CITY OF TAMPA EVENING SESSION
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2020
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.
ANY PERSON WHO NEEDS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDINGS MAY NEED TO HIRE A COURT REPORTER.
[ SOUNDING GAVEL ]
18:03:37 >>LUIS VIERA:
CITY COUNCIL IS IN SESSION.
ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
18:03:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
HERE.
18:03:41 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
HERE.
18:03:42 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
HERE.
18:03:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
HERE.
18:03:49 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
HERE.
18:03:50 >>BILL CARLSON:
HERE.
18:03:51 >>LUIS VIERA:
HERE.
OKAY.
CITY COUNCIL BEGINS.
I'D FIRST LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR VOLUNTEER TONIGHT.
PARKER, ARE YOU -- THERE YOU ARE.
COME FORWARD.
PARKER IS HERE FROM WILSON.
SHE'S HERE TONIGHT VOLUNTEERING WITH US AND DOING A BANG-UP
JOB.
THANK YOU.
HIGH-FIVE FOR THAT.
SHE'S WELL COMPENSATED.
[ APPLAUSE ]
OKAY.
WE BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER 1.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN?
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
18:04:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE THESE ARE ALL QUASI-JUDICIAL.
18:04:36 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IT'S FUNNY.
I'VE BEEN OUT FOR TWO WEEKS BECAUSE OF WISDOM TOOTH ISSUES.
I'M A LITTLE WHATEVER.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE SPEAKING TONIGHT ON ANY QUASI-JUDICIAL
MATTER, PLEASE STAND UP, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO DO SO, AND BE
PREPARED TO BE SWORN IN.
[OATH ADMINISTERED BY THE CLERK]
18:04:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU FOR THAT.
GO AHEAD WITH NUMBER 1.
MR. SHELBY, AGAIN, I LOVE YOUR BEARD.
18:05:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
18:05:08 >> GOOD EVENING, CITY COUNCIL.
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
COORDINATION.
THE FIRST ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA IS REZ 19-66.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT HAS BEEN HEARD BEFORE CITY
COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 12 AS WELL AS THE LAST MEETING ON
JANUARY 16th.
THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT THE APPLICANT HAS REVISED THEIR
SITE PLAN AND BROUGHT IT BEFORE YOU.
18:05:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS ONE COMPLETELY,
WE HAD ONE CASE, I THINK IT'S ITEM 12, THAT WAS HERE
JANUARY 16, AND THEN IT GOT CONTINUED, BUT IT GOT BOUNCED TO
THE END.
I THOUGHT A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE CONTINUE STUFF, WE PUT IT
AT THE BEGINNING.
18:05:58 >>LUIS VIERA:
WAS NUMBER 12 A CONTINUANCE?
18:06:02 >> YES.
18:06:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
THAT POINT IS WELL TAKEN.
18:06:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MAYBE WE CAN TAKE IT SECOND.
18:06:06 >>LUIS VIERA:
YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT.
WELL TAKEN.
18:06:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE ONLY RISK YOU
TAKE WITH REGARD TO THAT IS PEOPLE SEEING THE PLACEMENT ON
THE AGENDA, THERE MAY BE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
ULTIMATELY MAY COME.
18:06:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
HOW ABOUT WE DO THIS?
WE MOVE IT TO THE MIDDLE OF THE AGENDA?
DO YOU THINK THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
18:06:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I WAS JUST RAISING A CONCERN.
18:06:29 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE'LL MOVE NUMBER 12 TO NUMBER 5.
THERE YOU GO.
JUST TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
LEGAL, ANY OBJECTION TO THAT?
18:06:42 >>CATE WELLS:
CATE WELLS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS WHAT MR. SHELBY STATED.
TO THE EXTENT PEOPLE ARE RELYING ON THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA.
THEY MAY NOT COME UNTIL MUCH LATER AND THEN WE'RE DEALING
WITH DUE PROCESS ISSUES.
18:06:58 >>LUIS VIERA:
UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO THAT, WE'LL HAVE TO STAY
AT 12.
18:07:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, I BELIEVE COUNCIL'S RULES
GENERALLY ARE IN THE ABSENCE OF IT SPECIFICALLY BEING
REQUESTED TO BE FIRST ON THE AGENDA, THE CLERK NORMALLY
PLACES IT LAST ON THE AGENDA IF IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
18:07:13 >>LUIS VIERA:
UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO AFOREMENTIONED REASONS,
WE'LL LEAVE NUMBER 12 AS NUMBER 12.
MY REGRETS.
YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN, COUNCILMAN.
THANK YOU.
LET'S GO FORWARD.
18:07:29 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
I'LL BE BRIEF BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE SEEN THIS A COUPLE OF
TIMES BEFORE.
WE ARE ON SOUTH WILLOW AVENUE JUST SOUTH OF WEST KENNEDY
BOULEVARD.
THAT'S THE UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA CAMPUS TO THE NORTH.
THIS IS THE CITY OF TAMPA FIRE STATION.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS RESIDENTIAL 35.
THAT IS THAT BROWN COLOR AND THEN THE RED IS COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL 35.
THIS IS URBAN MIXED USE 60.
A LOT OF THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN CHANGED.
UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA TO PUBLIC, BUT OUR MAP HASN'T BEEN
UPDATED YET.
WE DID FIND THIS REDESIGN CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
I KNOW PREVIOUSLY WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE THAT FINDING, BUT THE
RESUBMITTAL, WE DID FIND IT ADDRESSED OUR POLICY CONCERNS.
AND THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING AN ELEVATOR ON THE SITE
MAKING THE APARTMENT BUILDING ACCESSIBLE.
AND THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR HOUSING, THE CITY POPULATION
AND OUR FAIR HOUSING POLICIES.
SO WE ARE FINDING IT CONSISTENT, AND THAT CONCLUDES MY
PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
18:08:30 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
THIS IS THE LATEST ITERATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR
CONSIDERATION.
THE APPLICANT IS STILL REQUESTING A DENSITY BONUS FOR NINE
DWELLING UNITS.
IF YOU REMEMBER FROM YOUR JANUARY HEARING, THEY WERE
BRINGING A SIMILAR DESIGN, BUT THE BUILDING EXTENDED FURTHER
TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH.
AS A RESULT OF THAT, THEY WERE ASKING FOR A MULTIFAMILY
GREENSPACE WAIVER AS WELL AS A WAIVER TO ALLOW MITIGATION
AND REQUIRED TREES TO BE PLACED IN THE TREE TRUST FUND.
AFTER THE CONTINUANCE IN JANUARY, THE APPLICANT HAS
REDESIGNED, AS SHOWN HERE.
THIS PROPOSED SITE PLAN, AGAIN, FOR NINE DWELLING UNITS HAS
NO WAIVERS BEING REQUESTED.
IT HAS A DENSITY BONUS FOR ONE ADDITIONAL UNITS.
NINE TOTAL DWELLING UNITS.
MEETS REQUIRED GREENSPACE, PARKING, TREE, LANDSCAPING CODES,
AS WELL AS STORMWATER AND SOLID WASTE.
IF CITY COUNCIL APPROVES IT TONIGHT, THERE ARE SOME
MODIFICATIONS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING FROM NATURAL
RESOURCES, PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION AND
STORMWATER.
JUST CLARIFICATION OF SOME OF THE NOTES ON THE SITE PLAN.
SAYING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF HAS
FOUND THIS ITERATION OF THE SITE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THE
CITY OF TAMPA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
18:09:55 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
18:10:05 >> GOOD EVENING.
WILLIAM MOLLOY, 325 SOUTH BOULEVARD.
WE ARE BACK WITH SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME REQUEST, ONLY THIS
TIME THERE ARE NO WAIVERS REQUESTED.
I BELIEVE AS OF WHEN I LEFT MY OFFICE, WE HAVE SATISFIED
MR. MICHELINI AND HIS CLIENTS AS TO THEIR CONCERNS AND
OPPOSITION TO THIS.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I CAN.
18:10:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU'VE WORKED THINGS OUT WITH
MR. MICHELINI AND MR. LIGORI.
18:10:34 >> YES.
18:10:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
GREAT.
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, SIR.
IS ANYONE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER
1?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE ITEM NUMBER 1,
SIR?
18:10:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
JUST AS A PREFACE, I WANT TO EXPRESS OUR
APPRECIATION TO THE PETITIONER FOR IMPROVING THE SITE PLAN.
WE DON'T LIKE TO SAY NO.
CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE SAY, WE REALLY LIKE TO SAY YES.
WE WANT TO SEE OUR COMMUNITY IMPROVING.
WE LIKE TO SEE NEW STUFF.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT HAS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU'VE DONE THAT AND WE APPRECIATE IT.
WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE:
REZ 19-66, THE APPLICANT HAS MET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF TO
PROVIDE COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE REZONING
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SPECIFICALLY
IN REFERENCE TO THE STAFF REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND OUR PLANNING STAFF.
I BELIEVE THE PROPOSED ZONING CATEGORY OF PD IS CONSISTENT.
I WAS READING FROM THE WRONG CHEAT SHEET.
LET ME BACK UP.
I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE AS THE APPLICANT HAS MET ITS BURDEN OF
PROOF TO PROVIDE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE
DEVELOPMENT AS CONDITIONED AND SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY CODE,
SPECIFICALLY THE DEVELOPMENT AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN MEETS
THE PURPOSE OF THE PD REZONING, SPECIFICALLY THE PROPOSED
USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND IT PROMOTES
THE EFFICIENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE
AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 27-136.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE ANY WAIVERS REQUESTED.
INCLUDE THE REVISION SHEET, AND I MOVE THAT FOR FIRST
READING.
18:12:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF YOU COULD READ THE TITLE FROM THE
AGENDA, PLEASE.
18:12:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE
GENERAL VICINITY OF 110 AND 112 SOUTH WILLOW AVENUE, IN THE
CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN
SECTION 1, FROM ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION RM-24
(RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,
RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
18:13:12 >>LUIS VIERA:
DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
18:13:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A RESOLUTION THAT
GOES WITH THAT.
18:13:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED AT SECOND READING
AND ADOPTION PUBLIC HEARING.
18:13:26 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD MARCH 5th, 2020
AT 9:30 A.M.
18:13:45 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
ITEM NUMBER 2 IS SU2-19-10, COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET PARKING
LOT LOCATED AT 710 NORTH EDISON AVENUE.
18:13:59 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE OF YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE IN THE CENTRAL TAMPA PLANNING DISTRICT.
THAT'S THE SUBJECT SITE.
I HAVE TAMPA PREPARATORY ACADEMY HERE.
TO THE SOUTH IS THE UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA CAMPUS.
THERE'S SOME MULTIFAMILY AND THEN COMMERCIAL USES ALONG
EDISON.
WE DO HAVE SOME SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY BACK HERE.
THE SUBJECT SITE HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF URBAN MIXED USE
60.
IT'S A VERY INTENSIVE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY.
IT DOES TRANSITION TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE-35.
WE ALSO HAVE GENERAL MIXED USE 24, RESIDENTIAL 35,
RESIDENTIAL 20, AND NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE-35.
SEVERAL YEARS AGO, ONE OF MY FIRST PLAN AMENDMENTS WAS
TAKING THIS WHOLE BLOCK AND BRINGING DIFFERENT FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT THAT IS THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN HERE.
THIS IS ALSO IN THE WEST TAMPA URBAN VILLAGE.
IT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE JULIAN B. LANE WATERFRONT
PARK, HART ROUTE 7 SERVES THE SUBJECT SITE AND IS LOCATED
WITHIN EVACUATION ZONE B.
WE DID FIND THIS REQUEST CONSISTENT.
THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES ENCOURAGE OFF-STREET
PARKING WHERE APPROPRIATE IN THE URBAN SETTING.
WE FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PARKING WAS APPROPRIATE WITHIN
THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THIS IS CLOSE TO THE COMMERCIAL USES AND THE DOWNTOWN CORE.
WE DO NOTE THAT WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO ENSURE
THAT THE SITE IS APPROPRIATELY BUFFERED FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT.
BUT OVERALL, THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE URBAN MIXED USE 60
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
18:15:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
18:15:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YES.
IS THIS ASSOCIATED WITH A PARTICULAR PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT
OR THIS IS A FREE-STANDING PARKING LOT?
18:15:44 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
I'LL LET MARYANNE.
I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I WANT HER TO SAY IT.
18:15:51 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET PARKING.
PER THE CODE, THE SPECIAL USE IS FOR COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET
PARKING ASSOCIATED WITH AN ADJOINING COMMERCIAL USE.
SO THE ADJOINING COMMERCIAL USE FOR THIS PARKING LOT IS THE
RESTAURANT TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF
CASS, DELAWARE, AND EDISON.
SO HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON THE ZONING MAP.
CURRENTLY ZONED RS-50.
RS-50, COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET PARKING LOT FOR AN ADJOINING
COMMERCIAL USE IS A SPECIAL USE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE
WITH YOU TONIGHT.
THE ASSOCIATED USE, AGAIN, IS THIS RESTAURANT, THE CI ZONING
DISTRICT TO THE DIRECT SOUTH.
18:16:50 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
18:16:55 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS AT 710 NORTH
EDISON.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A TOTAL OF 22 PARKING SPACES.
THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY CONNECTION WILL BE THROUGH ONTO EDISON
THROUGH THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY FOR THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED CI
PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.
SO THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY CUTS.
THERE ARE REQUIRED CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING
FROM TRANSPORTATION, PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
COORDINATION, AS WELL AS NATURAL RESOURCES.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TWO WAIVERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
SPECIAL USE.
THE FIRST, THERE'S A CODE REQUIREMENT THAT A PARKING LOT
SHOULD NOT EXTEND MORE THAN A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE
COMMERCIAL USE THAT IT IS SERVING.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY EXTENDS 142 FEET TO ITS FARTHEST POINT.
SO THAT IS A WAIVER REQUESTED.
THAT IS FOUND IN YOUR STAFF REPORT TO EXTEND FROM 100 FEET
TO 142 FEET.
OTHER WAIVER REQUEST, THERE IS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO
THE NORTH AS WELL AS THERE ARE TWO TO THE WEST.
THE CODE REQUIRES A 15-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND A SIX-FOOT
HIGH WALL IN BOTH LOCATIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A WAIVER TO ALLOW A 15-FOOT
BUFFER.
BUT INSTEAD OF A SIX-FOOT WALL, SIX-FOOT HIGH PVC FENCE.
OTHER THAN THAT, IT MEETS ALL THE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND
DEVELOPMENT AND COMPLIANCE STAFF FOUND IT CONSISTENT WITH
THE CITY OF TAMPA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
18:18:21 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
18:18:46 >> GOOD EVENING, CITY COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS MATT NEWTON FROM THE LAW FIRM OF SHUMAKER, LOOP
AND KENDRICK, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
THE ADDRESS OF THE FIRM IS 101 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD HERE
IN TAMPA, SUITE 2800.
AS STAFF POINTED OUT, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PARKING LOT.
JUST TO QUICKLY REITERATE, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION
POINTED OUT, THE URBAN CORE IS JUST HERE TO THE EAST.
YOU HAVE JULIAN B. LANE PARK HERE.
THE PARTICULAR SPOT HERE IS JUST NORTH OF A CI ZONING
DISTRICT.
THIS IS RS-50.
IT'S RIGHT THERE AT THE BREAK OF THE ZONING.
SURROUNDING USES OF THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE THE LAW FIRM OF
OLDER AND LUNDY HERE TO THE SOUTH.
THIS IS THE RESTAURANT -- IT'S CALLED THE HOOCH AND HIVE --
HERE TO THE SOUTH.
IT LOOKS LIKE A DUPLEX, SINGLE-FAMILY.
SINGLE-FAMILY TO THE NORTH AND THEN MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST.
