.
08:00:52 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Councilmember Reddick, I wanted to let
you know that when we had the discussion among staff, I
did talk to Mary Samaniego in relationship to solid
waste servicing the site and whether solid waste would
need that access.
Sometimes we end up having to service the site that
way.
She said we would note need that access.
That if that access were closed off, solid waste could
still safely service the site.
And have ingress and egress on MLK.
In case that comes under consideration.
Thank you.
08:01:22 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you.
08:01:23 >> Jonathan Scott, transportation planning.
We did look at that.
We had them run some auto turns on that street.
We had them run the auto turn to make sure the truck
can get through.
Typically it is a narrow street.
We thought that you can still get a truck down it.
We just object any time there's a local street access,
local streets are mainly just for residential, so we'll
object.
But, I don't know what else to say.
We were going to have to move some parking spaces.
Any other questions?
08:02:36 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Let me ask you.
If they're going to have storage space on their
property and that mean they're going to have
deliverables coming to that business.
And either that, they're going to have to come off MLK,
tenth street or 33rd.
08:02:55 >> Not on 33rd.
08:02:58 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Nothing on 33rd?
So either tenth or MLK.
08:03:02 >> That's correct.
08:03:03 >>FRANK REDDICK:
All right.
And I don't know which side delivery trucks might be,
but looking at the capacity of these deliverable trucks
I'm pretty sure they're not going to be minivans.
And, because they're commercial vehicles.
And having to come down tenth, which is very narrow,
that's why I have a problem with this proposal.
So I'm hoping they got some alternative plans when they
make their presentation because I travel that road
every day.
And I pass your current facility every day and I just
can't see having these commercial vehicles coming down
tenth street.
That's all I'm going to say.
08:03:53 >> I'll let the applicant follow-up on that then.
08:03:57 >>HARRY COHEN:
If there are other Councilmembers that
have questions or comments?
Councilwoman Montelione wanted the floor.
08:04:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you, Jonathan, don't go away.
Can you put that diagram back up on the Elmo with the
auto turn?
08:04:11 >> Sorry, I missed that.
08:04:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Can you put the diagram back up so I
can see the auto turn?
Okay.
So, you see where the indicator is to install a no left
turn sign?
Right at the driveway.
08:04:33 >> Yes.
08:04:35 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.
So, that spot where it kind of bolds out, you know, it
shows the path of the vehicle coming in, so the inside
curve is Tampa boundary of where that vehicle may go.
And the lower one is, you know, that's the space, give
or take where that vehicle is going to turn in.
08:05:02 >> That's correct.
08:05:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The inner most line is intersecting
with the bulb out for the island.
So, if that vehicle makes enough of those turns at a
sharp enough angle, it's going to be jumping that curb
every single time.
So that sign is going to be a goner.
Again, Mr. Reddick already pointed out that it's a very
narrow street.
So you can see, you can see the path of the vehicle
even going north and south, the auto turn corrects in
an almost squiggly kind of fashion.
This is a two-way street, correct?
If there's a car coming the other way, the auto turn
doesn't show the car going the other direction.
It only shows the potential path of the commercial
vehicle turning in.
08:06:10 >> That is correct.
It is narrow there.
08:06:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
So you're not showing two-way
traffic on that street, would mean that whoever is
coming the other direction would have to wait for that
truck to turn in before they could go, because they're
not both going to fit in that space at the same time.
And again, my concern is that it's right in front of
that single-family residence, so not only is it going
to be a tight turn and they may be jumping that curb
and whoever is going the other direction is going to
have to wait because the street's not wide enough, to
make matters worse, it's right in front of the only
house on that block.
08:06:48 >> Good point.
08:06:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
If that ingress and egress were to
be closed, would transportation approve of all of the
traffic coming in at Martin Luther King, Jr.?
08:07:02 >> We wouldn't have a problem with that that's
typically what our code requires.
So I mean, that's a possibility certainly.
08:07:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.
Thank you.
08:07:17 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any other questions or
comments from Councilmembers before we go to the
petitioner?
Petitioner?
Please state your name and address for the record.
08:07:29 >> Duane Milford, 7720 Pullara Drive, Odessa.
And I have been sworn in and I'm here representing Mike
Charles, the owner of these properties and the
applicant for this case.
He's with us tonight.
We also have Bill Isley, who is our development and
construction consultant as well as Albert Alfonso and
Jessie Shell from Alfonso architect who are going to be
talk in a minute about the building.
I'd like to talk a little bit about how we got to where
we are here.
Similar to Mr. Horner's case a little bit earlier, I
believe we have submitted three site plans.
We have had two DRC meetings.
We actually started with a larger piece of property.
We were about 2.6 acres.
We had a larger building.
We had three single-family residential units all along
33rd avenue.
After some discussion with staff about a lot of issues
that range from size to trees we were saving and a lot
of things, we actually decreased the footprint of the
property a little bit.
Decreased the footprint of the commercial building.
At one point we dropped from three to two residential
units.
And then finally really to save what is probably the
two nicest trees on the property, we relocated and
reshaped our open storage area along 33rd avenue and
reduced our residential units down to just one.
Originally we were looking at three affordable housing
units and that just got smaller and smaller for other
reasons.
I think what I would like to do now -- and I want to
talk about the waivers we're requesting.
Sounds like we need to probably focus a little bit on
the driveway on tenths street.
Do I want to address the other three.
Let me go ahead and do this though.
One of our density bonus provisions was referred to a
little bit earlier was the transit stop improvements
for HART.
And Abbye located where the current stop is.
There's a sign and a bench.
And Hartline has asked us to improve that location, to
put the covered shelter.
It would probably have, you know, at least a garbage
can.
There was something else I think they asked to go
there.
They sent us the specs on that their preference is that
we build those improvements per their specs.
And as I understand it, the development agreement is
being rewritten by the city attorney's office so that
we would do that as HART has requested.
We do have the other, the two other bonus density
provisions we have talked about.
One of the first folks we met with on this project was
Ed Johnson from the East Tampa district.
Very receptive to our project and we were -- he worked
real well with us and we appreciate that.
Before I get into the nitty-gritty of some of the
waivers, I want to ask Albert Alfonso and Jessie to
talk a little bit about the building.
08:11:08 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Let me just pose a question to you.
You indicated that you met with Ed Johnson and East
Tampa partnership.
Did you meet with the partnership itself?
Because Ed works for the partnership.
The partnership doesn't work for Ed.
So did you meet with the partnership?
08:11:24 >> We met with Mr. Johnson.
08:11:28 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Mr. Johnson cannot speak for the
partnership.
08:11:30 >> Okay.
08:11:31 >>FRANK REDDICK:
So I just want to go on record saying
that.
The people you need to meet with is the people in the
partnership.
08:11:38 >> I understood he was bringing any concerns they would
have.
08:11:44 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Mr. Johnson is a city employee.
Those are residents of the partnership.
So those are the people you need to meet with.
Just wanted to put that on the record.
08:11:52 >> We did, I think there were two neighborhood
associations in addition to surrounding neighbors that
we had to -- well in that case, with the associations,
not only the letters, but the actual plan sets.
I then called, contacted city staff to find out if they
had the phone numbers for these associations and I was
told by Mary Samaniego that they did not.
I went on the web sites for these associations.
They both had e-mail contacts.
One of them, link was broken.
The other one, my e-mail went, I never got a response.
So I tried the best I could to reach out to those
associations.
Now I did not ask Mr. Johnson if I could speak to the
people he represented, if that was something I missed,
I missed it, but I assumed that he was bringing any
concerns he had and there were none.
08:12:53 >>HARRY COHEN:
Question from Councilwoman Montelione.
08:12:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Maybe from Ms. Feeley or -- there
you are.
When we have applicants, and they have to do notice,
right?
Isn't it the office of neighborhood empowerment that
provides the contact information for the neighborhood
associations?
08:13:26 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
The neighborhood registry is maintained
by the neighborhood.
08:13:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
So I'm confused.
Why would Mary say we didn't have contact information
for -- I mean Seminole Heights, for instance, they're
pretty active.
08:13:43 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I do not believe the registry does have
telephone numbers associated with those.
Which is what they were looking for.
Let me -- I can pull the registry up right now and show
you --
08:13:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The registry might not because
they're individuals, personal, you know, home telephone
numbers.
So I can see we wouldn't publish those online for
anybody to have.
But if Land Development Coordination were to call
neighborhood empowerment and talk to Carla or Moray,
I'm sure they would be more than happy to provide a
correct e-mail.
Because it may have been updated and maybe T and I
didn't get the updated on the registry and a phone
number.
08:14:31 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Not typical protocol that we would do.
I don't know that I've ever been approached for a
telephone number of a neighborhood contact in my number
of years in this position.
I would think we'd be more than happy to do that if
that information was available to us.
I do not know if Mary knew that or not.