RATHER THAN KIND OF RETREAD ON WHAT STAFF IS PUTTING OUT IN
THE REPORT, I WANT TO DO A LITTLE DUE DILIGENCE ON PARKING
LOT BEST PRACTICES BEFORE I CAME HERE TONIGHT.
I FOUND AN ARTICLE COAUTHORED BY DONALD SHOUPPE, WHO IS A
LITTLE BIT OF A CHARACTER IN THE URBAN PLANNING AREA.
HE'S A LITTLE BIT LIBERTARIAN WHEN IT COMES TO OFF-STREET
PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
HE THINKS IT SHOULD BE BUSINESS DRIVEN BUT AT THE SAME TIME,
PATERNALISTIC AND IF BUSINESS IS GOING TO PUT PARKING SPACES
ON THE PROPERTY, IT SHOULD BE HEAVILY REGULATED WITH DESIGN
RESTRICTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS PROTECTED.
I'LL GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF HIS OFF-STREET BEST
PRACTICES AND POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A VERY STRONG PARKING
LOT DESIGN.
THE FIRST THING THAT MR. SHOUPPE RECOMMENDS IS THAT PARKING
LOTS BE PLACED TO THE REAR OF THE PRINCIPAL USES.
OF COURSE, HERE, AS MS. SAMANIEGO POINTED OUT, THE PARKING
LOT IS SITUATED BEHIND THE MAIN ROAD HERE, CASS STREET,
WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS A COLLECTOR BY THE CITY OF TAMPA.
SECOND IS MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S APPROPRIATE SCREENING FOR
YOUR PARKING LOT.
ONE STRATEGY THAT HE EMPHASIZES IS TO USE SUFFICIENT
LANDSCAPING.
THIS SLIDE DEMONSTRATES THAT THIS IS A VERY HEAVILY
LANDSCAPED PARKING LOT PROPOSAL.
THE VIEW WAY AS PROPOSED IS 49.1%.
YOU DO HAVE A HEDGE CIRCLING THE ENTIRE PROPOSED PARKING LOT
AS WELL AS QUITE A BIT OF TREES.
AS MS. SAMANIEGO POINTS OUT IN HER PLAN, THE EXACT PLANTINGS
WILL BE APPROVED AT PERMITTING.
AS WE'RE LOOKING AT IT TODAY, THIS IS HEAVILY SCREENED.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS, OF COURSE, THAT WE ARE REQUESTING
THAT THE SCREENING BE DONE WITH A PVC FENCE AS OPPOSED TO A
MASONRY WALL.
PVC FENCES ARE HISTORICALLY EASIER TO CLEAN AND THERE'S
ALREADY ONE ON THE PREMISES.
SO IT'S ALREADY EXISTING.
WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE USING THAT.
FINALLY JUST TO POINT OUT A FEW OTHER POINTS, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION POINTS OUT IN THE REPORT THAT WE ARE IN LINE WITH
ENCOURAGING PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, THAT WE ARE PROPOSING A
FIVE-FOOT SIDEWALK HERE ALONG THE EAST THAT WILL CONNECT TO
THE PARKING LOT HERE AND TO THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND
CONNECT TO THE NORTH.
AND WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE BUFFERING AND SCREENING.
SO THAT'S IT.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
18:22:09 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, SIR.
18:22:15 >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
18:22:17 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK PUBLICLY ON ITEM NUMBER
2?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
18:22:27 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS HARRIET McCREED.
I'M REPRESENTING THE OLD WEST RIVERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
WE DID RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION OF THIS PROJECT, BUT ONE OF
THE THINGS WE NOTICED IS WE DIDN'T GET THE EXACT DETAILS OF
WHAT'S GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN THIS PROJECT.
I'M JUST BASICALLY FINDING OUT RIGHT NOW.
THEY DID ASK ME ON THEIR BEHALF TOO OFTEN PARTIES -- TO HAVE
THE PARTIES INVOLVED TO MEET WITH THE ASSOCIATION.
WE ALSO HAVE THE SECOND ASSOCIATION IN THE AREA, THE NORTH
HYDE PARK ASSOCIATION IS HERE ALSO.
MS. BRENDA.
SHE WOULD ALSO LIKE THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT TO
MEET WITH THEM.
18:23:07 >>LUIS VIERA:
COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL?
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER?
18:23:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HEARD ANYTHING IN
PARTICULAR THAT BOTHERS YOU TONIGHT, BUT WHAT WE COULD DO --
IT IS A TWO-READING PROCESS, NOW AND THEN TWO WEEKS FROM
NOW, TYPICALLY.
WE COULD GO AHEAD AND TENTATIVELY APPROVE IT.
ASK THE PETITIONER TO MEET WITH YOU AND YOUR COHORT OVER
THERE IN BETWEEN OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, TWO WEEKS FROM NOW
FOR SECOND READING, YOU COULD COME BACK IF YOU HAD ANY
OBJECTIONS.
18:23:43 >> SINCE THEY DO HAVE AN OBJECTION BECAUSE THEY LIVE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERYTHING THAT COMES INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
AS A PROJECT IS GOING TO IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY WANT TO LOOK AT THE PROJECT ITSELF AND LOOK AT ANY
IMPLICATIONS THAT MAY HAPPEN THAT MAY BE SHORTSIGHTED, THAT
MAY BE MISSED.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED.
THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME THAT BOTH OF THE ASSOCIATIONS HAVE
MET WITH BUILDERS.
WE'VE MET WITH JUST ABOUT EVERY BUILDER, EVERY PROJECT --
18:24:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU THINK YOU'D NEED?
TYPICALLY, LIKE I SAY, TYPICALLY IT'S TWO WEEKS.
WOULD YOU NEED A MONTH TO BE ABLE TO MEET WITH THEM AND LOOK
AT THIS?
18:24:22 >> WELL, I HAVE TO SPEAK WITH THE PRESIDENT AND THE VICE
PRESIDENT IN ORDER TO GET THAT ARRANGED.
BUT THEY DID WANT TO MEET WITH THE PARTIES AS FAR AS THIS
PROJECT.
18:24:36 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ARE YOU FINISHED, COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER?
18:24:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YEAH, I THINK SO.
18:24:43 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
COUNCILMAN GUDES.
18:24:44 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I GUESS I NEED TO ASK THE PETITIONER IF
THEY MET WITH ANYBODY ELSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I BELIEVE THAT PROPERTY WAS OWNED BY THE CHURCH, I BELIEVE.
BEULAH BAPTIST.
I THINK BEULAH SOLD THAT PROPERTY TO THEM, CORRECT?
18:25:02 >> MR. NEWTON FOR THE PETITIONER.
YES, THIS IS OWNED BY THE BEULAH BAPTIST CHURCH.
WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CHURCH HERE AS WELL.
18:25:13 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE.
I KNOW THERE ARE TWO STRONG NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OVER
THERE, AND THEY DO HAVE A VOICE OVER THERE.
I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE CHURCH IF THE CHURCH IS HERE.
18:25:23 >> THE ASSOCIATIONS FEEL THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE SURE THAT ANYTHING THAT COMES INTO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
18:25:31 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I UNDERSTAND.
18:25:33 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
FOR THE RECORD, MR. SHELBY, WHEN WOULD THIS BE COMING BACK
TO US, DO YOU KNOW?
18:25:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NORMALLY THE CLERK WOULD SET IT TWO WEEKS
FROM -- MARCH 5th, 9:30 A.M.
18:25:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THEN.
18:25:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
DEPENDS ON THE PETITIONER.
PETITIONER'S POSITION WE GET TO HEAR.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT CONTROLS WHAT DIRECTION --
18:25:56 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE CAN INQUIRE.
YES, MA'AM, GO AHEAD.
18:26:00 >> BRENDA LINDSEY, 1916 WEST LEMON STREET, NORTH HYDE PARK.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE INDUSTRY AND BUSINESSES COMING TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER, WE'D LIKE TO MEET
WITH YOU ALONG WITH RIVERFRONT TO REVIEW THIS PROJECT.
I HAVE A CONCERN WITH THE TREES AND THE FENCE, AND NO ONE
MENTIONED HOW LONG THE PARKING LOT IS GOING TO BE OPEN.
IS IT OPEN 24/7?
THAT'S NOT A GOOD AREA TO HAVE A 24/7, NO AREA REALLY, A
PARKING LOT.
THAT'S A CONCERN WE HAVE.
18:26:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
GOOD QUESTIONS.
18:26:42 >> IF WE CAN MEET WITH THE DEVELOPER, THAT WOULD BE
WONDERFUL.
18:26:48 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
18:26:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
WERE YOU ALL NOTICED BY THE DEVELOPER?
18:26:55 >> NO.
I GOT A NOTICE, YES.
18:27:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THEY WERE NOT NOTICED?
18:27:02 >> YEAH, IT WAS ONE OF THESE.
18:27:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I JUST WANT TO FIND OUT, YOU SENT OUT HOW
MANY NOTICES?
18:27:12 >> MATT NEWTON FOR THE PETITIONER.
18:27:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THERE IS NO MIKE THERE.
THIS IS NEW TECHNOLOGY.
18:27:22 >> I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF NOTICES OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD.
I COULD CHECK ACELA.
MY BELIEF IS IT WAS PROPERLY NOTICED.
18:27:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I GUESS YOU RESPOND TO THE PEOPLE THAT
ANSWER YOUR NOTICE, I WOULD ASSUME.
WHEN DID YOU MAIL THE NOTICES?
18:27:40 >> I BELIEVE CODE REQUIRES 30 DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
18:27:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOTICED PRIOR
TO YOU BEING HERE THURSDAY IN ADVANCE.
I SEE SOMEBODY SHAKING THEIR HEAD.
I DON'T KNOW.
18:27:54 >> THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOT NOTICED.
18:27:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
MA'AM, IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME.
18:27:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
MEANING WITHIN 250 FEET.
18:28:01 >> I UNDERSTAND.
18:28:01 >>LUIS VIERA:
I SEE MS. WELLS COMING UP.
18:28:03 >>CATE WELLS:
CATE WELLS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE NOTICE IS TO LET PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN
250 FEET AS WELL AS THE REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD
ORGANIZATIONS KNOW OF THE APPLICATION.
THERE'S INFORMATION GENERALLY IN THAT NOTICE ALLOWING THEM
TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPER TO HAVE THOSE COMMUNICATIONS IN
ADVANCE OF THE HEARING.
THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE NOTICE.
THE CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER OR APPLICANT TO MEET
WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ADVANCE.
SO PLEASE CONSIDER THAT AS YOU DELIBERATE HOW TO PROCEED
THIS EVENING.
AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE NOTICE IS SO THAT THOSE RECEIVING
IT CAN CONTACT THE DEVELOPER AND HAVE THE CONVERSATION.
18:28:45 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, SIR.
18:28:50 >> MY NAME IS JORDAN EDDIE.
I LIVE AT 511 SOUTH WESTLAND AVENUE, TAMPA, FLORIDA.
I'M HERE OPPOSED TO THIS TONIGHT.
I THINK THIS PROJECT IS TOO CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN TO BE
EXPANDING WHAT AMOUNTS TO A SURFACE PARKING LOT.
I THINK IF WE WANT A MORE VIBRANT URBAN CORE, WE NEED TO BE
THINKING ABOUT OTHER TYPES OF THINGS ON THESE PARCELS THAN
WHAT JUST AMOUNTS TO A PARKING LOT.
THIS IS CLOSE TO THE CASS STREET GREEN SPINE, WHICH IS
SUPPOSED TO BE A CORRIDOR FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BIKES AND
HAVING A SURFACE LOT ALONG THAT CORRIDOR DOES NOT ADVANCE
THAT GOAL.
IT'S ALSO CLOSE TO JULIAN B. LANE PARK, WHICH IS AN URBAN
PARK THAT THE CITY PUT A LOT INTO.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE SQUANDERING ITS POTENTIAL TO PUT A
SURFACE PARK CLOSE BY.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION FOR THE LOT IS URBAN
MIXED USE 60.
I DON'T THINK THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS URBAN OR MIXED USE.
UMU-60 CALLS FOR INTENSE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS, AND, AGAIN,
THIS IS JUST A SURFACE LOT.
UMU-60 ACTUALLY DESCRIBES CERTAIN TYPES OF PARKING
ARRANGEMENTS, EITHER ON-STREET PARKING, PARKING BEHIND A
STRUCTURE OR A STRUCTURED PARKING GARAGE, AND I DON'T
CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL TO BE ANY OF THOSE THREE THINGS
BECAUSE THE PARKING LOT IS COMPLETELY EXPOSED TO THE EAST TO
EDISON.
ON EDISON, IT WILL JUST BE A ROW OF PARKING LOT.
TO ME, THIS IS A VERY SUBURBAN DESIGN FOR AN URBAN AREA.
AND I ASK THAT YOU REJECT THE PROJECT.
THANK YOU.
18:30:32 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
NEXT, PLEASE.
18:30:38 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS WILLIE TIMES.
I'M A TRUSTEE WITH BEULAH BAPTIST INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH.
2516 REGAL RIVER ROAD, VALRICO, FLORIDA.
WE SUPPORT THE IDEA OF THE ZONING CHANGE TO PUT IN A PARKING
LOT.
PRIOR TO THE USE -- THE REQUESTED USE, THAT WAS KIND OF A
BLIGHTED AREA.
WE WERE ALWAYS HAVING TO SPEND EXTRA MONEY FOR CLEANUP AND
REPAIR AND REMOVING TRASH.
SO WE THINK THAT IT WOULD SERVE A MORE SOLID USE IN TERMS OF
USING IT AS A PARKING LOT SO WE SUPPORT PUTTING IN A PARKING
LOT THERE.
18:31:23 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
18:31:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU FOR COMING THIS EVENING.
SIR, QUICK QUESTION, WILL THE CHURCH BE SHARING THIS PARKING
LOT, USING IT ON SUNDAYS OR THAT SORT OF THING?
18:31:39 >> NO.
18:31:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OR ARE YOU SELLING IT AND MOVING ON?
18:31:42 >> WE ARE LEASING THE PROPERTY TO THEM NOW.
18:31:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP IT AND CONTINUE TO
LEASE IT.
18:31:48 >> WE ARE GOING TO KEEP IT.
18:31:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
LONG-TERM LEASE I ASSUME.
18:31:51 >> YES.
18:31:54 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE?
THANK YOU, SIR.
COUNCILMAN GUDES.
18:32:02 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
NOT FOR PETITIONER.
18:32:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER
2?
GO AHEAD, SIR.
18:32:09 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
THAT'S AN OLD COMMUNITY OVER THERE.
AND THEY WORK WELL WITH CONVERSATION.
I KNOW YOUR FIRM BELIEVES IN CONVERSATING.
THIS BODY CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, BUT I WOULD URGE THAT
IF YOU WOULD MEET, GET THE CHURCH INVOLVED.
IT'S ONE OF THE OLDEST CHURCHES IN TAMPA, BEULAH BAPTIST
INSTITUTION, AND YOU'VE GOT TWO OLD NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS WHO ARE VERY, VERY STRONG OVER THERE, AND THEY
LIKE TO WORK WITH PEOPLE.
SO I CAN HOPE THAT YOU CAN MAKE YOUR DECISION TO WHERE WE
HAVE A SMALL CONVERSATION WITH THEM BEFORE THIS BODY MAKES A
DECISION.
18:32:49 >> ABSOLUTELY, COUNCILMAN.
I BELIEVE PERSONALLY THAT COMMUNICATING CAN ONLY HELP.
SO I'M HAPPY TO GIVE MY CARDS TO THESE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS.
IT HAS MY CELL PHONE ON IT, E-MAIL ON IT.
I'LL REACH OUT TO THEM AS WELL.
OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, WE'LL SIT DOWN AND HAVE A
CONVERSATION.
I'D LOVE TO HEAR THEIR CONCERNS AND UNDERSTAND THEIR POINTS
OF VIEW.
18:33:11 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
18:33:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MY CONCERN IS IF THERE'S SOME SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES, FOR EXAMPLE, YOUNG LADY INDICATED SHE WAS CONCERNED
ABOUT ANY POSSIBLE HOURS OF OPERATION.
I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT LIGHTING.
ALSO, I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE CURRENT PARKING.
WHAT'S THE CURRENT PARKING SITUATION WITH THE RESTAURANT?
WHAT'S YOUR NEED?
18:33:35 >> CURRENTLY, THERE'S PARKING TO THE WEST.
AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORIC PARKING TO THE SOUTH.
THIS WAS BROUGHT TO YOU TODAY BECAUSE THE LOT TO THE REAR
WAS BEING USED AS ILLEGAL NONCONFORMING PARKING LOT.
SO THIS BRINGS THAT INTO CODE.
18:33:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS YOU'VE GOT A RESTAURANT, TOO BUSY AND
SHORT ON PARKING.
18:34:00 >> CORRECT.
IT'S HARD TO GET A DEVELOPER TO VOLUNTARILY PAY FOR PARKING,
AS YOU ALL KNOW.
SO HERE THE MARKET IS SPEAKING THAT THEY NEED MORE PARKING
TO SUCCEED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS IS THE WAY THEY
WOULD GO ABOUT DOING IT.
18:34:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ONLY SUGGESTION I WOULD HAVE AND
MR. SHELBY ALLUDED TO IT, WE CAN'T MAKE YOU.
I GUESS YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO A VOTE TONIGHT AND YOU HAVE A
RIGHT COME BACK TWO WEEKS LATER.
I WOULD SUGGEST EXTEND IT TO A MONTH TO GIVE EVERYBODY A
CHANCE TO BREATHE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES, YOU'D BE ABLE TO WORK
WITH STAFF WITH A LITTLE MORE TIME TO MAKE THE CHANGES ON
YOUR SITE PLAN OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
WHATEVER THE DETAILS ARE.
THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION.
THAT HAS TO BE VOLUNTARY FROM YOU.
18:34:45 >> I FIND IT A WISE SUGGESTION AND I WOULD HAPPILY EXTEND
OUT TO A MONTH.
18:34:51 >>LUIS VIERA:
REBUTTAL, IF YOU'D LIKE.
18:34:54 >> WAIVE REBUTTAL.
18:34:55 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN GUDES, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE READING ITEM
NUMBER 2, SIR?
MR. NEWTON, IF I MAY --
18:35:18 >> MOVE TO REOPEN.
18:35:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
IN ANY FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
TO SPECIFY BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION.
YOUR INTENT AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG IS TAKE YOUR CHANCE
ON A VOTE NOW.
IF YOU GET TO PASS FIRST BASE TO SECOND BASE TO HAVE 30 DAYS
OR A MONTH GO BY TO SECOND READING, CORRECT?
18:35:40 >> THAT IS CORRECT, MR. VIERA.
I EXPECT THIS TO BE DISCUSSED FURTHER AT SECOND READING.
18:35:44 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS BASED ON THAT, COUNCILMAN GUDES?
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
I HEARD COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER CORRECTLY STATE, JUST FOR THE
OBVIOUS, WHICH IS IF I ASK SOMEBODY TO READ SOMETHING, I'M
NOT COMPELLING SOMEONE TO READ ANYTHING.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
I'M GOING DOWN THE LINE, SO TO SPEAK.
IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE.
COUNCILMAN GUDES, IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE READING ITEM NUMBER
2, SIR.
18:36:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
OTHERWISE, HE COULD ASK TO PASS.
18:36:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
PASS.
OKAY.
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
18:36:26 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
PASS.
18:36:27 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN CITRO?
18:36:34 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
GIVE ME ONE SECOND, PLEASE AND THANK YOU.
FILE NUMBER SU --
18:36:47 >>LUIS VIERA:
I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
I APOLOGIZE BEFORE THAT.
MR. SHELBY, IF THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PETITIONER WISHED TO
MAKE ANY FURTHER STATEMENTS AT THIS TIME, HE WOULD NOT BE
ALLOWED TO DO SO AS WE'VE CLOSED, CORRECT?
18:37:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE?
18:37:10 >>LUIS VIERA:
IN OTHER WORDS, GIVEN THE STATEMENT BY
COUNCILMAN GUDES ON MEETING WITH FOLKS AND WAITING ON FIRST
READING, JUST I DIDN'T KNOW IF --
18:37:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, COUNCIL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF
CLARIFICATION, OBVIOUSLY, BY READING THE TITLE, YOU ARE
MOVING THE ITEM.
18:37:31 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES.
18:37:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHEN YOU PASS, IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY
INDICATE HOW YOU INTEND TO VOTE NECESSARILY.
BUT FOR THE FACT THAT THEY WOULD PREFER PERHAPS SOMEBODY
ELSE TO READ IT.
18:37:43 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'M TALKING ABOUT -- I'M SORRY.
I WASN'T CLEAR.
18:37:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
BUT LET ME SAY THIS.
WHERE YOU STAND NOW IS IT'S BEFORE YOU FOR FIRST READING.
YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, AND YOU HAVE THE CRITERIA FOR THE
SPECIAL USE IN FRONT OF YOU.
WHATEVER DECISION YOU HAVE TO MAKE, YOU'VE ALSO HEARD
MS. WELLS FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT INFORM YOU THAT THERE IS
NO REQUIREMENT UNDER YOUR CODE FOR MEETING WITH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UNDER YOUR CODE, IS NOT
GRANTED ANY VETO RIGHTS ON ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT.
THEY, JUST LIKE ANYBODY ELSE, HAVE TO PROVIDE COMPETENT
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE UPON WHICH YOU MUST BASE YOUR VOTE,
ABSENT WHICH IT WOULD BE ERROR TO DENY IT IN THE ABSENCE OF
COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
I WOULD REMIND YOU OF THAT, IRRESPECTIVE OF HOW COUNCIL
ULTIMATELY GOES.
BUT ON THE CHANCE, MR. CHAIRMAN THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME
SORT OF ISSUES WITH THIS, WHAT I HAVE NOT DONE, I ASK THAT I
DO NOW, IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
RELATIVE TO ANY OF TONIGHT'S HEARINGS THAT HAVE BEEN
AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION THAT THEY BE RECEIVED AND
FILED INTO THE RECORD AT THIS TIME BY MOTION PLEASE.
18:39:01 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
18:39:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
SO MOVED.
18:39:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
THANK YOU, SIR.
YOU MAY CONTINUE.
I APOLOGIZE.
18:39:13 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
FILE NUMBER SU 2-19-10, AN APPLICANT --
EXCUSE ME, AN ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING
CONSIDERATION.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SU-2);
APPROVING COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET PARKING IN AN RS-50
(RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY) ZONING DISTRICT IN THE GENERAL
VICINITY OF 710 NORTH EDISON, IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA,
AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 HEREOF;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
AS THE PETITIONER HAS MET THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND THE
GENERAL STANDARDS OF 27-129, THE USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE
CONTINUOUS AND SURROUNDING PROPERTY.
THE USE WILL NOT ESTABLISH A PRECEDENT OR ENCOURAGE
INCOMPATIBLE USES IN SURROUNDING AREA.
18:40:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
18:40:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THE SECOND READING WILL BE 30 DAYS FROM
THIS DATE, WHATEVER THE STATE THAT IS.
AND PASSING ON FIRST READING DOES NOT IN ANY WAY CARRY THAT
IT WOULD BE PASSED ON SECOND READING.
18:40:16 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES.
18:40:17 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU.
18:40:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
IS THAT A SECOND, COUNCILMAN?
18:40:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'LL SECOND WITH THAT CAVEAT ADDED TO IT.
18:40:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE ALSO A REVISION SHEET AS WELL.
18:40:28 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
INCLUDING THE REVISION SHEET.
18:40:30 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, I BELIEVE.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
18:40:38 >> NAY.
18:40:42 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED WITH MANISCALCO VOTING NO.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WOULD BE HELD ON MARCH 19th AT
9:30 A.M.
18:40:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
JUST A REMINDER TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE
PRESENT THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONAL NOTICE SENT OUT
REGARDING THAT DATE OF THE SECOND READING.
AGAIN, IT'S MARCH 19th.
18:41:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IN THE MORNING.
9 A.M.
18:41:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
9:30 A.M., I BELIEVE.
18:41:12 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, SIR.
18:41:13 >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.
RYAN MANASSE, PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
ITEM 3 IS APPLICATION REZ 19-102 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
4313 NORTH MANHATTAN AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM COMMERCIAL
GENERAL TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF PROPERTY WITH COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES.
18:41:39 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE IN THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE
WESTSHORE BUSINESS CENTER AND DREW PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE IS A TRANSIT STOP ABOUT 1500 FEET TO THE EAST OF THE
SUBJECT SITE.
LEVEL E EVACUATION ZONE.
THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL, LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL, HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME RESIDENCES TO THE SOUTH,
WHICH IS WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND THIS IS
NORTH MANHATTAN AVENUE.
THIS IS AN ELECTRICAL SUPPLY STORE TO THE NORTH AND THEN WE
HAVE SOME FRINGE AIRPORT USES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL 35.
THAT IS THE RED.
THAT ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES.
TO THE SOUTH IS RESIDENTIAL 20.
THAT'S WHERE WE TRANSITION TO SOME RESIDENTIAL USES AND THEN
WE HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO THE NORTH.
AND THEN THE BLUE IS THE AIRPORT OWNED PROPERTY.
THAT'S OUR PUBLIC FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY
ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES.
THIS AREA HAS ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED WITH HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
USE -- EXCUSE ME, INDUSTRIAL-TYPE USES TO THE NORTH.
SO WE DID FIND THAT IT WOULD BE COMPARABLE AND COMPATIBLE
FOR THOSE, AND THIS IS WITHIN THE LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT
PATTERN ENVISIONED UNDER THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 35.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
18:43:06 >>RYAN MANASSE:
RYAN MANASSE, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS EUCLIDEAN REZONING, THEREFORE NO
WAIVERS REQUESTED OR PERMITTED THROUGH THIS REZONING
APPLICATION.
AGAIN, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REZONE THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 4313 NORTH MANHATTAN FROM CG TO CI TO ALLOW FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY WITH COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES.
.49-ACRE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF MANHATTAN
AVENUE, SOUTH OF THE WEST DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
BOULEVARD, AND NORTH MANHATTAN AVENUE INTERSECTION AND IS
CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY OFFICE USE.
THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY AUTO SALES AND WAREHOUSE TO
THE NORTH AND IN THE CI ZONING DISTRICT AND VACANT,
UNDEVELOPED LOT TO THE EAST IN THE CI ZONING DISTRICT.
A VACANT UNDEVELOPED LOT TO THE SOUTH IN THE RESIDENTIAL
MULTIFAMILY, RM-16 ZONING DISTRICT AND OFFICE IN THE CG AND
CI ZONING DISTRICT TO THE WEST.
THROUGH THE STAFF FINDING THERE ARE NO HISTORIC LANDMARK
STRUCTURES WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF THE AREA.
TO REITERATE THE AREA, AS YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS OUTLINED IN RED.
THE CI ZONING DISTRICT TO THE NORTH AS WELL AS CI AND CG TO
THE WEST WITH RM-16 TO THE SOUTH AND CI TO THE EAST.
THE FIRST PICTURE IS THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE SECOND SUBJECT SITE MORE TO THE SOUTH.
THIS IS THE NORTH NEIGHBOR AT 4316 WEST DR. MARTIN LUTHER
KING JR. BOULEVARD.
SOUTH NEIGHBOR 4309 NORTH MANHATTAN.
OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ALSO OWNS THIS PROPERTY WHICH IS ZONED
RM-16.
IT'S VACANT.
THIS IS THE EAST NEIGHBOR AT 4314 NORTH COOLIDGE.
THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST AT 4400 WEST DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING
JR. BOULEVARD.
THIS IS 4305 NORTH MANHATTAN. THIS IS GOING SOUTH FROM THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET, DOWN MANHATTAN.
THIS IS 4306.
4304, 4302 WHICH ARE RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND 4315 WHICH IS ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH MANHATTAN
BOULEVARD OR AVENUE.
THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE
APPLICATION, AND WE FOUND IT CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF
TAMPA CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
18:45:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, SIR.
PETITIONER?
ITEM 3, ANYONE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 3?
18:45:49 >> I'M HERE FOR THE OWNER.
HE HAS MET ALL OF THE QUALIFICATIONS --
18:45:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'M SORRY.
WHAT'S YOUR NAME.
18:45:55 >> MARIA GARCIA.
18:45:56 >>LUIS VIERA:
WHO IS YOUR FAVORITE BEATLE?
I'M JOKING.
[ LAUGHTER ]
18:46:02 >> ANYWAY, HE HAS SENT OUT THE NOTICE, WHICH HAS BEEN POSTED
AND THE RESIDENTS AROUND THE AREA HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE
INTENT TO REZONE THE PROPERTY.
18:46:16 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING ELSE, MA'AM?
18:46:18 >> NO.
18:46:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
18:46:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
JUST TO CLARIFY, DID I HEAR CORRECTLY
THAT THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY I THINK TO
THE SOUTH IS ALSO OWNED BY YOUR CLIENT AS WELL?
18:46:33 >> CORRECT.
18:46:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND THERE'S NO OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
SURROUNDING IT.
18:46:39 >> NO, SIR.
18:46:39 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING ELSE?
18:46:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
JUST TO MAKE SURE FOR THE RECORD, YOU WERE
SWORN IN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
18:46:46 >> I WAS NOT.
18:46:47 >>LUIS VIERA:
IF YOU DON'T MIND, BE PREPARED TO BE SWORN IN.
ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING THIS EVENING AND YOU HAVE NOT BEEN
SWORN IN, PLEASE PREPARE FOR THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING SWORN
IN BY JIM CREW.
[OATH ADMINISTERED BY THE CLERK]
18:47:13 >> THANK YOU.
18:47:15 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
ANYONE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 3?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
18:47:20 >> MOVE TO CLOSE.
18:47:22 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, SIR.
18:47:24 >> MY NAME IS RAFAEL GALLART.
I LIVE ON 4311 WEST VIRGINIA, SOUTH OF THEIR PROPERTY.
I WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH HIM TO SEE WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS
THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE THERE.
I'VE SEEN A COUPLE OF TRUCKS THERE, TRACTOR-TRAILERS.
AT NIGHT, THERE'S NOISE SOMETIMES.
I WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH THEM TO SEE WHAT OPERATION HOURS
THEY HAVE.
18:47:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
MA'AM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD, THIS
GENTLEMAN, WHAT'S YOUR LAST NAME, SIR?
18:47:59 >> GALLART.
18:48:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
MR. GALLART WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH YOU.
ARE YOU AMENABLE TO THAT?
PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN.
18:48:13 >> MARIA GARCIA.
I AM AVAILABLE TO MEET.
18:48:17 >>LUIS VIERA:
GREAT.
I ASSUME YOU ALL --
18:48:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MAYBE WE CAN EXPEDITE THINGS IF WE DEFER
THE ITEM.
GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, LET THEM GO IN THE HALL.
MAYBE THEY CAN DO IT QUICK.
IT'S A EUCLIDEAN, THERE'S NO SITE PLAN.
18:48:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST FOR PURPOSES
OF THE RECORD, THERE IS A SCHEDULE OF PERMITTED USES UNDER
EUCLIDEAN REZONINGS.