She didn't come to me to speak about it.
08:14:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I can't imagine you've never given
out a phone number for neighborhood association in all
the years you've been with the city.
08:14:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I haven't.
And I'm under oath too.
[ Laughter ]
08:15:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
We have a lot of people come here
and say I've spoken on the telephone.
Maybe it's because of the notice they receive in the
mail and people call them.
08:15:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Let me take a look for a minute.
Maybe while you continue to hear the case and take a
look.
08:15:22 >>HARRY COHEN:
We'll move on with the hearing and come
back to this item in a moment.
08:15:26 >> But I thought I tried my best to reach out to those
folks.
They did get the plan sets in the mail.
Neither I 0 as, and my phone number was on the letter
Mr. Charles' phone number was on the letter.
Neither one of us got phone calls.
So, we thought we tried our best.
If I could, I'll ask Mr. Alfonso and Ms. Shell to come
up for a minute.
08:15:52 >> Hello, Council.
Albert Alfonso, this is Jesse shell.
We have not been sworn.
08:16:04 >>HARRY COHEN:
If there's anyone else in the audience
planning on or even small chance they might speak
tonight, now would be a good time to be sworn in.
[Oath administered by Clerk]
08:16:16 >> I'm going to be brief.
It's been a long night.
The project I've known Mike Charles for probably 30
years.
And you know, his company CGM is kind of the lock
standing pillars of our community.
Gives back a lot.
And I think the fact that he's coming into this area,
which is an area that could really use some economic
development and spending over $5 million and actually
going through and hiring an architect like us, where
typically these kinds of buildings don't hire
architects.
They just sort of throw up tilt wall buildings.
So, Mike is about doing quality things.
He's actually pushing the architecture of this building
type further than you would.
We all know what these buildings typically kind of look
like.
And so, I would ask that, you know, we help him any way
we can.
Staff has been wonderful, as they always are, kind of
getting us through this process.
So if there's any questions that you have really about
the architecture, we're open to answer those.
08:17:36 >>HARRY COHEN:
Well, it sounds like from what everyone
has said that the real concern here is about the tenth
street access.
So, do you have any thoughts since you, I assume,
designed this, what the alternatives would be that
might be acceptable?
08:17:52 >> Unfortunately, there is an alternative that exits
two times on Martin Luther King.
And we believe and I know that Mike Charles would love
to speak to this, he's chomping at the bit because he
says he has driven up and down that tenth avenue for 30
years.
But, the egress off of MLK gets really close to the
intersection of, if we just sort of spit it right out
on MLK, we think that's actually less safe because it's
right next to the tenth street intersection.
So, we actually feel it's a little bit safer to come
off of tenth.
08:18:33 >> I'm Mike Charles.
I know several of you.
Probably run into everyone of you over the years.
Been down there on MLK for 36 years now.
I've been dreaming about doing this project since I
first got there.
Codes and things have changed a few years since 1982.
But we feel that this is a great project for the
neighborhood.
And you know, I listen to you all talk about tenth
street.
Tenth street is 150 feet long.
Tenth street is something that my vehicles that are on
the lot right next to it have been going in and out of
tenth street for 30 years now.
There really isn't another option.
We gave away another cut into another street to try to
make this work.
I own the property across the street on tenth.
The nice lady that I've known now for 35 years, her
husband passed away a few years ago, she's getting
ready to move back to the far east, and I'm probably
going to be buying her house anyway.
But, all being said, this beautiful building and my
dreams for 30 years of acquiring all this property
piece at a time, is not going to work unless we get
that tenth street cut.
And, quite frankly, tenth street dead ends into the
credit union property.
Dead ends to MLK.
There is no through traffic there, unless you're going
around my block.
And we appreciate everything and we'd really like to
get this project moved forward and when we're done with
this project, it will be closer to an $8 million
investment in the City of Tampa.
And we're looking forward to that.
Thank you.
08:20:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone else?
Mr. Reddick?
08:20:49 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you, Mr. Charles, let me say for
the record that your employees installed my first
carrier unit at my house.
[ Laughter ]
08:21:01 >>FRANK REDDICK:
From the same facility on MLK.
And only concerns I have is that tenth street because
you are going to have supplies coming into your
storming facility.
And I don't think those delivery trucks are going to be
the size of your vehicles that you have sitting out
there now.
They're going to be larger.
08:21:26 >> Well, we get a few tractor-trailers every now and
then.
But the bulk of our trucks that come in and out of CGM,
are 22, 24-footers.
They're not tractor-trailers.
And we try to accommodate when we do have a
tractor-trailer coming through there, to where they can
come in and swing around the whole property.
Because you know, you know, right now they stop on MLK,
they back up, I got my, you know, in the mornings, we
got safety issues on MLK trying to get in and out of my
business right now.
And we feel that this is going to make it safer.
You know, we're note going to have that situation where
people are coming down MLK and then there's a truck
stopping.
Like we have now.
I mean, we have had some pretty close encounters on
MLK.
And we feel that coming into tenth street, that little
dead end at both end streets, that we can swing in, you
know, it's an owner-occupied property.
And we feel it's going to be beneficial and I don't
feel that the tenth street issue is going to affect
anybody because the one house that is on tenth street
actually faces 33rd.
08:22:44 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Okay.
Well, I hope between first and second reading that this
is approved tonight, that you and your staff will give
some great consideration to an alternative route just
in case we might need to protect that little house
that's sitting on tenths street.
08:23:03 >> I understand.
And we have spent a lot of hours and a lot of changes.
We have cut the building down.
We have decreased its economic viability significantly
by losing that extra space.
Still with all that said, I feel it is a project I have
to do here in Tampa, as, you know, member of our
community.
08:23:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Air conditioning still unit?
08:23:33 >> No, it shut down.
[ Laughter ]
08:23:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Things don't look so good.
[ Laughter ]
08:23:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Montelione?
, thank you.
And Mr. Reddick and I are tag teaming you on this one.
If you could come -- no, Mr. Charles.
So, tenth street dead ends into the credit union
property.
08:24:01 >> Yes, ma'am.
08:24:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
And what I said before is about
two-way traffic on tenth street.
So, the parking lot for the credit union, folks who are
coming and going from the credit union would come down
maybe 33rd and go to 12th?
08:24:19 >> Well, actually --
08:24:20 >> LISA MONTELIONE:
But, let me finish.
I'm thinking, you know, people love shortcuts and if
they want to get out to MLK, the shortest route is
tenth because it's right there, rather than going all
the way down.
So, in your experience that you've been on the property
so long, what's the habit of folks at the credit union?
08:24:48 >> Thankfully, all the inlets and outlets to the credit
union are on the south side of their property that all
go out to residential houses directly across the
street.
08:25:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I don't like that.
That's already under the bridge.
08:25:04 >> There are actually, if I remember correctly, there
are no entrances onto to 33rd from the credit union.
I believe there might be one very close to Nebraska
Avenue, where they have their credit, their cash
machine up there.
But as far as traffic from the credit union down 33rd,
very, very little.
08:25:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Down tenth you mean?
08:25:32 >> Down 33rd from the credit union.
Very little.
I own all the property across the street also own a few
lots on the south side of 33rd that we're putting two
new houses on.
So, it's pretty much love affair in that area for me.
You know, there really isn't a lot of traffic.
It's just a very small street.
08:25:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.
I guess the reason why the curb cut, the ingress,
egress on tenth is, I can't tell how many feet off of
MLK it is would be for those trucks, that vehicle size
to get down to make that turn.
If it were any further north, even a little bit further
north, that then they'd have a tough time negotiating
the turn.
08:26:26 >> The setup that we're showing there, we should have
no issues getting vehicles in and out.
08:26:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
No, what I'm looking at -- so if
you're looking at the site plan, all right.
There's one right there next to you.
So, go to where the ingress egress is tenth.
It's about two thirds the way down tenth street.
And what I'm saying is if that were a little bit closer
to MLK, would those trucks still have a problem getting
in?
08:27:00 >> Well, you know, if you're going to try to get in the
property somewhere around here, you may have issues
with people getting ready to turn in tenth street or
something, there's a truck there.
Then they stop on tenth street and then there's
somebody rear ending them on MLK.
And that's the reason why we moved it down here.
We also took off, the part here and we made this area
wider than what we normally do prior to that swing
pattern of the vehicle.
08:27:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Right.
It's a swing pattern I pointed out earlier because it
looks like on the diagram that Jonathan had, the swing
is still going to cut that corner and take out the
proposed left-hand turn only sign.
[Inaudible]
08:27:48 >> But what we did here, where we come in we also made
it to where we took some more property and put an area
over here for them to stop and be out of the way of our
traffic pattern on our property.
Now, some of the things we have done during this
process, one, we brought the buildings further back
from tenth street, like we requested.
And took 25 feet off that end of the building.
We shortened it up this way.
We also brought the buildings further away from MLK to
give much better exposure, so when you're driving down
Martin Luther King.
We kept the big tree here.
[Inaudible] we're keeping this for storage, even though
it's not that good a storage for me because I can
[Inaudible] my warehouse typically keeps things outside
in this new planned development situation because we're
in a jazz neighborhood.
08:28:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
And the reason why you didn't want
to do, or had looked at I would imagine one of the
iterations is the U-shaped driveway, both exits and
entrances over MLK is because of the traffic on MLK.
08:29:15 >> Yes.
If we were to put an entry here, vehicles, people are
going to stop and pull in here and there are going to
be accidents right here, just like there are down here.
That's what we're trying to eliminate.
I mean, I had cars trying to drive in front of my
building.
We have had accidents there.
We feel by bringing this down here that we have
addressed some of the concerns.
08:29:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
One last question because that is a
state road, right, MLK is a state road.
And Jonathan might need to answer this.
Does FDOT allow another curb cut on MLK?
Or would that be out of the question?
Because oftentimes when we have access, asking for a
waiver to access from a side road it's because FDOT
won't allow the curb cut on MLK [Inaudible]
08:30:11 >> I got like five curb cuts.
We're eliminating all those curb cuts along here and
keeping this one.
All the others eliminate one every 50 feet.
08:30:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
And that's all I have for you,
Mr. Charles.
And you are very charitable.
I've attended many a function that you have sponsored.
So thank you for your work in the community.
08:30:36 >> And one other thing -- I forgot.
Never mind.
[ Laughter ]
08:30:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Look at your hair and Mr. Suarez's
hair.
08:30:53 >> At least we got it.
[ Laughter ]
08:30:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Fine good look held of hair he's got, my
friend.
08:31:01 >> Jonathan Scott, planning, follow up the on your
question about that.
08:31:20 >> I was asking if talked to DOT about putting
another -- it's too close to the corner.
Wouldn't let them have it that close.
08:31:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
All right.
Thank you.
08:31:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Let me just say this.
I know that area pretty well.
I had never been in the corner building, that's the one
you go get your traffic tickets and thank God I
haven't.
But when you get to 12th, you make a right heading
south.
Tenth street doesn't, from tenth to 33rd, that's it.
It doesn't continue past 33rd.
So therefore, in fact, if you want to see a modular
home, there's one the corner of 33rd and 12th.
And you take 12th, 12th is almost, it's a pretty good
traveled road.
And there have been numerous accidents that I've
witnessed, I have friends that run Dixie service
station I go by once in a while, used to talk to them
and reminisce about the old days in the neighborhood.
But 12th street is a street that, it's pretty wide.
Not perfect but it's nice size.
And I think if you start the curb cuts that were
eliminated, I think are for the betterment of society
and you won't have that many accidents there because
right now, coming out of 12th crossing the four lane,
there's no light there.
You look at the police reports, there's been numerous
accidents.
I mean, I'm not there all the time but I've seen them
there I don't think that from what I heard that tenth
street is going to be a detriment to anybody, would be
a detriment to this proposal if it's not done the way
it's presented because of the area that would put on
the record about the depth of tenth street and turns
and cars backing up and somebody going to get hit and
it won't be feasible.
08:33:15 >> You're saying it wouldn't be feasible if we moved it
closer to MLK?
08:33:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Right.
08:33:20 >> If I could say a couple things about this issue and
unless you all have questions I'll leave the other
three waivers alone.
I think they're pretty straightforward, I would
imagine.
I didn't, when I introduced myself, I am Mr. Charles'
civil engineer on this project.
I have spoken with DOT.
They would never allow a driveway at that location.
In fact, we're closing about three driveways along MLK,
as you spoke of.
They're considering this a safety upgrade.
For this driveway to be closer would be more of a
safety concern, being closer to a busier road than down
closer to 33rd.
Originally we had a narrower driveway and when Jonathan
asked us to put the, to run the auto turn -- and by the
way, this vehicle, this is a WB 50 is the designation,
this is a full-blown tractor-trailer.
So these are not Mr. Charles' normal delivery vehicles.
I did previously ask Mr. Charles how often this
tractor-trailer is coming.
And it sounds from what I gathered based on how his
operations work, we're looking at during the weekdays,
about four times.
So we're talking about this vehicle coming four times.
When we originally laid the auto turn on there, it did
cut the driveway.
And we widened the driveway and if we could zoom in
actually it does not--we moved the driveway to be
honest with you, to almost fit the template in auto
turn.
We would be ape to make that a little bit wider on the
northside.
There's no reason to make it wider down on the south
side.
But we could make it wider, larger radius on the
northside, move that sign you talk about over a little
bit.
And that would make that work.
The delivery locations over here, these are the more
typical vehicles that are coming to the mini warehouse
facility.
This is a U-Haul, 20-foot U-Haul or whatever they are.
And there's plenty of room over here for those.
But that's the tractor-trailer.
And we feel like for this thing to have proper ingress
and egress, again, we're talking about four times a
week, this is the best location.
Mr. Charles alluded to a third driveway that we
presented to staff and they didn't like at all.
And that was down here on 33rd.
It was when our open storage area was shaped a little
bit differently.
We were trying to put that across the street from the
credit union and not across the street from a house.
But in talking to staff, we decided to get rid of that
driveway, and so we have the one on tenth, the one on
MLK and we believe for this facility to operate safely
and for the roads around to be maintained in a safe
way, we do need these two access points.
08:36:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.
Anyone in the audience -- this is a public hearing,
anyone care to speak in this hearing, file REZ 14-81,
please come forward.
Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by
Ms. Montelione.
All in favor of the motion to close, please indicate by
saying aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Ms. Montelione, would you kindly take number eight
please.
08:36:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you, sir.
I move an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 1003, 1017, 1009, 1011, and 1015
east Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and 1002,
1004, 1006, 1008, 1012 and 1014 east 33rd avenue in the
City of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly described
in section 1, from zoning district classifications CG
commercial general and RS-50 residential single-family
to PD planned development, office, business and
professional warehouse and wholesale trade, climate
controlled mini warehouses and residential
single-family detached, providing an effective date,
with the waivers and changes that staff needs to make,
or asked to be made to the site plan between first and
second reading.
08:37:32 >> Second.
08:37:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, I
have a second by Mr. Suarez.
Abbye, does that meet all the items you need?
08:37:45 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Yes.
I handed out a revised.
08:37:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Revised revision sheet?
08:37:52 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I did.
08:37:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I said the changes that staff
requested to be made between first and second reading.
I didn't call it a revised revision sheet.
08:38:01 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Did I provide it to you.
So if you will enter that into the record, that would
be the changes we'd like in between first and second
reading.
08:38:08 >> We're talking about the sheet that Ms. Abbye brought
in to us.
08:38:13 >> I provided that to the clerk.
08:38:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
All right.
I have that motion on the floor by Ms. Montelione,
second by Mr. Suarez.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
I the ayes have it unanimously.
Yes, sir?
08:38:31 >> Motion carried with Capin being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be March 5th,
9:30 a.m.
08:38:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Members of Council, it came to my
attention there may be a request for a walk-on next
week to set a public hearing for the development
agreement that's associated with that.
Is that correct?
08:38:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'm not aware about a walk-on for
next week.
Happens, it happens.
08:38:55 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I think that staff wanted to make you
aware this evening there are two items on your agenda
tonight.
They both have development agreements and it would be
our intent to come back next Thursday morning and walk
them on so they can could run with second readings.
08:39:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I would bring them and not walk them
on.
It takes a long time for them to get here by
themselves.
[ Laughter ]
08:39:16 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Yes, sir, thank you.
08:39:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Go to item number 9.
08:39:39 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Abbye Feeley, Land Development
Coordination.
Item number 9 is REZ 15-01, it's located at 401 West
Kennedy Boulevard and is the University of Tampa.
The request before you tonight is from PD-A, planned
development alternative and CG commercial general and
CI, commercial intensive to PD-A.
I unfortunately have lost Mr. Hay due to a family
emergency for the remainder of the evening.
So I'm going to play Planning Commission too.
Looks like he did not leave me 15-01.
But I do have his report in the back of mine.
So, I'll just read from there momentarily.
The University of Tampa has an underlying land use of
regional mixed use 100, urban mixed use 60 and the
majority of it is a public quasi-public land use
category, which has an unlimited F.A.R.
It is located in the central Tampa planning district.
And approximately .70 acres that we're talking about
tonight.
States the site is being brought into the existing
acreage of the campus designated with the RMU 100.
The primary purpose of the RMU 100 is encourage and
maintain areas suitable for high rise rest definition,
major office and regional serving commercial
development that because of their need for space
significant vehicular access or intensity of use
require related, require locations related to major
transportation facilities.