IN OTHER WORDS, ONE COMMITMENT THAT ONE MIGHT MAKE TO
WHATEVER IS THERE WITHIN THAT ZONING CATEGORY IS NOT DONE
NECESSARILY BINDING, AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE SCHEDULE OF
PERMITTED USES UNDER THE EUCLIDEAN REZONING THAT'S BEING
REQUESTED.
YOU CAN DISCUSS THAT.
18:48:58 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4.
ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR COMMENT ON NUMBER 3?
OKAY.
SO WE'LL MOVE TO NUMBER 4.
ONCE WE'RE FINISHED WITH 4, WE'LL GO BACK TO 3.
ON TO 4.
18:49:11 >>RYAN MANASSE:
RYAN MANASSE, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
ITEM NUMBER 4 IS THE APPLICATION REZ 20-01.
THIS IS FOR THE ADDRESS OF 111 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM RS-60
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY TO RS-50 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY
TO ALLOW FOR TWO DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
18:49:31 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
18:49:36 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS AN UPDATED REPORT THAT I'M GOING
TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD AND I HAVE ENOUGH COPIES AVAILABLE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CENTRAL TAMPA PLANNING
DISTRICT, JUST SOUTH OF WEST KENNEDY BOULEVARD.
THERE'S A TRANSIT STOP ABOUT 0.1-MILE TO THE NORTH OF THE
SITE AT THE CORNER OF WEST KENNEDY BOULEVARD AND NORTH HIMES
AVENUE WHICH IS ABOUT HERE.
THIS IS WHERE THE SUBJECT SITE IS.
CHARLES B. WILLIAMS PARK IS THE CLOSEST PUBLIC RECREATIONAL
FACILITY LOCATED ABOUT 1.2 MILES TO THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT
SITE, AND THIS IS LOCATED IN EVACUATION ZONE D.
I HAVE AN AERIAL UP ON THE SCREEN.
THERE ARE A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES ALONG WEST KENNEDY
BOULEVARD, BUT THEN IT TRANSITIONS AS WE MOVE SOUTH TO THE
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL, WHICH WILL BE APPARENT
ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
WEST KENNEDY BOULEVARD IS A DESIGNATED TRANSIT EMPHASIS
AREA.
THIS IS AN AREA IN THE CITY WHERE WE PROMOTE TRANSIT OPTIONS
AND BEEN DEVELOPED WITH THE COMMERCIAL USES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE IS URBAN 60.
ORANGE COLOR IS RESIDENTIAL 10.
THAT IS THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PRESENT TO THE SOUTH OF
WEST KENNEDY BOULEVARD.
AND RESIDENTIAL 10 IS PRIMARILY A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
RESIDENTIAL 10 ALLOWS FOR UP TO 10 DWELLING UNITS
PRESENTATION.
THAT'S THE MAXIMUM DENSITY.
THE EXISTING DENSITY OF THIS SITE, IF IT IS DEVELOPED WITH
TWO DWELLING UNITS WILL BE 5.8 UNITS PER ACRE WHICH IS
CONSISTENT WITH THAT RESIDENTIAL TEN FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION, AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT
PATTERN ANTICIPATED UNDER THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
AND WE FOUND THAT IT WOULD NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OR
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE GRAY GABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
18:51:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WHAT CHANGED FROM YOUR ORIGINAL REPORT TO
THIS REPORT?
18:51:42 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
IT'S A LITTLE EMBARRASSING.
THERE WERE -- IT WAS A MISTAKE.
THERE WERE SOME URBAN VILLAGE POLICIES IN THE ORIGINAL
REPORT THAT DID NOT APPLY TO THIS REQUEST.
WHEN I REALIZED IT, IT WAS DELETED AND WE GOT THE NEW REPORT
OUT TO YOU.
18:51:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
SORRY FOR --
18:52:01 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
IT'S OKAY.
18:52:10 >>RYAN MANASSE:
RYAN MANASSE, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
AGAIN, THIS IS A EUCLIDEAN REZONING REQUEST, THEREFORE THERE
ARE NO WAIVERS PERMITTED.
THE APPLICANT AGAIN IS PROPOSING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY AT
111 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE FROM RS 60 TO RS 50 TO ALLOW FOR
THE TWO DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS TWO PLOTTED LOTS, LOTS 91 AND 92,
OF THE GRAY GABLES SUBDIVISION PLAT.
LOTS 91 AND 92 EACH MEASURE APPROXIMATELY 54 FEET BY
135 FEET WHICH EQUATES TO 7,290 SQUARE FEET AND HALF OF A
VACATED ALLEY FOR A TOTAL SITE AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 7,506
SQUARE FEET FOR EACH LOT.
GRAY GABLES SUBDIVISION IS THIS INSIDE BLOCK HERE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS RIGHT HERE.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY A DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED IN 1948.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED TWO LOTS TO THE SOUTH OF SOUTH
GUNLOCK AVENUE AND WEST GRAY COURT INTERSECTION.
IT IS SURROUNDED BY DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS TO THE
NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST AND IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY
RS-60 ZONING DISTRICT.
DEVELOPMENT MUST ADHERE TO ALL CITY OF TAMPA LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AT TIME OF PERMITTING.
I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ALSO THE SUBDIVISION MAP ON SCREEN.
IT IS IN YOUR STAFF REPORTS BUT JUST TO HIGHLIGHT IT AS
WELL.
THE GRAY GABLES SUBDIVISION WAS ORIGINALLY PLATTED IN 1925
WITH LOTS THAT RANGE IN WIDTH FROM 50 FEET TO 148 FEET WITH
A TYPICAL AVERAGE LOT WIDTH OF 50 TO 54 FEET AND DEPTH
VARYING FROM 61 FEET TO 150 FEET.
THE SUBDIVISION PLAT OF GRAY GABLES SUBDIVISION CONTAINS
FIVE BLOCKS.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN LOTS 91 AND 92, AND THE
SUBJECT APPLICATION SEEKS TO REESTABLISH THE ORIGINAL
PLATTED LOTS TO CREATE TWO BUILDABLE LOTS.
HERE'S OUR CONFORMING MAP.
THE OVERALL AREA OF ANALYSIS INCLUDES THE ENTIRETY OF THE
GRAY GABLES SUBDIVISION PLAT.
THE ANALYSIS INCLUDED 109 TOTAL ZONING LOTS.
67 OR 61 PERCENT OF THOSE LOTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITH
WIDTHS OF 60 FEET OR GREATER AND 42 OR 39 PERCENT HAVE BEEN
DEVELOPED WITH WIDTH OF 59.99 FEET OR LESS.
AND THOSE ARE TYPICALLY HISTORICALLY PLATTED LOTS.
PURSUANT TO THE REVIEW OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN,
THE SUBJECT BLOCK CONTAINS 25 TOTAL ZONING LOTS, 17 OR 68%
OF THOSE LOTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITH WIDTHS OF 60 FEET OR
GREATER AND 8 OR 32 PERCENT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITH LOT
WIDTHS OF 59.99 OR LESS.
AGAIN, TYPICALLY HISTORIC PLATTED LOT.
THE 100 TO 200 BLOCK OF SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE WHICH IS ON
BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET CONTAINS 25 TOTAL ZONING LOTS.
13 OR 52% OF THOSE LOTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITH A WIDTH OF
60 FEET OR GREATER AND 12 OR 48 PERCENT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED
WITH A WIDTH OF 59.99 FEET OR LESS.
THE TOTAL -- TOTAL OF 29% OF THE SUBJECT BLOCK FACE HAS BEEN
DEVELOPED WITH A WIDTH OF 59.99 FEET OR LESS.
STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE
STUDY AREA, SUBJECT BLOCK ADDRESS RANGE, AND BLOCK FACE ARE
COMPOSED PRIMARILY OF LOTS GREATER THAN 60 FEET IN WIDTH.
HOWEVER, STAFF PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT LARGER LOT WIDTHS
ARE RESORT OF MAJORITY OF LOTS WITH TRAPEZOIDAL SHAPE WITH
WIDEST PART FRONTING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
SUBJECT PROPERTY, AS WELL AS LOTS RUN DIRECTLY EAST AND WEST
ARE RECTANGLES AND MAJORITY LESS THAN 60 FEET IN WIDTH.
STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED REESTABLISHMENT OF THE ORIGINAL
PLATTED LOTS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
PATTERN OF THE BLOCK FACE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
THERE WERE NO HISTORIC LANDMARK STRUCTURES WITHIN A THOUSAND
FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF THE SURROUNDING
AREA.
THIS IS 109, GOING TO 209.
211.
212, 210, 114.
112.
110.
THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE
APPLICATION AND AGAIN FINDS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF
TAMPA DEVELOPMENT CODE.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
18:56:32 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS?
PETITIONER ON ITEM 4.
18:56:44 >> THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS J.P. GUZZARDO.
TAMPA, FLORIDA.
THE HOME UNDER CONSTRUCTION IS LOCATED AT 210 SOUTH GUNLOCK,
DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I WILL BRIEFLY BREEZE THROUGH THIS, IF I COULD TO REITERATE
SOME OF STAFF'S FINDINGS.
AS MENTIONED, THE SUBJECT REQUEST IS THE GRAY GABLES GREATER
NEIGHBORHOOD.
KENNEDY TO THE NORTH, AZEELE TO THE SOUTH, BORDERED ALSO BY
HIMES AND BEVERLY.
STAFF MENTIONED IT WAS PLATTED IN 1925, CONSIDERING A WIDE
RANGE OF LOT WIDTHS RANGING FROM 50 TO 100 FEET AND LOT DEP
AS LITTLE AS 160 FEET, WHICH IS INTERESTING TO 150.
THE REASON FOR THAT IS OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT A NORMAL
PARALLEL, PERPENDICULAR POSITIONED NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU
WILL.
THERE'S SOME ODD CONFIGURATION WITH THE TRAPEZOIDAL AND EVEN
TRIANGULAR SHAPED LOTS HERE.
THE MAJORITY OF LOTS, ALTHOUGH LESS THAN 60 FEET IN WIDTH,
CONTAIN OVER 6,000 FEET IN THE AREA.
ONE OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE IS THERE IS A
REQUIREMENT PER THE PLAT THAT THE HOMES BE SET BACK AT
25 FEET FROM THE FRONT BUILDING SETBACK, WHICH IS CONSISTENT
WITH RS-16 ZONING.
TYPICALLY THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE 20 FEET IF
IT'S AN RS-50.
SO WHAT THE REQUEST IS FOR TODAY IS THE REESTABLISHMENT OF
THE ORIGINALLY PLATTED LOTS, 54 BY 139.
ACTUALLY 135, BUT THEY VACATED THE ALLEYWAY WHICH MAKES THEM
NOW 139.
EACH OF THE LOTS WILL CONTAIN OVER 7,506 SQUARE FEET, WHICH
IS SUBSTANTIALLY IN EXCESS OF THE RS 60 MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.
EACH OF THE LOTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RS 60 AREA BUT DON'T
MEET THE TECHNICAL WIDTH AT THE FRONTAGE THAT IS REQUIRED.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.
I BRIEFLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SUBJECT BLOCK FACE, WHICH
REALLY RUNS FROM WEST GRAY GABLE COURT DOWN TO GRAY GABLES
SOUTH HERE.
MAJORITY OF THESE ARE PREDOMINANTLY LESS THAN 60 FEET.
ON THE EAST SIDE OF THIS, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S
PREDOMINANTLY 50 BY 139 AVERAGE SIZED LOTS.
9 OF THE 11 LOTS ARE DEVELOPED AT LESS THAN THE 60 FEET.
AND THEN ON THE WEST SIDE, YOU HAVE LOTS THAT ARE 50 BY 135
AVERAGE IN FOUR OF THOSE SEVEN LOTS WERE ESTABLISHED.
SO YOU'VE GOT 52% THERE.
SO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IS REALLY ONE HOUSE PER
ONE PLATTED LOT AS ORIGINALLY ESTABLISHED IN THE 1925 PLAT
THAT'S THERE.
THIS IS THE MAP THAT STAFF WAS PROVIDED.
LOTS OF COLORS, LOTS OF VARIETY, LOTS OF DIFFERENT LOT SIZES
GOING ON IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WOULD LIKE TO JUST POINT OUT THAT THE LOTS AS MENTIONED BY
STAFF, SOME OF WHICH ARE 80 FEET IN FRONTAGE NARROW DOWN TO
40 FEET IN THE BACK.
SO THESE ARE REALLY PIE-SHAPED LOTS AS YOU GET TOWARDS THE
CORNERS HERE AS YOU ENTER THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPOSED LOT AREA IS COMPATIBLE.
I TOOK REALLY WHAT'S CALLED THE CORE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF
YOU WILL, THAT RUNS, IF WE ELIMINATED THE PIE-SHAPED LOTS
AND THERE'S EFFECTIVELY 37 LOTS IN THAT GIVEN AREA, OF WHICH
24 ARE DEVELOPED AS ORIGINALLY PLATTED ON EITHER 54 OR
50-FOOT LOTS.
ON THE SUBJECT BLOCK FACE, THERE ARE 18 LOTS, WHICH 13 OF
THEM, 72% ARE EITHER 50 OR 54 FEET.
AND THEN ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BLOCK FACE THERE, THEY WERE
ORIGINALLY PLATTED AS 50-FOOT IN WIDTH.
THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND POLICIES,
CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL CHARACTER.
I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION HERE ALREADY TODAY ABOUT
OVERALL PRECEDENT AND WHAT THEY MAY MEAN.
THERE'S ONLY SIX OTHER LOTS WITHIN THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD
THAT COULD BE SPLIT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AND FOUR OF
THOSE ARE OVER 120 FEET.
THOSE ARE THE ODD-SHAPED TRIANGLE PIECES HERE, HERE, AND
HERE.
WHICH COULD BASICALLY BE SPLIT AS THEY SEE FIT WITHOUT
HAVING TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU.
SO THERE'S REALLY ONLY TWO OTHER LOTS THAT WOULD BE IN
QUESTION THAT WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO COME BEFORE YOU FOR THE
RS-60 TO RS-50 ZONING IN THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS A LOT DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT, 108 FEET
WIDE.
TWO 54-FOOT LOTS AND ALSO A LOT HERE THAT IS 101 FEET WIDE.
THIS WAS JUST REAL QUICK, JUST SO YOU CAN SEE THE
DISTINCTIVE DIFFERENCE.
I KNOW STAFF MENTIONED THIS.
THIS IS ON THE BLOCK FACE AS WE RUN NORTH-SOUTH.
THE BLOCK FACE THAT'S IN QUESTION.
SO THIS IS A 60-FOOT LOT GREATER THAN 60-FOOT LOT.
THEN WE GO HERE, 50-FOOT LOT, 50-FOOT LOT, 50-FOOT LOT,
55-FOOT LOT ORIGINALLY PLATTED AS 50-FOOT LOT BUT THERE WAS
A VACATED WALKWAY EASEMENT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE PROPERTY
OWNER.
THIS BECAME A 55-FOOT LOT.
50-FOOT LOT.
50-FOOT LOT.
50-FOOT LOT.
THIS IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN 60 FEET.
THIS IS 50-FOOT WIDE LOT AS WELL, ANOTHER 50-FOOTER.
WEST SIDE, LESS THAN 60 FEET.
THIS IS THE OTHER SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT IS 108 FEET WIDE,
OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WOULD SUGGEST THIS ONE IS OVER 60 FEET.
NOW WE HAVE A 52-FOOT WIDE LOT.
NOW WE HAVE A 57-FOOT WIDE LOT.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH IS THE 108 FEET AND
AGAIN, THIS IS WHEN WE START TO MAKE THE CURVE AS WE GO
NORTH TO KENNEDY.
80-FOOT OF FRONTAGE SHRINKS DOWN TO 40 FEET IN THE BACK.
I JUST WANTED TO SHOW KIND OF THE OVERALL CONSISTENCY THERE.