It is on a mixed use corridor as defined by the Tampa
comprehensive plan and the Planning Commission did find
the request consistent.
I don't know if any of you caught the article this the
payments this morning about the application that's
before you tonight.
We recently this Council recently back in 2011 rezoned
the university to bring in parts of property that had
been acquired in order to allow for comprehensive
master development.
Since the time of the rezoning in 2011, the university
has acquired a couple other additional properties.
They are on the corners of Boulevard and Kennedy.
And they had come to the city, approached us about
putting an entry feature there into the university,
much like they have at some of the other entry points
along Cass and also along Kennedy.
Given that the larger university is a PD-A, we can't
have the land sit being throughout Alaska commercial
and be serving the PD-A.
So what's before you tonight is really bringing those
pieces in to the PD-A so they can put those entry
features there and also an increase in entitlements.
The increase in entitlements is going from 1.5 million
square feet to 1.8 million square feet.
And an increase in the number of this beds from 4,000
to 5,000.
Go ahead and show you some pictures and also just to
speak, the pieces we're really talking about are these
pieces here.
If you've been by the university lately, there is a
Thompson building expansion that was reviewed through
the site plan review process currently under
construction.
New dormitories that have been completed.
I'll show you some pictures much.
The site was at 91 acres.
And I believe this puts it at -- it was 90.2 acres and
with the .8 acres that is adding, the university is now
92.
This is the entry off of Cass.
I ran out and got this morning, was such a beautiful
morning this morning, I just had to pull in and take
this shot.
I do all my own photos.
[ Laughter ]
08:44:40 >> I did.
Notice none of them are labeled telling you what
direction they are.
This is the northeast corner of Boulevard and Kennedy.
This is one of those pieces that is now coming into the
university.
This is that Thompson building expansion I just spoke
to you of.
This is that other corner, northwest corner immediately
adjacent to the out post.
This would be where those entry signs features would be
going.
Those are not included often this rezoning as we'll
handle those through the incremental site plan approval
process.
This is a shot from the western parcel that I just
showed you looking towards the eastern parcel.
This is to the west.
Little shot down Kennedy.
This is the southwest corner of Boulevard and Kennedy.
Southeast corner and here are some more, I just took a
couple of the different entries.
This is the south side of Kennedy, which immediately
interfaces with the historic portions of the campus.
These were some shots just from around Tampa as I took
a ride this morning.
Obviously, it's very difficult to show you 92 acres in
just a few pictures.
There are no modifications required in between first
and second reading.
The staff did find this request consistent and we're
available for any questions.
Thank you.
08:46:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions?
Petitioner?
Why.
08:46:11 >> Good evening, Council, I'm John LaRocca of Murphy
LaRocca consultant, agent for the applicant.
My address is 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, 33602.
To be brief this evening, Abbye did a good job
summarizing what is before you this evening with this
petition to amend two -- three parcels of property
acquired by the University of Tampa, zoned CI and CG,
adding it to the PD-A zoning that was reviewed and
approved going on five years now.
Just for quick reference, if I may on the projector,
illustrate three parcels, northeast corner of Kennedy
and Boulevard and then two parcels on the north --
excuse me, northeast corner and then two parcels on the
northwest corner that are really triggered the request
for rezoning.
As Abbye indicated, those parcels are going to be
developed with monument signage that would further
identify entering that area of the campus and will
certainly improve that particular intersection.
Because the standards were all established in the
zoning from four and a half, almost five years ago, we
needed to add that property into the request.
So at the same time as Abbye indicated, we did some
updates to the plan with regard to the land use
schedule and entitlement of uses.
All development and specific development will be
reviewed through the incremental review process.
Our team is here this evening if you need to have any
questions answered with regard to the proposal.
But again, this request is adding just under an acre.
We're not changing any of the conditions, other than
updating the references to the codes that have been
ended over the last year, year and a half for
reference points.
But it's the same site plan, same conditions adding the
additional property to it.
We respectfully request your consideration and approval
this evening.
08:48:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers?
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 9, REZ
15-01?
15-01.
Item number nine.
I have a motion to close by Ms. Montelione, seconded by
Mr. Cohen.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Suarez, you're first on number nine.
08:48:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.
I present an ordinance for first reading consideration,
an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
of 401, 409 and 901 west Kennedy boulevard 108 and 202
North Boulevard, 110 and 114 north Brevard Avenue, 11 T
west north B street and 136 UT Poe Parkway in the City
of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly described in
section 1, from zoning district classification, PD-A
planned development, alternative, college, university
private, to CG commercial general and CI commercial
intensive to PD-A planned development alternative,
college, university private, providing an effective
date.
08:49:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by Mr. Suarez, second bring
Cohen.
Further discussion by Councilmembers in all in favor of
the motion, please indicate by saying aye.
76 opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
08:49:48 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried with Reddick and Mulhern
being absent at vote.
Second reading and adoption will be March 5th at
9:30 a.m.
08:49:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Congratulations to tour boys of
summer.
They've started their baseball season.
All right.
Item number 12.
Ten and 11 taken care of earlier.
08:50:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Item number 12, is REZ 15-08.
Located at 400 north Rome.
And the request before you tonight is from PD, planned
development residential multi-family to PD, planned
development residential multi-family.
This block is actually one of the last remnants of the
west end development.
West end was done in two phases.
And they contain multiple blocks.
A portion of this was back, not a portion of this
block, but immediately to the east of this block was
back before you year before last for the development of
the no holds loss project which was completed probably
of six months ago and leased up and has really changed
the fabric of this area.
Let me play Planning Commission in Mr. Hay's Tampa.
Just moving a few blocks to the north -- boy, if I had
to write out all mine, I'd never get here.
But let me put the map up.
We're in the central planning district.
2.92-acre site.
Subject takes up the whole block between Rome,
Freemont, Gray, falls within the west the urban village
and the boundaries of the north Hyde Park neighborhood.
Closest transit stop is approximately 1700 feet to the
south along West Kennedy Boulevard.
It's also designated transit emphasis corridor.
HART route 30 connects downtown Tampa with the
Westshore Business District and Tampa International
Airport.
Closest public park is the Vila Brother Park over on
Armenia, located approximately 2400 feet to the west.
Then he used my aerial.
GMU 24, the tan is residential ten.
And CMU 35.
Planning Commission staff found the rezoning request
planned development furthered the number of
comprehensive plan policies regarding development
within mixed use villages.
The building oriented toward surrounding public streets
with parking internal.
Proposed building is comparable and compatible to
emerging multi-family residential development pattern
within the portion of north Hyde Park neighborhood.
The site is within an area of the city that is planned
and programmed for additional density and intensity.
Above that above what can currently be found in the
general area.
Within the mixed use category can be guided either by
density or floor area and under the mixed use community
mixed use 35 future land use, you can get a maximum
254,390 square feet.
The proposal is at 239,126, which is 1.8 F.A.R. and
they actually -- this is the second project on your
agenda tonight that has the bonus.
Based on these findings, the goals objectives and
policies of the Tampa comprehensive plan, the Planning
Commission found this request consistent.
That being said, the request before you tonight is for
275 multi-family residential units.
This is a building that surrounds a structured garage.
The garage is internal and the facades are at a ten
foot minimum setback all the way around the block to
allow for some good planting space.
There are three waivers.
The first is a parking waiver.
It is listed on my report as 486 to 417.
However, it should be 413.
They would like 15% waiver.
The second is to allow loading to occur in more than
one continuous maneuver to allow maneuvering in the
right-of-way and the last is to reduce the required
multi-family green space from 350 a unit to 96.25 a
unit for a total of 69,780 square feet to be waived.
The property, I'll go ahead and show you, as I
mentioned, this is one of the last full blocks of west
end phase two.
That was rezoned back in 2007.
And it is Gray to the north.
Fig to the south.
Freemont to the south.
Rome to the east.
The PD you see here is the nova los PD.
It does span those three blocks and Gray street was
vacated, just to the east of this by this Council
probably 18, 24 months ago, maybe a little bit longer
than that.
Here is the site.
This aerial does display this first phase no hope
completed.
Other sections under construction.
And there is a mix of mini warehouse use, residential.
I'm going to show you pictures and take you around the
block.
Also you may recall there was a rezoning that placed
this portion of the PD, this atlas is not represented
above it.
Back to RS-50 and five single-family houses have been
developed there as infill development.
Going to take you real briefly through some pictures.
Show you all those changes in the area.
S this morning I headed out and it was great.
But this was my first stop.
This is from Rome Avenue looking west towards Freemont.
From Freemont looking back east toward Rome.
This is, I'm going to travel down Gray Street to the
northside of the property.
So this is the north part along Gray, that industrial,
there's some industrial mini warehouses that still
located there.
This is at the end of Gray, almost at Freemont.
That's the northeast corner.