THE MAP THAT STAFF PROVIDED REALLY DEMONSTRATED NO
PREDOMINANCE OF A PATTERN IN THE OVERALL AREA.
IF THERE WAS A PATTERN ESTABLISHED, I WOULD SUGGEST GOING
BACK TO THE PREVIOUS MAP THAT WOULD BE IN THAT CORE AREA,
THE LOTS UNDER 60 FEET IN NATURE.
IT'S AN INTERESTING ENCLAVE OF COMMERCIAL USES THERE ON THE
NORTH SIDE AND THEN REALLY CORE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT
THERE TO THE SOUTH.
VERY CHARACTERISTIC OF THE REQUEST, PRESERVE, MAINTAINING
AND CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD AND STAFF HAD
MENTIONED.
ALTHOUGH THE LOTS ARE 60 -- NOT 60 FEET IN WIDTH, THEY DO
COMPOSE OF OVER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD BE
REQUIRED FOR THE RS-60.
I WON'T BORE YOU WITH THIS.
BASICALLY QUOTES FROM THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
POLICIES, BOTH SAYING THAT THE REQUEST IS IN LINE WITH THE
REQUEST, INCONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
THE TAMPA COMP PLAN.
IN CONCLUSION HERE, THE FINAL REPORTS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY
STAFF -- WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDS THE REQUEST CONSISTENT WITH
THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING
CHARACTER OF THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD AND RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR APPROVAL AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
19:03:49 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER?
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANYONE HERE TO COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 4?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
GO AHEAD, FOLKS.
BY A SHOW OF HANDS, JUST SO WE KNOW, HOW MANY FOLKS ARE
PLANNING ON SPEAKING FOR ITEM NUMBER 4?
IF YOU'RE ABLE TO DO SO, STAND UP AND GO LINE YOURSELVES UP
THERE AGAINST THE WALL, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
WE APPRECIATE IT.
GO AHEAD, SIR.
19:04:18 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS BRUCE CLARKE.
I HAVE RESIDED AT 212 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE FOR THE PAST 19
YEARS.
I OPPOSE THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FOR THE FOLLOWING
REASONS.
THERE ARE ONLY 30 PARTIES IN ALL OF GRAY GABLES THAT ARE
54 FEET OR LESS.
THERE ARE 79 PARCELS, INCLUDING THE PETITION'S THAT ARE
55 FEET OR GREATER.
I DISPUTE THE FINDING OF A STAFF REPORT THAT THE REZONING IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
I AM REQUESTING THAT THE CHARACTER OF THE ENTIRE
NEIGHBORHOOD OF GRAY GABLES BE PRESERVED AND NOT DETERMINED
BY THE ARBITRARY BLOCK FACE AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
THIS WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN 9.3.8, WHICH STATES IT IS THE INTENT OF THE CITY THAT
NEW RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS SHALL BE MINIMALLY
DISRUPTIVE TO ADJACENT AREAS, IMPACTS OF RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ON THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND
THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND TAMPA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 27-11, WHICH STATES, NEWLY
CREATED LOTS MUST MAINTAIN THE FRONT ORIENTATION AND
HISTORICAL PRECEDENT PATTERN OF PARCEL CONFIGURATION IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE STAFF REPORT ALSO CITES POLICY 1.3.10.
THEY CITE IT IN SUPPORT OF CHANGE IN CONFIGURATION WHERE THE
POLICY ACTUALLY STATES BUILD WITHIN THE EXISTING STREET
BLOCK AND LOT CONFIGURATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF GRAY GABLES IS DUE IN NO SMALL PART
TO THE DIVERSITY OF THE LOT SIZES.
THIS GIVES A VERY DIFFERENT FEEL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH
IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THE DECISION MANY OF US HAVE MADE
TO LIVE HERE.
THE RS-60 DESIGNATION WAS APPLIED IN 1987.
AT THAT TIME, THE PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT WAS WELL
ESTABLISHED IN GRAY GABLES AND CERTAINLY WELL-KNOWN TO CITY
PLANNERS AND THE COUNCIL.
THE EFFECT OF RS-60 IS TO MAINTAIN THE UNIQUE
CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTS OF TAMPA BY PREVENTING THE CREATION
OF SMALLER LOTS.
PLEASE DON'T GO AGAINST THIS INTENT.
PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE.
THANK YOU.
19:06:21 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:06:24 >> HELLO.
MICHAEL VICARI.
I LIVE IN GRAY GABLES ALSO.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS THREE MAIN POINTS AND PETITION AGAINST
THIS ZONING CHANGE IS CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, DISCUSS THE RS-60 ZONING, AND ALSO THE
MOTIVATION BEHIND THIS.
FIRST THING IS THE MAJORITY OF THE LOTS IN THIS AREA ARE
60 FEET AND WIDER.
HE SAID IT HIMSELF, OVER 60%.
THAT CREATES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU HAVE
BIGGER LOTS.
IF YOU CONTINUE TO SPLIT THE LOTS AND ALLOW IT, THEN YOU'RE
CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF YOU BRING IT BACK DOWN TO THE 50-50 RANGE OR LESS THAN
50%, 60-FOOT FRONTAGE, YOU'RE DEFINITELY CHANGING THE
CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE OTHER THING I WORRY ABOUT, TWO EMPTY LOTS SYMMETRICAL
SIDE BY SIDE.
THAT LENDS TO A BUILDER COMING IN AND BUILDING THE EXACT
SAME HOUSE.
IT HAPPENED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT GOT PAST THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ONCE THOSE HOUSES WERE BUILT, EVERYBODY WAS FURIOUS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND WROTE LETTERS BUT IT WAS TOO LATE BECAUSE
THE ZONING CHANGE HAD TAKEN PLACE.
IT ALSO DRAWS A LARGER HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHEN YOU'RE PAYING $350,000 FOR A LOT, PEOPLE TEND TO
MAXIMIZE THEIR SQUARE FOOTAGE.
YOU GET A LARGE RECTANGULAR HOUSE WHICH IS NOT THE
CHARACTERISTIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
RS-60 ZONING IS THE CURRENT ZONING.
IT SHOULD BE UPHELD AS THERE IS NO VALID OR CRITICAL REASON
TO OVERRIDE THE CURRENT ZONING.
IT'S A LAW.
IT'S THERE FOR A PURPOSE AND IT WAS SET IN PLACE.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ORIGINAL
PALLET.
THAT WAS THERE AS A GUIDE.
SOME POINT OVERRULED THAT.
RS-60 AS WELL AS EVERYTHING AROUND US RIGHT NOW.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS RS-60 ZONING.
THE MOTIVATION BEHIND THIS, THE PERSON REQUESTING THE CHANGE
RIGHT NOW DOES NOT CURRENTLY OWN THE PROPERTY.
HE IS A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPER, AND SO HE WANTS TO SPLIT IT
TO SPLIT TWO LOTS AND MAKE MONEY ON IT.
HE DOES NOT OWN THAT PROPERTY.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT REASON TO CIRCUMVENT ZONING LAWS.
THE ZONING IS RS-60.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE PETITIONER WILL CLOSE ON THIS PIECE
OF PROPERTY IF THIS ZONING IS NOT GRANTED.
IF YOU SPLIT IT UP INTO TWO, THERE'S PLENTY OF MONEY TO BE
MADE AND THEN HE'LL CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY.
IT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT.
THIS IS NOT BEING DONE TO BETTER OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
19:09:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:09:09 >> HELLO.
MY NAME IS KATRINA FEYERABEND.
I LIVE AT 219 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE, ONE OF THE HOMES
PICTURED EARLIER.
I WOULD BE AGAINST THE CHANGE FOR THE REASONS FOR DENSITY,
ADDING TWO HOMES TO THIS ONE SINGLE LOT IS -- WOULD INCREASE
THE DENSITY SO MUCH.
AND THE REASON WHY I FIND IT PROBLEMATIC IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
IS WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN THIS STREET, SOME MORNINGS YOU CAN
BARELY GET DOWN THE STREET, THERE ARE SO MANY VEHICLES ON
THE STREET.
I KNOW YESTERDAY MORNING WHEN I WAS ON MY WAY TO WORK, I HAD
TO SIT AND WAIT AS THERE WERE PROBABLY TEN CARS IN FRONT OF
ME PARKED ON THE STREET WAITING FOR OTHER CARS TO PASS
BEFORE MY CAR WAS ABLE TO DRIVE.
I FEEL THAT WITH CHANGING THE LOT FROM ALLOWING FROM ONE
HOME TO TWO HOMES ON THERE WOULD ONLY ADD TO EXACERBATE A
PROBLEM THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY HAS WITH MANY CARS ON
THE STREET AND NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE INGRESS AND EGRESS IN
AND OUT OF INDIVIDUAL RESIDENCES.
FOR THOSE REASONS, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DENY IT.
THANK YOU.
19:10:15 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:10:19 >> BECKY ROTHROCK.
I OWN 217 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE AND 204 SOUTH HIMES.
BUILT IN 1940 AND IN THE GRAY GABLES NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KEEP HEARING THE WORD CHARACTER AND CHARACTER OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH GRAY GABLES, YOU SHOULD BE.
IT IS THE BEST NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY.
WE DO HAVE THAT OVAL, IF YOU NOTICED IT ON THE DRAWINGS
WHERE PEOPLE WALK.
A FRONT LOADER THAT IS OUT OF PROPORTION WITH THE LOT WITH
NONUNIFORM SETBACK IS COMPLETELY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE LOVED IT SO MUCH WE BOUGHT A COTTAGE TO KEEP IT FROM
BEING TORN DOWN.
DENSITY IS A MAJOR PROBLEM.
THIS SCHOOL YEAR ALONE, I WATCHED THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BACK UP THE STREET IN THE SAME AREA.
WATCHED GARBAGE TRUCKS NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS OUR GARBAGE
CANS BECAUSE OF THE PARKING ON THE STREET.
UPS TRUCKS, FEDEX TRUCKS.
REGULAR OCCURRENCE.
I SEE IT ALL THE TIME.
I ASK YOU PLEASE TO VOTE AGAINST IT.
THIS IS THE KIND OF HOMES WHERE WE HAVE HOMEOWNERS TEARING
DOWN HOMES AND REBUILDING FOR THEMSELVES.
IT'S NOT THE PLACE FOR DEVELOPERS AND HOMES THAT ARE OUT OF
SCALE.
THANK YOU.
19:11:30 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:11:32 >> HELLO.
SCOTT TAYLOR.
219 SOUTH GUNLOCK JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY
WE'RE MENTIONING.
I ALSO OWN THE PROPERTY BEHIND MY HOUSE ON HIMES AVENUE.
REALLY JUST WANT TO REITERATE WHAT THE REST OF MY NEIGHBORS
ARE SAYING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT DOES HAVE A LOT OF CHARACTER.
KEEP IT AS BEST WE CAN.
MORE IMPORTANTLY FOR ME IS THE PARKING.
LIKE KATRINA SAID, REAL PROBLEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
STREETS ARE VERY NARROW.
WE FEEL LIKE HAVING TWO HOUSES THERE WOULD CREATE EVEN MORE
OF AN ISSUE THERE.
THAT'S REALLY THE MAIN CONCERN WE HAVE IS THE PARKING AND
CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU.
19:12:07 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:12:12 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS JAMIE ELLIS.
I LIVE AT 214 SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE.
LIVED THERE FOR 32 YEARS AND MOVED BACK IN AFTER I GOT
MARRIED, AS I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN GRAY GABLES ALSO.
MOST OF WHAT I CAME TO SAY HAS BEEN SAID.
BUT WHAT I HOPE TO HEAR FROM THE PERSON PUTTING THIS FORTH
WAS SOME HARDSHIP, WHICH I THINK IS PRETTY CRITICAL WHEN YOU
WANT A VARIANCE, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SHOW SOME SORT OF A
HARDSHIP.
I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT.
THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL LOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF YOU WANT TO DEVELOP A LARGE HOUSE, THE HOUSING PRICES
RIGHT NOW ARE COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE, AND I THINK -- I
HAVEN'T HEARD ANY HARDSHIP, ANY BURDEN THAT IS PRESENTED BY
THE CURRENT ZONING.
I HOPE YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW THE ZONING TO BE CHANGED AND THAT
WOULD BE WHY I CAME TO TALK.
THANK YOU.
19:13:11 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
NEXT, PLEASE.
19:13:15 >> HI.
I'M JENNY CLARKE.
I LIVE AT 212 SOUTH GUNLOCK, JUST ACROSS THE STREET AND OVER
FROM THE SUBJECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'VE LIVED IN GRAY GABLES FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS, AND WE CHOSE
THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEING THE WAY IT IS
AT THE CURRENT TIME.
IT HAS CHARACTER AS EVERYBODY ELSE HAS SAID, AND IT IS TRULY
A NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT JUST A PLACE TO LIVE.
THE EFFECT OF THE EXISTING RS-60 ZONING IS TO PREVENT THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF ANY NEW LOTS LESS THAN 60 FEET IN WIDTH,
WHICH IS SUPPORTED IN THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9.3.8,
AND THE TAMPA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 27-11, REGARDING THE
PRESERVATION OF THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOODS.
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF HOMES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD CLEARLY
CHANGES CHARACTER AMONG OTHER PROBLEMS, AND THOSE HAVE BEEN
SPOKEN OF.
THE STAFF REPORT USES ARBITRARY, QUOTES, BLOCK FACE
STANDARDS TO DETERMINE THE ACCEPTABILITY OF REZONING
REQUESTS BY CONSIDERING ONLY THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND NOT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE.
GRAY GABLES IS A STABLE AREA WITH A CHARACTER DIFFERENT THAN
MANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS AND ADDING HOUSES AND PEOPLE BY
SPLITTING LOTS WILL DIMINISH ITS CHARACTER.
PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS ZONING REQUEST.
19:14:52 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
19:14:58 >> HELLO.
FRANK MARISELA, 218 SOUTH GLEN STREET, ONE STREET OVER FROM
THE APPLICANT'S ZONING REQUEST.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT.
I BELIEVE THE STAFF FINDING, AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT'S
PRESENTATION ARE ACCURATE.
THE PROPERTY TYPES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU.
19:15:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 4?
OKAY.
REBUTTAL, SIR.
APPLICANT, SIR.
19:15:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MR. CHAIR, BEFORE YOU DO, MR. SHELBY --
THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT HARDSHIP AND VARIANCES AND
WE'RE NOT A VARIANCE BOARD.
I WANTED TO HAVE A LITTLE CLARIFICATION SO THE RECORD WAS
CLEAR.
19:15:46 >>CATE WELLS:
THANK YOU.
CATE WELLS, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
TYPICALLY, A BOARD HAS TO ADDRESS HARDSHIP CRITERIA IF THE
REQUEST BEFORE IT IS FOR A VARIANCE.
THAT IS NOT TONIGHT'S REQUEST.
TONIGHT IS A REZONING FROM RS-60 TO RS-50 TO ALLOW A LOT
SPLIT.
WHEN AN APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING, WE ARE THEN
LOOKING, COUNCIL HAS TO APPLY THE CRITERIA IN THE CODE
THAT'S IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
AND THE CONCEPT OF HARDSHIP DOES NOT COME INTO PLAY,
ESPECIALLY BECAUSE NO WAIVERS ARE BEING REQUESTED.
19:16:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
19:16:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES, SIR.
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
GO AHEAD, SIR.
19:16:21 >> THANK YOU.
I WOULD JUST LIKE --
19:16:22 >>LUIS VIERA:
STATE YOUR NAME.
19:16:24 >> J.P. GUZZARDO, FOR THE RECORD.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS IN REBUTTAL HERE.
WITH RESPECT TO NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, THERE ARE A LOT OF
FOLKS HERE THAT HAVE OPPOSED.