Now I'm coming down, going to come down Freemont and
then come around on Fig.
This is at Freemont and Gray.
This is the southwest corner of Freemont and Gray.
This is the west side of Freemont.
This is now at Fig headed back east towards downtown.
On the south side, there's a little bit of residential.
Coming along, the south side of Fig, it appears this is
where the food trucks load up for the day.
There had to be a good four or five of them getting
prep'd and ready to head out.
South side, coming down -- there is a mix of light
industrial and heavy commercial intensive types of uses
in this area.
This is the south west corner of Rome and Fig.
This is the east side of Rome.
So this is the nova los project recently completed.
This is on Rome.
Again on Rome, I took some pictures, one of the bonus
criteria, one of the -- this project has a 69 spaces,
so with the calculation, 72 or 73 space reduction.
However, there are 43 space proposed on street that
would definitely make up for that reduction in the
garage and offset that.
This is the sales center for No Ho.
This is continuing down on Fig.
Just wanted to again show you down street parking.
It is the intent this pattern of on-street parking
would be followed the along the subject block we're
talking about right now.
Then those houses I mentioned, just wanted to show you
those were completed as well and really this area is
transitioning with a mix of uses and intensities.
Always you know, Lennar is building some townhouses
right in this area as well at the other corner at Cass.
That being said, I believe I mentioned to you that
there would be a ten foot minimum setback all the way
around to allow for enhanced landscape and streetscape,
which is part of the bonus criteria.
This is a four-story multi-family with structurally
integrated garage with mid block access on Gray.
There is no access proposed on Fig.
There is no other vehicular access proposed for the
project on any of those other streets.
Only Gray.
There would be a requirement for 486 spaces.
They're asking for a waiver of 15%, down to 413.
We're going to make that adjustment on the site plan in
between first and second reading.
It is located in the West Tampa overlay district.
It has committed to meet all requirements of the
overlay design district.
I mentioned in the last paragraph of my summary that
they are eligible for up to a 2.0, which would be
254,000 or just above that.
They're at 239,000, so it's an F.A.R. of 1.8.
They are proposing the structure parking counts answer
one of their three in ten bonus.
The enhanced landscape and streetscape and a transit
stop as well.
There's a couple modifications in between first and
second reading.
The F.A.R. calculation needs to be corrected.
The setbacks need to be corrected.
That ten foot I talked about is at the ground level.
Above that the building does cantilever out to 8 feet
and some places a little less than eight.
So I need the plans to reflect that.
There's a notation on the plans right now talking about
dimensioning being approximate and being able to be at
zero.
I'm asking that that be removed.
The ten foot minimum needs to be met to allow for those
plantings.
We did run into some issue on the first phase.
I have met with the applicant.
We discussed that thoroughly across the street, that we
learned from that and we're going to provide the
opportunity to thoroughly adequately plant in the
planting spaces.
Transportation had some minor modifications.
One waiver that needed to be added and one notation
that needed to be added and tree and landscape needed
the revised tree table to be included.
That being said, staff did find the request consistent
if those changes are made in between first and second
reading and we are available for any questions.
09:02:03 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman and Councilmembers.
My name is David Mechanik, 305 South Boulevard, Tampa,
Florida.
I'm here on behalf of Pollock shores development.
And with me this evening is Mr. Anthony Everett with
Pollock shores.
Mr. Everett will in just a few moments give you a very
brief presentation of the project.
And I passed out a printed copies of his presentation.
I'd just like tow say Abbye did a most thorough job so
I don't want to repeat all the things that she
indicated.
The second thing I passed out, however, was a list of
additional corrections that we need to make between
first and second reading.
I'd like to state for the record that all of the
corrections that are requested in the staff report will
be made.
We agree with those.
And Abbye and I worked on some three additional ones,
which I passed out to Council just a few minutes ago.
So we would add those and make those changes as well to
the site plan.
Abbye went through the bonuses that we would need tow
achieve to achieve the F.A.R. required.
And we plan on meeting those.
And that will be part of a development agreement that
we would request be heard by Council on March 5th, to
coincide with second reading.
And this application was one of the two that Abbye
mentioned that we would like permission for staff to
have Council schedule that hearing next Thursday
morning.
So we would ask that that be done.
With all those housekeeping items, I would like to just
ask for Mr. Everett to give you a brief overview of the
project.
09:04:31 >> I'm Anthony Everett.
5,000 Bayshore Boulevard, Tampa, Florida, and I have
been sworn.
I'm also the direct rear of development for Pollock
shores here in central Florida.
And Pollock shores is located in the southeast United
States.
We have approximately $1.5 billion worth of properties
under development.
In Florida so far, we have completed a couple projects.
The first one we did was steel house over in Orlando.
And then last one we completed was No Ho flats Abbye
was speaking of earlier.
This project is, as Abbye indicated, located across the
streets from No Ho flats, sits on about three acres.
When we did this project back in the day, the rents in
this area were substantially lower than they are now.
So we couldn't afford do structured parking on this
Council was very gracious in allowing us to close Gray
Street and to get this project out of the ground which
was a catalyst for development in the area.
Now you're seeing the fruits of that project going
forward and now we can afford to do structured parking
in the next phase.
The project is two Texas donut buildings with interior
courtyards, four stories.
And they're wrapped by park deck, which is treated to
look like a building on both sides.
I'll show you those elevations here shortly.
One of the things Abbye mentioned was in phase one we
had an issue in the setbacks were not really wide
enough to give us enough planting area.
So we did a ten foot setback all around the buildings.
There is extensive city right-of-way also.
A lot more than we had over at No Ho plats.
So there will be a much larger distance between the
edge of this parking and the face of the buildings for
this project.
There are 43 on-street parking spaces we would build at
our expense and would be open to the public at all
times.
Because of that, we're asking for a waiver of our
parking.
Most we found No Ho flats we had adequate parking with
the waiver we achieved there.
We're asking for less of a waiver here.
Our guests and visitors really like parking on the
street.
Each of these units has on the front first level has a
stoop or entry level like we had at No Ho flats.
And our residents really like that.
It creates energy on the street.
You see people at night walking out on the street,
walking their dogs and what-not.
The street lighting that we put in at No Ho flats,
which has changed the security in the neighborhood,
would be continued around this project using the same
specifications that Mike Callahan at the city approved.
Looking at our elevation, this would be the elevation
to the west.
This would be the elevation along Rome with our leasing
office in the center of that elevation.
Coming around Gray Street, you turn the corner and then
this would be the parking garage in the middle of the
block.
Stepping back down to four stories as you head towards
the end of the block.
Coming back around on Fig street, you'd go back up four
stories, back up to the garage and then back down to
four stories as you come up to Rome.
This is an elevation looking at the conference Fig and
Rome.
So Rome would be down this angle and this is Fig.
One thing I also want to mention about this project is,
we found during the summertime rains at this
intersection, there was extensive flooding when we were
building No Ho flats.
We investigated that the city staff and found that the
city system from this point heading towards the bay is
constrained.
The city has a project over North Boulevard area to
route some of the water that's coming into this area
away from this area.
But we're still concerned that it may not address the
flooding issue we had at this intersection.
So we have agreed to take some of the water from this
intersection and actually build larger stormwater
containment facility on our property to help handle the
city's water situation at that point.
I think it's better for the neighborhood, certainly
better for transportation in that area and that's
something we have taken on and agreed to do with city
staff so that we can try to help alleviate that
problem.
This is the elevation along Rome, so this would be our
leasing office.
There would be signage up above this canopy, similar to
what we have at no HOA flats.
We have tentatively named this the district at north
Hyde Park and we're hopeful you'll give us an approval
and we could move forward to start construction this
summer.
09:09:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by you Councilmembers?
09:09:20 >> We have nothing else.
09:09:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
This is a public hearing.
Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 12, REZ
15-08, please come forward.
09:09:30 >> Good morning--excuse me, good evening.
I've been here a long time.
My name is Rob Dubsky.
I live at 2114 West Cass Street in north Hyde Park.
I also am the president of the North Hyde Park Alliance
which Anthony was at the inaugural meeting.
I'm here I guess as a citizen.
Thank you so much for staying this late to listen to
this.
I am all for the growth and people building things and
Tampa growing.
And as you all well may know, that I've been here
before and I've said that I support the Tampa InVision,
what the Mayor has and what you all have endorsed.
On this particular project here -- I've also sworn
and -- but more so in addition to everybody making a
profit, I also believe that we have a mission and a
goal of the greater good of the future of Tampa and
citizens of Tampa and the people within that
neighborhood.
I'm going to take a minute here and go through a couple
points on the InVision plan and also some things that
Ms. Feeley has touchdown upon.
Her site analysis goals, objectives and policy is great
for filling in the blanks of the city code and
following that.
I don't think what it does, it's limited in scope
because it does not have the InVision in mind.
Interesting she did make one note.
The closest park was 2400 feet away, which is half a
mile.
I don't know a lot of people in this town that walk
half a mile.
The neighborhood district, this is from the InVision
plan.
Talks about neighborhood development opportunities.
And says the city center should have a healthy
neighborhood.
Should be safe, secure and walkable, bikable, and it
says here local retail services down here, grassroots
organizations should work together to keep their
neighborhoods clean and safe while opportunities for
unique neighborhood identity and activities.
This is also from the InVision plan here.
Says Tampa should leverage the activities of community
groups -- do I have a time limit here?
09:12:12 >> You have 30 more seconds.
09:12:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Everyone has a time limit.
09:12:16 >> I've listened to people talk five and ten minutes.
09:12:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Let me explain this now.
The petitioner has 15 minutes.
I haven't seen one petitioner yet give me the 15
minutes.
That he finished much quicker.
I'm not supposed to give you an extra 30 seconds or so.
09:12:33 >> Here's the bottom line.
This is sad because you guys are missing a good point
here.
I'm against this product, this project, number one.
Not to grant these waivers.
The two waivers, the place is already crowded.
The businesses to the south will infringe and take up
those spots.
You saw the one tick tour she put up about all the
industrial.
Number two, this, Tampa taking money for the green
space, that same money should be invested back into our
neighborhood and buy a park.
That peeves land that the same landowner that owns this
land owns right at the corner of Cass and Rome.
That land should be bought and a park should be put
there, not the money taken for credits and spent in
other place.
And lastly, Rome and Kennedy is a mess.
Try to go towards downtown on Kennedy and take a left
on Rome.
Good luck.
And that should be borne by the developer.
09:13:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
All right.
Thank you very much.
09:13:35 >> Not the citizens of Tampa.
09:13:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.
Appreciate it very much.
Next please?
09:13:50 >> Thank you, Councilmembers, I'm Wesley Weissenburger.
I've been sworn.
I live 1919 west North "A" Street.
I'm not here to argue and scream and yell.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen this gentleman or talked
to him in a long time.
He could find me.
He's been to our civic association and if he doesn't
find me in the phone book after 20 years, he will see
me walking along the street with my identical twin
brother Robert Allen, who is not here tonight.
If you look at this property, it's a nice big open
field.
Once it's finished, all the drainage that's gone into
that field will be gone.
It's going to be filled with concrete, asphalt and
buildings.
The drainage is going to get worse.
Mention a small side point where they're trying to
alleviate the drainage.
Not until a major drainage situation has taken place
will this community of north Hyde Park have any relief
from the flooding.
We have been here.
I'm not going to go any more about it, but this big old
project is going to add to the drainage problem.
Point two.
Or the next point.
Rome is a truck route.
Not only is that, but there's a lot of high speed.
There are no sidewalks along that street.
People are pushing grocery carts from the Walmart down
the middle of the street.
Lighting is really quite poor.
You know in the newspaper a lady was raped in our
neighborhood.
The lighting was very poor.
You couldn't see a thing.
When lighting is Brad, the developers are not putting
enough lighting into the area.
The crime goes up.
We have had quite a bit of increase in crime in the
neighborhood.
Transportation.
I have no idea what he's talking about.
The bus routes are up on Kennedy and up on Cypress.
There is no buses going down in that area.
Sidewalks we need.
We need a lot more light.
We're hoping that the traffic is helped a lot by these
developers coming in.
We need them to put up more, something to slow down the
traffic on Freemont.
Not increase it.
Those people going to their homes are going to fly off
of Kennedy and they're going to be going down into this
area.
Thank you for listening.
We do not agree with this waiver of the parking.
We think any time they build a project -- there's
not -- there's no indication anywhere where they even
have a dog walk.
There's no green, there's nothing that's adding to the
community.
It's going to be a nice little compact area and sum it
up.
It's a nice project but look more for what they could
do for the community.
Thank you very much.
09:16:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.
Mr. Suarez?
09:17:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Mechanik, can I ask you a quick
question?
You made a comment about stormwater issues on the site
plan, there are some stormwater notes concerning what
the developer is going to provide.
It says half inch stormwater retention for the entire
site for water quality and could explain what that
means?
09:17:19 >>DAVID MECHANIK:
You're, to speak to the comments as
well, your stormwater regulations require that the
run-off from the property after development cannot be
any greater than the flow rate and quantity of flow
that occurs before the development.
In this particular case, Mr. Everett is saying he is
also volunteered to increase the amount of stormwater
retention tow help alleviate some of the flooding in
that neighborhood.
This project can't resolve all of the existing
flooding, but he'll go to some degree to help that.
09:17:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Right.
In order to not make it worse.
09:17:58 >>DAVID MECHANIK:
Certainly.
And your regulations do not allow for it to be made
worse.
09:18:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I just wanted to point that out.
Thank you.
09:18:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Montelione?
, Mr. Reddick.
09:18:12 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you.
Isn't it true that I think, one of the stormwater
projects in the budget.
09:18:21 >> Was mentioned earlier.
The one that comes across Cypress, they're going to
solve everything?
No.
But it's going to help.
09:18:30 >>FRANK REDDICK:
I think in addition to what you're
doing should help alleviate a lot of that flooding that
we see on Cass Street and the Rome area.
09:18:43 >> Should help the situation.
By the way, I didn't introduce myself again.
David Mechanik here on behalf of the applicant.
And by the way, I didn't mention I was sworn in
initially.
One other point I'd like to address.
The fee that we pay into the city's green space fund,
which is a substantial amount, it actually is
calculated based on the value of land in your
particular location in the city, and we as a developer
do not have any say where the city spends that money.
But, the city administration can make a decision to
direct that money in certain locations.
But that's not something within our control.
To the gentleman's point, if there's a need for an
additional park area, then that's really up to the city
of Tampa.
09:19:36 >> I'd like to just clarify two things.
First of all, on the parking waiver, we have adequate
parking in the garage for all our residents.
So, and some guest parking.
The on-street parking is additional guest parking.
And the waiver we're getting, the City of Tampa, City
of Tampa has a requirement for guest parking that
exceeds what we see in most other municipalities.
So that's really the difference there.
We're not providing as much guest parking as we
normally would provide under the code but we are
putting 43 on-street parking spaces to mitigate that.
I do want to say about the lighting from the
neighborhood.
I've been the only one installing lighting from the
neighborhood.
So I do agree it would be nice to have additional
lighting and sidewalks coming from Kennedy and I hope
that as projects come in you will force those
developers to continue the lighting program in the
neighborhood.
We are paying for the lighting.
It's not on the city's tab, so we need to make sure
other developers keep doing that lastly I may not have
met with your association a while but I committed when
we did No Ho flats to build, to help build a community
center if we could find a place to put it.
And I kept the commitment of finishing the plans for
that project.
I have the plans ready to go, ready for permitting.
We have raised $11,000 towards putting it on the JCC
project on the Vila Brothers Park if the JCC can be
granted a lease there and so I will go out and continue
to try and raise funds to build the community center
that we designed and have ready for permitting, so that
the North Hyde Park Association has a place to meet if
the city comes in and buys land in the neighborhood for
a park and we want the community center to go there,
we'll still try to raise the money to build that
community center and we'll donate the plans as we have.
I'm fully committed to try and help the neighborhood.
Even though I haven't seen new a while, we're going to
honor that commitment.
I just ask for your consideration and hope you'll give
us approval.
We're going to do a quality development.
09:21:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Montelione?
, thank you.
I do have to say that I'm a little disturbed by what
you just said.
It's happened a few times before in the four years that
we have been sitting here.
Where the neighborhood says well, you know what, this
would be great to have if you do this for us, we'll
either support your project or we won't object, let me
put it that way.
And I think that's extortion.
I think it's, it's wonderful for you to offer, you
know, to do something aside from this project.
I have a little bit of consternation about that
happening around the city.
Because it's just, we want people to come into the city
with their companies, where their projects, with their
developments.
And way want you to abide by our rules.
And that's not only density bonus credit rule.
09:22:47 >> One is not tied to the other.
I'm a fifth year Tampa -- fifth generation Tampa
resident.
I feel like I have an obligation to give back to Tampa.
09:23:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'm not putting the blame on you.
09:23:03 >> I understand.
I just feel like it's the right thing to do.
We have a voice in a way to help bring people together
in the community.
09:23:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I don't want people to get into the
habit of thinking that every developer is going to do
what you did.
Understand what I'm saying?
If we have it as a rule, maybe we'll change the
criteria of the, you know, three out of ten and maybe
add something like that.
Anyway, be that as it may, that wasn't the original
thing I was asking.
Is Jonathan still here?
I couldn't see him.
The on-street parking we don't count, because it's
available and open to the public, so it can't be
counted in the parking ratios that are part of this
report, which makes the parking 14% waiver.