I DID SEND AN E-MAIL TO BRUCE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AS IT RELATES TO SENDING OUT MY
CONTACT INFORMATION, IF ANYONE WANTED TO REACH OUT TO ME,
THEY COULD.
I'M IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
210 SOUTH GUNLOCK, PEOPLE CAN FIND ME.
I DID MAKE AN EFFORT TO ENGAGE WITH THEM.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD, SIGNATURES OF 25
PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE GRAY GABLES GREATER
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE IN SUPPORT.
I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT THAT FOR THE RECORD.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SHOW BRIEFLY -- I'M MESSING WITH THE
MICROPHONE -- THIS AS WELL FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED IN
SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT AS WELL.
SO I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT THIS FOR THE RECORD.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT TECHNICALLY.
19:17:20 >>LUIS VIERA:
YOU CAN HAND IT TO OUR ATTORNEY.
19:17:36 >> I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE, THERE ARE NO VARIANCES
REQUESTED HERE AT ALL.
AS IT RELATES TO THE PARKING, PART OF THE PARKING ISSUE IS
THAT SOME OF THESE HOMES HAVE DETACHED REAR GARAGES, AND
PEOPLE WILL PARK ONE CAR IN THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN PARK THEIR
SUBSEQUENT CAR OUT ON THE STREET.
THE FACT THAT THE PEOPLE SAY THEY DON'T WANT STREET PARKING
ON ONE SIDE AND THEN THEY SAY THEY DON'T WANT A DOUBLE
LOADED GARAGE, FRONT ENTRANCE ON THE OTHER IS A LITTLE BIT
OF A CONFLICT.
THERE ARE FRONT LOADED PRODUCT ALL THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD,
HOUSES, INCLUDING THE IMMEDIATE AREA THAT WE DISCUSSED.
WITH RESPECT TO THE BUILDER -- THIS IS ME.
THIS IS THE HOME MY WIFE AND I WILL BE LIVING IN HOPEFULLY
IN THE NEXT TEN DAYS.
WE DID GET OUR CO TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA, PAID OUR IMPACT FEES.
SO WE WILL BE LIVING HERE.
I UNDERSTAND THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WOULD SAY IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S OUT OF PLACE WITHIN
THE NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A CONSISTENCY STANDPOINT, IS THE FACT
THAT YOU HAVE 108-FOOT LOT WHEN YOU'RE SURROUNDED BY LOTS
THAT ARE TYPICALLY 50, 55, AND LESS THAN 60 FEET IN NATURE.
SO WHAT YOU ALSO SEE FROM HERE IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN
CHANGING.
WHAT'S SHOWN HERE IS THE 80% RULE FOR LOTS THAT WERE
ORIGINALLY TAKEN FROM ONE HOME ON TWO PLATTED LOTS AND
ULTIMATELY CAME BEFORE CITY STAFF TO GET THE 80% RULE TO
ESTABLISH TWO HOMES THAT COULD BE BUILT ON TWO SEPARATELY
PLATTED LOTS.
IF YOU LOOK, IT'S HAPPENED ONCE, TWICE, THREE, FOUR, FIVE,
SIX PLUS TIMES IN THE HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD DATING
BACK REALLY THE MAJORITY OF THESE IN THE '80s WHEN THIS
TOOK PLACE.
I THINK THAT WAS IT.
IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
19:19:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
19:19:36 >> I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THIS FOR THE RECORD AS WELL.
AND PICTURES OF THE FRONT FACES.
19:19:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY?
19:19:52 >> YES.
19:19:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
EXHIBITS ARE GOING AROUND, ULTIMATELY.
IF THEY COULD MAKE THEIR WAY TO THE CLERK.
19:20:01 >>LUIS VIERA:
NOTHING ELSE, SIR?
19:20:02 >> NO, SIR.
19:20:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL?
I'LL GO DOWN THE LINE IF I HAVE TO.
19:20:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
MR. CHAIRMAN, IN LIEU OF THAT, I DON'T
WANT TO BE HERE ALL NIGHT ON ONE ISSUE.
I'LL HANDLE IT AND SEE WHEREVER IT GOES.
THAT WAY WE CAN DISPOSE OF IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 4.
FILE NUMBER REZ 20-01, MOVE AN ORDINANCE PRESENTED FOR FIRST
READING CONSIDERATION.
ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF 111
SOUTH GUNLOCK AVENUE, CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION RS-60 (RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY) TO RS-50
(RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE PETITIONER HAS MET THE BURDEN OF PROOF SET FORTH BY THE
EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY
STAFF AND IT'S COMPARABLE WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY
CODE.
19:21:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
19:21:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
NAY.
19:21:40 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
AYE.
19:21:42 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
AYE.
19:21:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
AYE.
19:21:44 >>BILL CARLSON:
NAY.
19:21:45 >>LUIS VIERA:
NAY.
19:21:51 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
NO.
19:21:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
DO THE ROLL CALL AGAIN, PLEASE.
19:21:56 >>LUIS VIERA:
ONE LAST TIME, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
19:21:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
NAY.
19:21:58 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
AYE.
19:21:59 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
NO.
19:22:02 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
YES.
19:22:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
YES.
19:22:05 >>BILL CARLSON:
NO.
19:22:06 >>LUIS VIERA:
NO.
19:22:09 >>THE CLERK:
THE MOTION FAILS WITH DINGFELDER, MANISCALCO,
CARLSON AND VIERA VOTING NO.
19:22:16 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
NOW WE NEED A MOTION FROM ONE OF THE NAYS DENYING.
ANYONE INTERESTED IN TAKING THAT?
GO FOR IT, SIR.
19:22:32 >>BILL CARLSON:
MOVE TO DENY REZ 20-01, DUE TO THE FAILURE
OF THE APPLICANT TO MEET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF TO PROVIDE
COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT THE
REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CITY
CODE, SPECIFICALLY IN NOT KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
19:22:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'LL THIRD IT.
19:22:58 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, SIR.
19:22:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'LL SECOND IT, AND I'LL ADD A COUPLE OF
COMP PLAN PROVISIONS RELEVANT, I BELIEVE, AS WELL AS SOME
TESTIMONY.
THE TESTIMONY THAT I BELIEVE WE ALL HEARD NOT ONLY SPOKE TO
COMPATIBILITY BUT ALSO SPOKE TO AN ON-STREET PARKING
SITUATION OR EXISTING PROBLEM.
SO IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL HOMES ON THE SAME STREET
INEVITABLY WITH VISITORS, GUESTS, ET CETERA, YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE MORE PARKING PROBLEMS.
ALSO MAKE REFERENCE TO LAND USE POLICY 2.1.1, WHICH SPEAKS
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ENCOURAGE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, LAND USE OBJECTIVE 9.3 WHICH AGAIN SPEAKS TO
COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT TO SUSTAIN STABLE
NEIGHBORHOODS AND ENSURE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HEALTH OF THE
CITY.
LAND USE POLICY 9.5.1, I'LL LET THAT SPEAK FOR ITSELF.
I BELIEVE, AND I CAN'T FIND THE POLICY SPECIFICALLY THAT
SPEAKS TO INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT, AGAIN, NOT ONLY DID I HEAR
TESTIMONY, BUT THE PARKING PROBLEM IN THAT AREA IS WELL
ESTABLISHED.
THANK YOU.
19:24:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
ARE YOU AMENABLE TO THOSE AMENDMENTS?
OKAY.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON TO DENY, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
19:24:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
19:24:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YES TO DENY.
19:24:58 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
NAY.
19:25:00 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
YES.
19:25:02 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
NAY.
19:25:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NAY.
19:25:06 >>BILL CARLSON:
YES.
19:25:08 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES.
19:25:23 >>THE CLERK:
THE MOTION CARRIED WITH GUDES, CITRO, AND
MIRANDA -- I'M SORRY.
WITH GUDES, CITRO, AND MIRANDA VOTING NO.
19:25:35 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
NOW WE GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 3.
MA'AM, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP, THE PETITIONER.
19:25:46 >> MARIA GARCIA.
I HAD THE CONVERSATION WITH MR. GALLART.
19:25:54 >>LUIS VIERA:
EXCUSE ME.
ALL THE FOLKS LEAVING, IF YOU'RE GOING OUT THERE IN THE
HALLWAY, MAKE SURE TO KEEP IT LOW TO A MINIMUM.
GO AHEAD, MA'AM.
19:26:02 >> I HAD THE CONVERSATION WITH MR. GALLART, I ASSURED HIM
THAT I WOULD HAVE HIM MEET WITH THE OWNER.
HOWEVER, MR. GALLART HAS THE ISSUE WITH THE COOLIDGE
PROPERTY AND NOT NORTH MANHATTAN AVENUE PROPERTY.
BUT I TOLD HIM THAT I WOULD SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH HIM
TOMORROW OR SATURDAY AT HIS EARLIEST CONVENIENCE.
19:26:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
19:26:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'M WELL AWARE OF THAT AREA.
THE COOLIDGE AREA ACROSS THE STREET, FINE OPERATION,
ELECTRICAL SUPPLY COMPANY.
WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE, SEMIS, THE PARKING AREA FOR THE
SEMIS ARE FULL AND THEY PARK ON MLK AND LEAVE IT SOMETIMES
FOR A DAY OR TWO.
IN FACT, ON EITHER COOLIDGE OR HESPERIDES, SEMIS WHERE THEY
COME IN, LEAVE AND GO HOME.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT SOMETIMES THEY ARE FULL.
IN FACT, MOST OF THE TIME THEY ARE FULL.
AND THEY PARK THEIR TRACTOR AND TRAILER WHEREVER THEY CAN.
AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
CODE ENFORCEMENT IS WELL AWARE OF IT.
THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IT.
I UNDERSTAND THE GENTLEMAN'S CONCERN.
19:27:13 >> THAT'S NOT THIS PROPERTY.
19:27:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
MR. SHELBY, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING?
19:27:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NO, SIR.
19:27:23 >>LUIS VIERA:
YOU HAD AN INQUISITIVE LOOK ON YOUR FACE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM.
WE HAD FINISHED PUBLIC COMMENT.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
I BELIEVE SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN GUDES, YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT ONE.
19:27:44 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
FILE REZ 19-102, ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED
FOR FIRST READING CONSIDERATION.
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF
4313 NORTH MANHATTAN AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, IN ORDER,
AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION CG, COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO CI
COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
19:28:10 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
19:28:17 >>THE CLERK:
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5th AT
9:30 A.M.
CITRO BEING ABSENT AT VOTE.
19:28:31 >>LUIS VIERA:
YOU'LL GET IT.
YOU'RE VERY NEW.
IT'S A LOT OF PRESSURE.
YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB.
INDEED.
YOU GOT BIG SHOES TO FILL THERE WITH MR. CREW.
TRUST ME.
HEAVY BURDEN.
NUMBER 5.
19:28:45 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO.
NUMBER 5 IS REZ 19-105.
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7627 COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY FROM PD
TO PD FOR HOTEL, RESTAURANT AND ALL CG USES WITH A BONUS
PROVISION TO 27-140 FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO
INCREASE INTENSITY FROM 1.5 TO 1.64 F.A.R.
19:29:08 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
19:29:11 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
THIS IS LOCATED IN THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT, THE
WESTSHORE BUSINESS CENTER.
THERE'S NO TRANSIT SERVING THE SUBJECT SITE.
IT IS IN THE LEVEL A EVACUATION ZONE, ALSO WITHIN THE
COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA.
I HAVE A MAP HERE FOR YOU JUST TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW, THIS
IS HOW THE COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA INTERACTS WITH THE CITY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT KIND OF HUGS THE SOUTH TAMPA PENINSULA,
AND IT COMES TO THE NORTH.
THE HATCH MARKS ON THIS MAP INDICATE WHERE THE COASTAL HIGH
HAZARD AREA IS.
SO IT'S CLEARLY ON ROCKY POINT.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS CLEARLY WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD
AREA.
AND THERE'S AN AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT SITE.
SO IT IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST COURTNEY CAMPBELL
CAUSEWAY.
IT IS A HOTEL.
THIS AREA OF ROCKY POINT HAS A VARIETY.
THERE'S SOME HOTEL AND MULTIFAMILY USES ON THE PENINSULA.
THE FUTURE LAND USE IS COMMUNITY MIXED USE-35, WHICH ALLOWS
FOR COMMERCIAL USES AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL.
THIS IS A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH THAT IS R-35.
AND THEN THIS IS ACTUALLY WITHIN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY.
IT'S NOT WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
EXCUSE ME.
MY APOLOGIES.
I HAVE ANOTHER CORRECTED REPORT TO HAND OUT FOR THIS.
SORRY.
MY APOLOGIES.
I WAS FOCUSED ON GIVING THE INFORMATION AND NOT HANDING OUT
THE CORRECTED REPORT.
WE HAVE A REVISED REPORT.
IT WAS A MINOR AREA.
WE DIDN'T COMPLETE ONE OF OUR SENTENCES IN THE STAFF
ANALYSIS.
IT DIDN'T FIND OUR CHANGING OR ANYTHING.
BUT YOU HAVE THE CORRECTED REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU.
AS MARY WILL EXPLAIN WHAT THE APPLICANT IS DOING, THE
OVERALL FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING WILL REMAIN THE SAME AND
THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE BONUS PROVISIONS
WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF
THAT.
WE DID FIND THAT THIS WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE ANTICIPATED
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ENVISIONED UNDER THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE
35 CATEGORY.
NO MAJOR CHANGES TO THE OVERALL STRUCTURE WILL OCCUR, AND
THE DEVELOPMENT WILL CONTINUE TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ON ROCKY POINT.
THAT COMPLETES MY PRESENTATION.
19:31:40 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
19:31:49 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
JENNIFER SHOWED YOU AN AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
EXISTING HOTEL ON ROCKY POINT.
IT WAS APPROVED AS A HOTEL AND A REZONING BACK IN 2007 WITH
Z 07-13 FOR A HOTEL AND CG USES.
HERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING HOTEL FROM COURTNEY
CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY.
THIS IS A PICTURE FROM ROCKY POINT.
THIS IS TO THE SOUTH.
A NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT WAS APPROVED THROUGH PD A FEW
YEARS AGO AND AN OFFICE BUILDING.
AND THEN ANOTHER OFFICE BUILDING AND PARKING GARAGE TO THE
WEST.
HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING WITH THIS PD, BACK IN 2007,
WHEN THIS PD WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, THEY WERE APPROVED FOR
A MAXIMUM OF 300 HOTEL ROOMS.
HOWEVER, THEY HAD TO COMPLY WITH THE PARKING STANDARDS.
WHEN THE PROJECT WAS DEVELOPED, THEY DEVELOPED 255 ROOMS AND
PUT IN ENOUGH PARKING FOR 255 ROOMS.
THE APPLICANT, AND THEY'LL TESTIFY TO THIS TONIGHT, ARE
PROPOSING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ROOMS TO 44 ROOMS, SO 44
ADDITIONAL HOTEL ROOMS.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT WAS
CONSTRUCTED, THEY COULD NOT MEET THE PARKING STANDARDS OF
TODAY WITH THE INCREASED NUMBER OF ROOMS.
ALSO, THEY ARE INCREASING THE FLOOR TO AREA RATIO BEYOND THE
1.5 ORIGINALLY APPROVED.
THAT IS THE CATALYST FOR THIS PD THAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT
TO ALLOW A LEGAL PROCESS TO APPROVE A PARKING WAIVER AS WELL
AS PER 27-140 TO ALLOW A BONUS PROVISION TO EXCEED THE
ALLOWABLE 1.5 F.A.R.
THERE ARE SOME VERY MINOR CHANGES FROM PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DID FIND THIS INCONSISTENT.
ON PAGE 1 OF YOUR STAFF REPORT, YOU WILL SEE THREE WAIVERS
ALL RELATED TO PARKING.