14% reduction.
And if perchance we were to count the on-street
parking, hypothetically speaking, what would that 14
number turn into?
I counted them up and what it looks like, and I don't
know if I counted them correctly.
But looks like 31 on street park.
09:24:18 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
We had concern as to the parking waiver
as well, Ms. Moreda and I were discussing that there
are 43 on street proposed, which means they, they, on
their site plan, there's zero as far as guests being
provided in the structured garage.
So it's the difference between the 79 guest space that
are required and the 43 on-site -- on street that would
be provided.
Ends up being like 26 spaces or something.
[Inaudible]
09:24:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The 14% reduction would be reduced,
right?
, would it not?
09:25:06 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
No it can't be.
They have to waive the space.
They're required the spaces by code.
The on street don't count.
09:25:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Hypothetically speaking, if we were
to count the on-street parking.
09:25:18 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Would be a six percent reduction.
09:25:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Instead of 14.
09:25:25 >> Correct.
09:25:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.
That's the question I was asking.
I think there was one other question that -- oh, and I
think you already, Mr. Mechanik, addressed the fee in
lieu in time.
It is a very large number of square feet in waiver
number 3.
69,780 square feet.
You have a ballpark estimate of what, we know what the
fee would be?
A.
09:26:04 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I don't know what the fee would be.
I do know Mr. Everett's company paid 563,000 on No Ho
los when they waived that and that was because of the
UA green space, multi-family green space.
The interesting fact in relation to this if he popped
up two of the floors to six story, he'd only owe you
30% of the site after he takes the building footprint
out as far as green space goes.
So it's kinds of unequal playing field the way it is
right now.
But I think it's around $5 or $6 a square foot.
That changes every corner.
Jimmy cook in our office calculation that based on the
land values and the district.
It's done on a district wide basis.
I would be happy to bring you back that figure in
between first and second leading.
09:26:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
It will be a lot.
09:26:54 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
It's probably half a million dollars.
09:26:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
And we spend that -- are we
restricted as in transportation when you have to spend
it in the development area?
09:27:08 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I cannot confirm that statement for
you.
It is my understanding that it is spent within the
district that it is collected under.
But I --
09:27:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
We have different districts.
09:27:20 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
It's a landscape in lieu district.
Those are actually depicted in the zoning code under I
believe 27285.
But I would be happy, like I said, to one, get the
district, current district fee for you the, provide
that calculation at sec reading and also confirm --
it's my understanding it is spent in the district it's
collected in.
09:27:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I would like to see that thank you
very much.
All I have.
09:27:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I remember that area when big orange
was there, Willie pep's bar and grill.
The whole area on Kennedy Boulevard was no wetter than
this.
Was just one shop after another, minor things.
Tailoring shop, printing shop, whatever.
And behind that was an alley and company called EB
Malone mattress company.
And I worked there.
And Mr. Weisberg is right.
It was nothing but trucks and warehouses and Rome was
full all the way down on either side.
Maas Brothers, the Oldsmar bella fish company.
The cab company and across the street was a service
station on the southwest corner of Cass and Rome.
And all of that area there is changing and when you
look further north on the North Boulevard homes, the
whole area is going to change.
This is going to be an area that whether it makes it or
not, this developer may make a lot and he may lose it
all.
I don't know.
But that's his choice, not mine.
It's his money, not mine.
It's his risk, not mine.
All -- the thing to say is does it fit criteria of the
facts?
And that's all I'm charged with.
But I don't look at nothing, at anything on how much
money somebody's going to make.
Because if I did, it wouldn't be a free country.
It would be a country where you get paddled because you
made too much money or put in jail because want to go
out and be prosperous.
That's what's called something else other than freedom.
But anyway -- anything else?
09:29:44 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I'm sorry.
I actually have the district fee in my file and it's
$6.01.
Right now per square foot.
So if you multiply that by let's round up to 70,000,
$420,000.
Soy I owe you a couple other answers.
09:30:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Providing you haven't changed
between now and the next quarter.
Anyone else who has not spoken care to speak on this
item?
I have a motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.
Cohen.
All in favor of the motion to close, please indicate by
saying aye.
Opposed nay?
09:30:32 >> Chair memorandum, whoever makes the motion, there
wasp a revision by staff and additional addendum
provided by Mr. Mechanik, so would be two sheets.
09:30:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Manager Reddick, would you kindly
read this with the revision of staff and supplement
revision.
09:30:48 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Move an ordinance being presented for
first readings consideration, an ordinance rezoning
property in the general vicinity of 400 north Rome
Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida and more
particularly described in section 1, from zoning
district classification PD planned development,
residential, multi-family to PD planned today.
Residential multi-family, providing an effective date.
And including the revisions from staff and the
supplementary revisions from the petitioner.
09:31:16 >> Second.
09:31:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Have a motion by Mr. Reddick for
first reading, further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you all very much for attending.
09:31:30 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading and adoption on March 5th, 30:00 a.m.
09:31:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Item number 13.
09:31:40 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Item 13.
Abbye Feeley, land development.
Item 13, REZ 14-75, located at 110 and 114 south Rome
Avenue.
The request before you tonight is from PD and CI to CI.
This is property just south of Kennedy.
And I will do the Planning Commission report in just a
moment.
This property is just south of Kennedy Boulevard.
Primrose school is located at the southwest corner, the
PD here.
Council just rezoned the property to the north of this
for the new Dunkin' Donuts.
And Starbucks would be just to the east of that and
then the McDonald's.
So, this piece right here has an old PD, it's not real
old, but PD for an office.
And then there's a portion that is CI.
In order to put it all back to CI to allow for it to be
developed as an office, that's the rezoning request
before you tonight.
Site is currently vacant.
Primrose school was completed.
Property to the north which was just handled and then
the hair pin turn at the Starbucks location.
There is a small office just to the south.
There is some residential single-family attached.
Some parking for the office.
And then the Broadstone development which was also
under approval by this Council, just southwest.
This would be back to Euclidean district.
Ten foot setback, ten foot all the way around.
It does satisfy all those requirements for tour
consideration this evening.
This is the subject.
Small office just to the south.
Residential just to the south.
This is the Dunkin' Donuts.
Northside of Kennedy.
Somebody told me this is referred to as the KONTACO
hut.
This is the northwest corner, Primrose school, this is
the on-street parking on Rome.
Just directly across the Primrose school takes up most
of that block as you saw via the aerial.
Then there is commercial parking.
And then there is the new Broadstone development that
is almost completed.
Really they're just trying to lift that old PD and make
this buildable site for an offers.
Believe it would be office type of development over
parking on the ground floor and then an office above in
order to utilize the site.
Staff did find this request consistent.
Why us to take care of Planning Commission.
The subject site and, is community commercial 35, which
allows for consideration of the CI.
With the intensive commercial uses envisioned under the
CC-35 category.
Parcels adjacent to the east, south and north are zoned
CI.
The introduction of CI uses on the subject would not
create any negative impacts to the surrounding area and
given the goals, objectives and policies, the Planning
Commission did find this request consistent.
Thank you.
09:35:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Petitioner?
09:35:36 >> Dick LaRosa, 11325 Coventry Grove Circle, Lithia.
I have not been sworn.
[Oath administered by Clerk]
09:35:52 >> As Abbye said, this request is for two lots, one of
which is a PD.
It went to PD for certain waivers.
Because the lot size was two small.
We're impinge the lots to develop it under the CI
rules.
We can meet the requirements setbacks an such.
Owner of this property does in fact own the Primrose
school across the street.
The eternity is for office space above parking.
If you have any questions.
09:36:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers?
Anyone in the audience care to speak on this item?
Please come forward.
I have a motion to close by Mr. Reddick.
Second by Ms. Montelione.
Further discussions by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Ms. Mulhern, would you kindly take number 13 please?
09:36:40 >>MARY MULHERN:
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
I move an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 110 and 114 South Rome Avenue in
the City of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
described in section 1, from zoning district
classifications CI, commercial intensive and PD,
planned development, to CI, commercial intensive,
providing an effective date.
09:37:03 >> Second.
09:37:04 >>I have a motion by Ms. Mulhern for first reading,
second by Mr.~Suarez.
Further discussion by councilmembers in all in favor of
the motion please indicate by saying aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
09:37:15 >> Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading and adoption will be on March 5th at
9:30 a.m.
09:37:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
If I have public comments on this
one, I'm going to have a problem.
09:37:31 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Lucky number 14.
09:37:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Pete rose.
Tell him if he's lucky.
09:37:39 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I was born on 14-14.
Last case of the night.
REZ 14-86.
Which this came in September of '14.
This is located at 720 East Henderson Avenue.
And the request before you tonight is from an RM-24,
residential multi-family to PD, residential planned
development for office, business professional.
Seven waivers associated with the application as the
application speaks to retain the existing residential
structure on the property and convert that structure
into business professional office.