THE FIRST WAIVER IS TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF
PARKING SPACES FROM 372 REQUIRED TO 309 PROPOSED, WHICH IS A
17% PARKING REDUCTION.
THE OTHER PARKING RELATED WAIVER TO 27-283 IS TO AUTHORIZE
63 TANDEM PARKING SPACES, PARKING SPACES LOCATED IMMEDIATELY
BEHIND ANOTHER PARKING SPACE TO BE INCLUDED AS A PARKING
SPACE TO SATISFY THE CODE.
IT IS THE INTENT THOSE WOULD BE USED FOR VALET SERVICES.
HOWEVER, THAT IS REQUIRED A WAIVER FOR OUR CODE.
THE ONLY USE THAT IS ALLOWED, TANDEM PARKING BY RIGHT IS
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
THE THIRD WAIVER IS TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL ACCESS PARKING TO A
LOCAL STREET, EAST ROCKY POINT DRIVE TO RECOGNIZE THE
EXISTING DRIVEWAYS.
SAYING THAT, OVERALL, THE DEVELOPMENT COMPLIANCE STAFF DID
FIND THIS INCONSISTENT.
AGAIN, SEE THE FINDINGS FROM TRANSPORTATION RELATED TO THE
PARKING-RELATED WAIVERS THAT I JUST STATED.
REMINDER, PLEASURE OF COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE PLAN
DEVELOPMENT, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THERE IS A REVISION SHEET.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME AT THIS TIME?
19:35:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
DO WE HAVE TRANSPORTATION STAFF WITH US
TONIGHT?
19:35:19 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES, SIR.
19:35:21 >> JONATHAN, TRANSPORTATION AND PLANNING.
19:35:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
GOOD EVENING, JONATHAN.
TRANSPORTATION STAFF OBJECTS, I GUESS THE SORT OF STANDARD
OBJECTION BECAUSE THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE 17% WAIVER IN
PARKING SPACES.
THE 372 REQUIRED SPACES, I ASSUME THAT'S OUT OF OUR CODE
BASED UPON SOME CALCULATIONS OR WHAT HAVE YOU FOR A HOTEL
AND RESTAURANT USE, CORRECT?
19:35:54 >> THAT'S CORRECT.
IT'S BASED ON THE HOTEL USE CALCULATIONS.
WE OBJECT TO THE PARKING WAIVER IN GENERAL.
19:36:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
RIGHT.
DO OUR STANDARDS, OUR HOTEL, RESTAURANT STANDARDS, DIFFER
FROM NATIONAL STANDARDS?
I GUESS PART OF MY QUESTION IS, HAVE THE NATIONAL STANDARDS
BEEN ADJUSTED IN RECENT YEARS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE UBER, LYFT,
ET CETERA, SYNDROME?
MY QUESTION IS, DO OUR STANDARDS, ARE THEY THE SAME AS THE
NATIONAL STANDARDS OR DO WE DIFFER?
IF SO, HOW DO WE DIFFER?
19:36:33 >> YEAH, WE DO DIFFER AND WE HAVEN'T UPDATED THEM IN A
WHILE.
I BELIEVE IF YOU LOOK AT THE ITE CALCULATIONS, IT WOULD COME
UP A LITTLE BIT LESS.
BUT WE HAVE NOT UPDATED OUR CODE.
19:36:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
DID YOU GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT
THAT CALCULATION WOULD BE IF WE DID THE ITE CALCULATION?
19:36:53 >> I DON'T HAVE THAT OFFHAND.
19:36:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MAYBE THE PETITIONER DOES.
THANK YOU.
19:36:57 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
ALL RIGHT.
PETITIONER.
19:37:08 >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MR. CHAIRMAN, MICHAEL HORNER,
14502 NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
33618 REPRESENTING TAMPA ROCKY POINT LLC.
THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE WESTIN HOTEL.
WITH ME IS MR. SEAMUS ROSS, CEO PRESIDENT OF THE ASSET
MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT IS THE OWNERSHIP.
HE HAS TO CATCH A FLIGHT TO NASHVILLE AT 8:45.
WE'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE.
WITH ME IS ALSO MICHAEL YATES, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.
HE WILL BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS PARKING RATIO ISSUES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, AND COUNCIL, THIS IS THE WESTIN HOTEL.
THIS IS A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN UNDER REVIEW FOR QUITE SOME
TIME.
IT WAS APPROVED IN 2007, AS MARY INDICATED.
WE ARE ESSENTIALLY REDUCING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS THAT
WERE APPROVED IN 2007 FROM 300, DROPPING IT BY ONE ROOM TO
299.
THE PARKING RATIO IS DUE TO THE CONVERSION OF PARKING
GARAGE, TWO FLOORS OF THE PARKING GARAGE ESSENTIALLY
UNDERUTILIZED AND EMPTY.
YOU CAN PLAY FRISBEE IN THE PARKING GARAGE FLOORS DURING
PEAK HOURS AND NOT WORRY ABOUT ENCOUNTER A CAR.
IT IS RATHER INEFFICIENT.
THE CLIENT IS CONVERTING TWO ENTIRE FLOORS.
THE PARKING GARAGE INTO THE ADDITIONAL 44 ROOMS.
BY CONVERTING NON-AC AND NON-HEATED SPACE TO AIR CONDITIONED
AND COOLED SPACE, THAT BECOMES FLOOR AREA RATIO.
THEREFORE WE HAVE TO ASK FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO BUMP TO
1.64, WHICH IS 18,000 SQUARE FEET FROM 1.5.
UNDER YOUR BONUS PROVISION 27-140, THAT IS COMMENSURATE TO A
CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY OF $264,000 BY REDUCING ONE HOTEL
ROOM BY CONVERTING THE PARKING GARAGE.
THE REASON THE PARKING GARAGE WAIVER -- EXCUSE ME, THE
PARKING WAIVER, IN OUR OPINION, IS A NOMINAL ISSUE IS
BECAUSE THIS IS A PRIVATE ENTITY.
PRIVATE GARAGE.
RESTRICTED FOR ACCESS.
IT WILL BE VALET CONTROLLED.
IT WILL BE CONTROLLED BY TANDEM PARKING SPACE INITIATIVES.
WE FILED THAT DOCUMENT THROUGH THE CITY OF TAMPA.
THAT TANDEM SPACE ESSENTIALLY EQUATES TO THE 66 PARKING
SPACES WHICH WE'RE ESSENTIALLY DEFICIENT ON FROM 372 TO 309.
SO NOTHING CHANGES PHYSICALLY.
WE'RE CONVERTING TWO GARAGE FLOORS TO ROOMS.
WE'RE DOING SOME NOMINAL PARKING SPACE CONFIGURATIONS ON THE
SURFACE, ADDING A POOL, HARD SCAPE, DOWN SIZING THE
RESTAURANT, DOWN SIZING THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE BAR
AND THEREFORE THE PARKING SPACE RATIO THAT WE PROPOSE, THE
309 SPACES IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE, BECAUSE WE CAN ACTUALLY
INCREASE TANDEM SPACES TO ALLOW FURTHER REDUCTION TO LESS
THAN 309 SPACES.
OUR INTENT IS SIMPLY TO MAKE THIS FUNCTION, TWEAK IT, MAKE
IT WORK AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE.
THERE WILL NOT BE ANY IMPACTS TO COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY.
THERE IS A DEDICATED RIGHT-TURN LANE.
ROCKY POINT DRIVE IS A LOCAL ROAD.
IT IS A TECHNICAL OBJECTION.
WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION, NO OBJECTION.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT.
MR. YATES WILL BRIEFLY ADDRESS THE PARKING WAIVER.
19:40:22 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
KIND OF AN OFF-BASED QUESTION.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT STAY AT
YOUR HOTEL THAT ARE DRIVING THEIR OWN VEHICLES?
I KNOW YOU JUST FINISHED SAYING YOU CAN PLAY FRISBEE IN THE
PARKING LOT.
MOST PEOPLE I WOULD THINK WOULD STAY AT THIS HOTEL WOULDN'T
HAVE THEIR OWN CAR, BEING IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT.
19:40:44 >> THAT'S CORRECT.
19:40:44 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE PERCENTAGE IS
OF THE PEOPLE THAT RENT A VEHICLE?
19:40:49 >> GOOD QUESTION.
SEVERAL PARKING STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE DURING PEAK PERIODS.
THE MAJORITY OF THE CHARACTERISTICS ARE UBER, LYFT.
HOTEL HAS A VALET SHUTTLE AS WELL.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY ON THE STATS?
19:41:11 >> GOOD EVENING.
MICHAEL YATES.
I HAVE BEEN SWORN.
WHAT WE DID IS WE WENT OUT AND DID IN LIEU OF USING NATIONAL
DATA, WE WENT OUT AND ACTUALLY DID PARKING OBSERVATION
COUNTS IN THE GARAGE.
WE DID A WEEKDAY WEDNESDAY AND THEN A PEAK TIME SATURDAY.
WE DID IT IN FEBRUARY.
THE HOTEL WAS 92% OCCUPIED.
BOTH DAYS, VERY CONSISTENT DATA, YOU WILL SEE ON THE SCREEN
VERY CONSISTENT.
THE SURFACE LOTS WERE PRETTY WIDELY USED.
WE HAD 89% USAGE ON THE SURFACE LOTS, BUT THE GARAGE AT THE
PEAK TIME WAS ONLY 12% UTILIZED.
AND SO WE ONLY HAD THE FOURTH, FIFTH, AND SIXTH FLOORS WERE
COMPLETELY VACANT.
AND IT WAS CONSISTENT DURING BOTH STUDY DAYS.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF ROOMS
AND THE COUNTS THAT WE OBSERVED, PROBABLY HAD ABOUT 30 TO
35 PERCENT THAT WERE USING AN ALTERNATIVE MODE OF
TRANSPORTATION TO GET THERE RATHER THAN THEIR OWN VEHICLE.
19:42:24 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
19:42:26 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
19:42:30 >> THAT WOULD CONCLUDE OUR PRESENTATION, COUNCILMAN MAN ALL
RIGHT.
WE'LL GO TO THE PUBLIC.
IF ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, ITEM
NUMBER 5, PLEASE APPROACH THE LECTERN, STATE YOUR NAME AND
ADDRESS.
19:42:42 >> MOVE TO CLOSE.
19:42:43 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE FROM
COUNCILMAN CITRO WITH A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ALL RIGHT.
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, I BELIEVE --
19:42:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'LL READ IT.
BEFORE I READ IT, THE GENTLEMAN WHO BUILT THIS HOTEL BUILT
THE FIRST HOTEL THAT WAS BUILT IN YBOR CITY AND MAYBE A
HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
HE BUILT THE FIRST ONE THAT BECAME A VERY SUCCESS.
IT STARTED THE REVITALIZATION OF YBOR CITY.
SAME ONE THAT BUILT THE WESTIN.
DID A FANTASTIC JOB WITH BOTH OF THEM.
NOT BECAUSE OF THE ZONING MATTER, BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE.
YOU HAVE THE FACTS AND FIGURES TO PROVE IT.
ITEM NUMBER 5, REZ 19-105, AN ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR
FIRST READING CONSIDERATION.
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF
7627 WEST COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY IN THE CITY OF TAMPA,
FLORIDA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM
ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOTEL
AND ALL CG USES, TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOTEL RESTAURANT AND
ALL CG USES, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
AND THIS MEETS AS APPROVED WITH ALL THE FACTS AND FIGURES
ACCORDING TO THE CITY CODES, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVEN THE
BURDEN OF PROOF AND ESPECIALLY THE BURDEN OF PROOF REGARDING
THE PARKING SITUATION IN THE ZONING MATTER.
AND WITH THE REVISION SHEET.
19:44:08 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN
MIRANDA, A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN CITRO, AND A QUESTION FROM
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
19:44:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
JUST A COMMENT.
I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
TYPICALLY, ESPECIALLY RECENTLY, THIS PAST YEAR, I'VE HAD
GREAT CONCERN ABOUT AN INCREASE IN DENSITY IN THE COASTAL
HIGH HAZARD AREA, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCERNED
ABOUT.
HOWEVER, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE TESTIMONY FROM STAFF
AS WELL AS THE PETITIONER INDICATES THAT THE APPROVED ZONING
BACK IN 2007, WHICH I DO REMEMBER, WAS FOR 300 UNITS.
THEY DIDN'T BUILD THE 300 UNITS.
NOW THEY ARE GOING TO 299.
I REALLY DON'T SEE IT AS AN INCREASE NECESSARILY IN DENSITY.
19:44:51 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
WE ALSO HAVE THE -- DO WE DO THE RESOLUTION SEPARATELY?
19:45:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT WILL COME BACK AT YOUR NEXT HEARING.
19:45:05 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
ALL RIGHT.
19:45:07 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED WITH VIERA BEING ABSENT AT VOTE.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5th AT
9:30 A.M.
19:45:16 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ITEM NUMBER 6.
19:45:18 >>RYAN MANASSE:
RYAN MANASSE.
PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
ITEM 6 IS FOR APPLICATION REZ-19-106 PROPERTY LOCATED AT 612
NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT PD FOR RESTAURANT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD TO
ALLOW FOR ALL COMMERCIAL GENERAL CG USES.
19:45:40 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE ALSO BACK IN THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT AND
WESTSHORE EMPLOYMENT CENTER.
THIS IS SERVED BY HART ROUTE NUMBER 36.
IT IS WITHIN A LEVEL D EVACUATION ZONE.
I HAVE AN AERIAL.
THIS IS NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED IN THE PURPLE.
THERE IS A SUSHI RESTAURANT TO THE SOUTH AND A PARTY CITY TO
THE NORTH.
IT IS AN INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, NORTH DALE MABRY
HIGHWAY, BUT IT DOES TRANSITION TO THESE RESIDENTIAL USES AS
WE MOVE AWAY FROM THE CORRIDOR, WHICH IS APPARENT AS WELL ON
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THE SUBJECT SITE HAS THREE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS,
REGIONAL MIXED USE 100.
THAT IS THE DARK PURPLE COLOR.
THAT IS A VERY INTENSIVE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY.
IT'S ONE OF THE MOST INTENSIVE IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THEN THE BACK PORTION OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS SPLIT BY
RESIDENTIAL 10, WHICH IS THE ORANGE AND RESIDENTIAL 20,
WHICH IS THIS BROWN COLOR, AND WE SEE THAT TRANSITION THAT
THESE ARE EVENTUALLY USED MOVE AWAY FROM NORTH DALE MABRY
HIGHWAY.
THE PD IN FRONT OF YOU SHOWS THAT THERE ARE NO COMMERCIAL
USES WITHIN THESE RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES ON THE SITE, WHICH
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE WANT TO KEEP THOSE COMMERCIAL USES AS CLOSE TO NORTH DALE
MABRY HIGHWAY AS POSSIBLE AND THAT VERY INTENSIVE FUTURE
LAND USE DESIGNATION, WHICH IS WHAT IT'S THERE FOR.
SO WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE REQUEST DOES SUPPORT MANY OF THE POLICIES WITHIN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY PLANNING
STRATEGY, URBAN DESIGN AND REDEVELOPMENT WITHIN MIXED USE
CORRIDORS AND CENTERS.
AND WE DID FIND THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
PATTERN FOUND ON THIS PORTION OF NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
WE WOULD JUST STATE THAT SINCE THIS IS AT THE EASTERN EDGE
OF THE NORTH BON AIR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE APPLICANT ENSURE
THAT THE SUBJECT SITE IS APPROPRIATELY BUFFERED AND TO
MITIGATE FOR ANY NEGATIVE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE
RESIDENCES.
BUT WE DID FIND IT CONSISTENT AND COMPARABLE, COMPARABLE
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
19:47:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THE PD -- THE PRIOR PD, Z 11-31, WAS IT
THE SAME FOOTPRINT?
19:47:59 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
I WILL LET RYAN MANASSE ANSWER THAT.