There are also several large trees on the northside of
the property, which you'll be able to see on your site
plan, that they are retaining.
So if the retention of those trees is actually
triggering some of these waivers.
Let me quickly go through the waivers.
The first is to reduce the required parking spaces from
five to three, which is a 40% reduction.
The second is reduce the backup width from six to zero.
The third is allow maneuvering in the right-of-way for
parking spaces.
These first couple are really driven by those trees and
configuration of parking spaces.
The fourth is to reduce required use-to-use buffer
along to north boundary from 15-foot with six foot wall
to ten foot with six foot PVC fence.
Fifth is allow for all replacement to be accommodated
into payment into the tree trust fund.
The sixth is to allow reduction in the driveway throat
width from 20 feet to 19 feet and last is reduce the
minimum parking space width from 9 foot to 8 foot.
We can talk about the existing structure, 6600 square
feet.
The house on the property was constructed in 1949.
The structure will remain and be remodeled to comply
with applicable codes.
The subject property shown here in green.
This is Henderson to the south.
[Inaudible] to the east.
7th to the north.
This is actually an alley that the city widened to the
west.
This PD is the GTE federal credit union headquarter
location there.
Go ahead and show you.
There is a rehabilitation center to the east.
There is a non-conforming auto repair shop to the west.
Just wanted to be clear on that one because it's zoned
RM-24.
Then you'll start to see the start of the GTE campus to
the south of there.
The subject we're talking about is here.
There is a picture of the existing structure.
This is going to be rehabbed to be the office.
Another shot.
This is the east side from Taliaferro.
This is toward the rear of the property.
This is north of the property.
This is the west side of the property adjacent to the
auto repair.
Here's the auto repair.
Then this is a look up that alley towards 7th.
This is a look at Taliaferro looking north, which has
some on-street parking.
Moving east on Henderson, the parking for the rehab.
Little further east on Henderson towards Nebraska.
Another look up Taliaferro and some of the rehab
buildings from Taliaferro.
South side of Henderson approaching GTE.
Gated entry to GTE and then the GTE facility.
The proposed setbacks for the building are front 10,
corner 7, side on the west 3 and the rear 10.
These are all based on the current location of
structure.
Maximum building height is proposed at 35 feet.
Based on the proposed use, the total of five spaces
required, three space are being provided and a waiver
is being requested.
Vehicular access would be on north Taliaferro only.
The property is surrounded as I just went through, by
PD to the south, RM-24 to the west and north.
Congregate living, auto repair shop.
There are some site modifications from land development
to correct the setbacks and also revise the waiver
table.
Transportation is finding this request inconsistent
given the reduction in the off-street parking spaces,
including all the areas for maneuvering to be located
fully on private property and the arrange.
That is -- so it's the reduction in the backup, the
reduction of spaces and the maneuvering in the
right-of-way.
Natural resources has some revisions to the tree table
and the calculations for the BUA and solid waste needs
the general note number 2 removed.
Therefore, there is an inconsistent finding on this
application from transportation in relation to the
three waivers.
If it's pleasure of Council to approve this, those
modifications would need to be made in between first
and second reading.
Staff is available for any questions.
Thank.
09:44:05 >> Any questions for Councilmember staff?
Petitioner?
09:44:14 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Planning Commission, is the urban mixed
use 60, one of the higher intensity uses.
It would not be out of character with expected
development pattern anticipated under this particular
land use category due to proximity in downtown Tampa
and number of available parcels, redevelopment is
encouraged in this area and staff found this consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of Tampa
comprehensive plan.
09:44:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Petitioner?
09:44:45 >> Good evening.
Ed Roland, mobile use architect as agent for the owner
Equialt.
My address is 313 park Boulevard Oldsmar.
I've been sworn.
I think a couple of things about the inconsistencies
with traffic as Ms. Feeley pointed out.
We're handcuffed a bit by the trees that are on the
site.
Any redevelopment of the site is going, would
potentially have to deal with those trees back there.
Our goal to keep the structure and try to work the
parking in the back area.
The most we can get there are three spots.
Requiring us to back out onto the street.
There is on-street parking available as well.
Obviously they would utilize that.
This is going to be a headquarters for the owner.
He's a real estate investor.
And this will be where his office is located.
With regards to the parking issues, wanted to point out
if this were left as a residential structure at that
same location, a resident would be backing out on the
street in that same area.
So changing to commercial really doesn't have much of
an impact there.
Also, with regard to the reduction in the amount of
parking spaces, there is administrative variance
available to allow reduction of 50% for an existing
building prior to 1988.
So we're consistent with that an what we're asking.
The property is obviously going to be improved quite a
bit from what it is.
It's not much to look at right now but this is
something the owner is going to put a fair amount of
money into that structure and it will include a metal
roof.
There will be in fact even a green roof on the front
portion.
So there will be flat roof covering the front porch
that will be extended.
And from what I understand, that's not something that's
been done in the area before.
So that should be pretty interesting, quite an
improvement.
And I think that's about it.
Respectfully request that you approve this thank you.
09:47:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Any questions by Councilmembers at
this time?
Anyone in the audience care to speak to think I'm tem?
To close by Mr. Reddick, further discussion by
Councilmember also?
Please signify please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed nay.
Motion passes unanimously to close.
Somebody wants to read this?
Mr. Suarez will read it.
09:47:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I present an ordinance for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 720 east Henderson Avenue in the
City of Tampa, Florida, more particularly described in
section 1, from zoning district classification, RM-24
residential multi-family to PD planned development,
office, business professional, providing an effective
date.
09:47:59 >> Second.
09:48:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by Mr. Suarez, I have a
second by Ms. Montelione.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you all very much for attending.
Any new information by Councilmembers?
From left to right, Ms. Montelione?
09:48:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes, sir.
I would like to make a motion to have Cathy Coyle, Land
Development Coordination -- is that the right
department name?
-- to bring a staff report to us regarding the bonus
provisions, the density bonus provisions, the ten
criteria, meeting three of those criteria and possibly
changing what those criteria are.
So I would ask she bring what the current criteria is
and if she has any suggestions on how we can improve
that.
09:49:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by --
09:49:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
When do I want it?
My calendar is on my desk.
April 2nd sounds great.
09:49:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
April 2nd at, during staff meetings,
what time?
9:00 a.m.
The year 2015.
I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second by
Mr. Reddick with those times given.
You'll in favor of the motion, please indicate by
saying aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Anything else?
09:49:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
No, sir, that's it.
09:49:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mr. Cohen?
09:49:47 >>HARRY COHEN:
No, sir.
09:49:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Mulhern?
09:49:49 >>MARY MULHERN:
Yes.
I have a couple of commendations.
One I'd like to ask that we prepare a commendation for
Tampa crossroads in recognition of their work with
veterans for presentation on February 26 N.
09:50:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I have a motion by Mrs. Mulhern,
second by Mr. Suarez.
All in favor of the more, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
09:50:18 >>MARY MULHERN:
And then we already made the motion for
commendation for assistant chief John Bennett.
But he is able to be here on March 5th, so I'd like to
add that date.
09:50:32 >> Motion by Ms. Mulhern, second by Mr. Cohen.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Reddick?
09:50:44 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Make a motion that Council [Inaudible]
[ Laughter ]
09:50:50 >>MARY MULHERN:
I was healthy when I walked in here.
I would've just been happy to hear all these cases and
say yes or no.
09:51:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Ms. Capin?
09:51:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
No, sir.
09:51:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mr. Suarez?
09:51:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes, I have a couple issue also here.
I'd like to the envied the Florida competes to give a
ten minute -- let's make it a five minute presentation
on their grassroots campaign efforts on behalf of
Florida businesses for competitive workforce coalition
and that's to be presented on February 26th at
9:00 a.m.
09:51:32 >> Sec.
09:51:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by
Ms. Montelione.
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
09:51:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Also like to have a commendation
prepared and presented to Israel Segarra to celebrate
26 years to the City of Tampa and four years as
chairman of the mayors Hispanic Council.
And that to be presented on his, I think last official
day or last official week which will be February 26th.
Also at 9:00 a.m.
09:52:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.
I have a second by Ms. Montelione.
Further discussion by Councilmembers?
All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying
aye.
Opposed nay.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Motion to receive and file the documents --
09:52:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have one last thing.
Valentine's Day this weekend.
09:52:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Just wanted to give you a break.
Got a motion on the floor.
I have a second by Ms. Montelione to receive and file.
All in favor of the motion to receive and file, please
indicate by saying aye.
The ayes have it unanimously.
Mr. Suarez?
09:52:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Again, happy Valentine's Day.
Don't forget to go to the Sant'Yago Knight parade this
weekend.
Thank you, chair.
09:52:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Anyone else in the audience care to
speak?
We're adjourned.
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.