19:48:02 >>RYAN MANASSE:
RYAN MANASSE, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION FIRST, COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER, IT IS
IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT.
I'LL GO INTO THE STAFF REPORT AS FAR AS SETBACKS.
EXISTING STRUCTURE.
SETBACKS ARE STAYING THE SAME.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND PRESENT THAT TO YOU AND IF YOU HAVE
FURTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.
19:48:24 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
IS THIS THE GRILL SMITH PROPERTY?
19:48:26 >>RYAN MANASSE:
THAT IS CORRECT.
PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
AGAIN, THE APPLICATION BEFORE IS YOU PROPOSING TO REZONE THE
PROPERTY AT 612 NORTH DALE MABRY FROM PD FOR A RESTAURANT TO
PD TO ALLOW ALL CG USES.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS REZONED IN 2011 TO ALLOW FOR THE
RESTAURANT USE.
THAT WAS THE ONLY USE IN THAT PD THAT WAS APPROVED.
THE APPLICANT REQUEST TO USE THE CHANGE -- I'M SORRY.
APPLICANT REQUESTED THE USE BE CHANGED TO ALLOW FOR ALL CG
USES.
THEY ARE PRESENTING ONE WAIVER TO YOU TONIGHT, AND THAT'S TO
ALLOW COMMERCIAL ACCESS TO THE LOCAL STREET, WHICH IS WEST
CASS STREET.
THE SITE PLAN NOTES THAT THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR ANY SINGLE
OR COMBINATION OF USES WILL NOT EXCEED THE PROVIDED PARKING
ON-SITE.
THE SUBJECT SITE CONTAINS 47,975 SQUARE FEET AND HAS 6,070
SQUARE FOOT ONE-STORY BUILDING.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH
DALE MABRY HIGHWAY AND WEST CASS STREET AND THE SETBACKS
THAT I'LL READ OUT ARE THE SAME AS THE SETBACKS PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED.
BUT THE NORTH IS 4.5 FEET.
THE SOUTH IS 1.5 FEET.
THE EAST IS 25.6 FEET AND THE WEST IS 228.8 FEET.
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS PROPOSED AT 22 FEET.
BASED ON THE MOST INTENSE CG USE OF RESTAURANT WITH 276
PATRONS, TOTAL OF 69 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED, AND THEY
ARE PROVIDING THOSE 69 PARKING SPACES.
AND THAT IS THE SAME PARKING CALCULATIONS THAT WERE ON THE
PREVIOUS PD.
ALSO, SUBJECT SITE HAS TWO ACCESS POINTS, BOTH ON WEST CASS
STREET.
THERE'S NO VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY FROM THE SOUTH
ON WEST CARMEN STREET, NORTHEAST FROM NORTH DALE MABRY
HIGHWAY.
OVERALL AERIAL MAP OF THE AREA.
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED IN RED.
NORTH DALE MABRY HERE.
CARMEN TO THE SOUTH.
CASS TO THE NORTH, AND YOU'LL SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE
PARKING LOT AS STATED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY USES START GETTING TRIGGERED ALONG
THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY GOING AROUND TO CARMEN
STREET.
THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY A RESTAURANT USE TO THE NORTH,
ACROSS WEST CASS STREET.
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES TO THE SOUTH ACROSS WEST
CARMEN STREET AND COMMERCIAL USES TO THE EAST ACROSS NORTH
DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
AND THE RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE WEST THAT I JUST DESCRIBED.
THERE ARE NO HISTORIC LANDMARK STRUCTURES WITHIN A THOUSAND
FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF THE AREA.
THE SUBJECT SITE ON THE CORNER, THIS IS DALE MABRY AND CASS.
A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, STILL THE SUBJECT SITE.
THIS IS FACING SOUTHWEST.
THE REAR OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND AGAIN THE EXISTING
BUILDING.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE, THE EXISTING PARKING LOT.
FEW PICTURES TO TRY TO GET SOME ANGLES.
THIS IS WEST ACROSS DALE MABRY.
NORTH DALE MABRY, SOUTH ON DALE MABRY.
THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH, WHICH IS THE RESTAURANT
USE.
THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH, AND THERE ARE A FEW DIFFERENT
NEIGHBORS BECAUSE OF THE ORIENTATION OF THE LOT.
THIS IS THE DIRECT NEIGHBOR THAT ABUTS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
RIGHT HERE TO THE SOUTH.
THIS IS THE OTHER NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE PARKING LOT WOULD BE FACING THE
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY.
AND THIS IS THE OTHER SOUTH NEIGHBOR THAT ABUTS NORTH DALE
MABRY ACROSS CARMEN.
THIS WOULD BE THE CLOSEST WEST NEIGHBOR.
SO THE SUBJECT SITE IS OVER HERE.
THIS IS RESIDENTIAL.
AND THIS IS THE CLOSEST NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST, 3813 CARMEN
STREET ON THE OPPOSITE STREET.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE
PETITION AND FINDS THE REQUEST CONSISTENT WITH THE
APPLICABLE CITY OF TAMPA LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
SHOULD IT BE THE PLEASURE OF CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE
WAIVER THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THERE ARE
SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS THAT WILL BE REQUIRED BETWEEN FIRST
AND SECOND READING THAT ARE DESCRIBED ON THE REVISION SHEET
IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
19:52:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
19:52:28 >>RYAN MANASSE:
YES, SIR.
19:52:29 >>LUIS VIERA:
APPLICANT?
19:52:35 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS TARA TEDRO.
ORLANDO, FLORIDA, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
WE AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL AND THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE MET THE APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES IN YOUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS IN YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
OUR APPLICATION HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY ALL OF YOUR DEPARTMENTS
AND BEEN FOUND CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
FROM EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS.
WHAT THIS COMES DOWN TO IS MARKETABILITY OF THE PROPERTY.
CURRENTLY VACANT.
WAS FORMERLY A RESTAURANT AND ONLY ALLOWABLE USE ON THE
PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE PRIOR PD THAT WAS APPROVED IS A
RESTAURANT.
AS STAFF NOTED, THAT IS THE MOST INTENSE USE FROM A PARKING
PERSPECTIVE THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED.
THOUGH THERE IS SOME EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ON THE REAR OF OUR
PROPERTY, OUR BUILDING, WHICH WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO MODIFY
THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, IS OVER 200 FEET SETBACK FROM THAT
RESIDENTIAL AND THERE IS A SIX-FOOT MASONRY WALL.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S SOME EXISTING WAIVERS ON THAT
PROPERTY, AND THE ONE WAIVER TONIGHT, WHICH OUR ENGINEER CAN
DISCUSS FURTHER, WAS TRIGGERED BECAUSE THE ONLY ACCESS
EXISTING ON THAT PROPERTY WAS ONTO CASS STREET, NOT ONTO
DALE MABRY.
SO THE ONLY WAY WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE TWO POINTS OF
ACCESS WAS TO GET A WAIVER.
CODE SAYS F.D.O.T. WILL NOT ALLOW FOR THE ALTERNATIVE
ACCESS, THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GRANT THE ACCESS IN THAT
WAIVER.
WE RECEIVED THAT DENIAL LETTER FROM F.D.O.T., THAT THEY
WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR ALTERNATIVE ACCESS.
SO THAT'S THE ACCESS POINTS THAT EXIST NOW.
BECAUSE OF THE CODE CHANGES, THAT POSTDATED THE ORIGINAL
PLAN WHEN IT WAS APPROVED.
WE HAD TO COME BACK AND TECHNICALLY ASK FOR THAT WAIVER AS
WELL.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
MATT FEMAL, OUR ENGINEER OF RECORD, IS ALSO HERE TONIGHT IF
YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
19:54:16 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
19:54:18 >> THANK YOU.
19:54:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 6?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
19:54:26 >> MOVE TO CLOSE.
19:54:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN CITRO -- COUNCILMAN CARLSON, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE
READING THIS ONE, SIR?
19:54:47 >>BILL CARLSON:
MOVE FILE REZ 19-106, ORDINANCE BEING
PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING CONSIDERATION.
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF
612 NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY, IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA,
AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1, FROM ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, RESTAURANT)
TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ALL CG USES); PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
19:55:13 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION --
19:55:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF YOU COULD ADD THE APPROVAL OF THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
19:55:26 >>BILL CARLSON:
THE FIRST PART.
19:55:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES.
19:55:29 >>BILL CARLSON:
AS THE APPLICANT HAS MET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF
TO PROVIDE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE
DEVELOPMENT AS CONDITIONED AND SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CITY CODE.
19:55:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ALSO INCLUDING THE REVISION SHEET AS
REQUESTED BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING.
19:55:44 >>BILL CARLSON:
AND INCLUDING THE REVISION SHEET BETWEEN
FIRST AND SECOND READING.
19:55:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THANK YOU, SIR.
19:55:48 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
THANK YOU.
19:55:56 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5th AT
9:30 A.M.
19:56:03 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT
IS GOING IN THERE?
19:56:13 >> WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING UNDER CONTRACT RIGHT NOW.
WHAT WERE YOU HOPING FOR?
19:56:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
TWO WORDS, OLIVE GARDEN.
[ LAUGHTER ]
19:56:23 >> I'LL LET THEM KNOW.
19:56:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
ON TO NUMBER 7.
19:56:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
REZ 19-110.
REZONING REQUEST FROM RS-50 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL.
19:56:55 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE ARE GOING TO THE CENTRAL TAMPA PLANNING DISTRICT, MORE
SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE EAST TAMPA URBAN VILLAGE.
THERE IS TRANSIT SERVICE WITHIN PROXIMITY OF THE SUBJECT
SITE ALONG NORTH NEBRASKA AVENUE, WHICH IS TO THE EAST OF
THE SITE.
YOU'LL SEE ON THE AERIAL, SERVED BY HART ROUTE NUMBER TWO.
THIS IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN AN EVACUATION ZONE.
ABOUT A HALF MILE TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS
ROBLES PARK, WHICH IS THE CLOSEST PUBLIC RECREATIONAL
FACILITY SERVING THE SITE.
HERE'S AN AERIAL.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE NORTH NEBRASKA AVENUE, EAST
ST. CLAIR, INTERSTATE 275.
THERE'S SOME COMMERCIAL USES ALONG NORTH NEBRASKA AVENUE,
BUT THEN IT DOES TRANSITION TO THE RESIDENTIAL USES INTO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE ADOPTED FUTURE LAND USE IS RESIDENTIAL 20.
IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES WITHIN THIS
AREA, WHICH IS SUPPORTED UNDER THE RESIDENTIAL 20 FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY AND ALLOWS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE PINK IS THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE-35, THOSE COMMERCIAL
USES ALONG NORTH NEBRASKA AVENUE.
THE GRAY IS JUST REPRESENTING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE
INTERSTATE FOR INTERSTATE 275.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THERE IS A POTENTIAL IN THIS AREA FOR HIGHER DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
MULTIFAMILY IS ENCOURAGED IN THE RESIDENTIAL 20 FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATIONS TO PROVIDE A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES TO
MEET THE NEEDS OF TAMPA'S PRESENT AND FUTURE POPULATION.
FURTHER, THIS IS LOCATED IN THE EAST TAMPA URBAN VILLAGE,
WHICH DOES PROMOTE A MIX OF PLACEMENT OF A VARIETY OF USES,
INCLUDING SINGLE AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AS WELL AS A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT.
WE FOUND THAT IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT
IS COMPARABLE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
19:58:54 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
HERE IS THE ZONING MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY IN GREEN.
IT IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE EDGE OF THE YBOR CITY SPECIAL ZONING
DISTRICT AREA.
AGAIN, AS I STATED, ZONED RS-50.
THEY ARE REQUESTING TO DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
THE SITE PLAN YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, THE PROPOSAL IS TO TAKE
THE EXISTING HOUSE AND DETACHED STRUCTURE THAT'S CURRENTLY
IN THE BACK AND THERE WOULD BE TWO DWELLING UNITS IN THE
MAIN HOUSE AND THEN ONE DWELLING UNIT FOR A TOTAL OF THREE
FOR THE ENTIRE SITE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
BECAUSE THEY ARE COMING IN TODAY WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
THEY ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF TODAY'S ZONING
STANDARDS.
SO STORMWATER, PARKING, GREENSPACE, ET CETERA.
SO YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED AND PROVIDING SEVEN
PARKING SPACES.
THEY HAVE STORMWATER LOCATED ON THEIR PROPERTY.
THEY HAVE ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE OFF OF ST. CLAIR STREET.
TRAVERSE THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND EXIT ON EAST ROBLES
STREET.
THE PROPOSED SETBACKS PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY ARE RETAINING
THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE NORTH 7, SOUTH 5, EAST 7, AND
WEST 19 WITH A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AS 35 FEET, WHICH IS
COMFORTABLE TO ALL OF THE RS ZONING DISTRICTS.
THEY ARE REQUESTING TWO MAIN WAIVERS.
THE FIRST, AND THEY ARE BOTH RELATED TO BUFFERING.
THE FIRST WAIVERS ARE TO THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE FROM EIGHT
FEET TO FIVE FEET, BECAUSE OF HAVING TO PUT IN THE 45-DEGREE
PARKING SPACES, THE CODE REQUIRES EIGHT FEET.
THEY ARE AT THIS POINT ONLY FIVE.
YOU CAN SEE THEY MEET IT FURTHER DOWN, FURTHER TO THE EAST.
THE OTHER WAIVER THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING IS FOR THE EAST
PROPERTY LINE.
THE CODE STATES SUPPOSED TO BE A THREE-FOOT BUFFER HERE.
THEY ARE REQUESTING TO GO DOWN TO ZERO BECAUSE THE POINTS OF
THE ANGLED PARKING SPACES GO TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
BUT, AGAIN, THERE ARE LANDSCAPED AREAS AND GREENSPACE AREAS
PROVIDED SOMEWHAT.
IT DOESN'T MEET THE TECHNICAL STANDARD OF EXACTLY THREE
FEET.
THE FINAL WAIVER IS FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS AGAINST A
SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE.
SUPPOSED TO BE A FIVE-FOOT BUFFER.
THEY ARE REQUESTING TO GO DOWN FROM FIVE FOOT TO ZERO FOOT
SUBJECT TO PAYMENT IN LIEU AT TIME OF PERMITTING.
THERE ARE CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING THAT ARE
FOUND IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AND REVISION SHEET.
PLEASE REMEMBER THAT IN YOUR MOTION FROM PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION SOME MINOR CHANGES.
TRANSPORTATION, AGAIN, SOME MINOR CHANGES, AND NOTES THAT
NEED TO BE ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN.
NATURAL RESOURCES DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT, EVEN WITH THE
CONSIDERATION OF THE WAIVER REQUEST.
THERE ARE SOME NOTES THAT NEED TO BE ADDED.
URBAN DESIGN DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT AS WELL AND JUST HAD
ONE COMMENT FOR TIME OF PERMITTING, SAYING THAT, I'LL LET
THE APPLICANT MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW AND CLIENT STAFF DID FIND THIS APPLICATION CONSISTENT
WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
20:02:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
20:02:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THE PROPERTY -- I'M NOT SURE THE
DIRECTION.
I GUESS IT'S TO THE EAST.
IS IT DEVELOPED?
ALREADY A HOUSE THERE?
DO YOU HAVE A PHOTO OR ANYTHING?
20:02:40 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE.
20:02:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IT'S SET BACK A LITTLE BIT.
SO THERE'S PVC FENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.
20:02:56 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE,
YES.
20:03:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THAT FENCE WOULD EFFECTIVELY ACT AS A
BUFFER BETWEEN THAT AND THOSE PARKED CARS THAT ARE GOING TO
COME ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT FENCE?
20:03:09 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES, IF THE NEIGHBOR RETAINED THAT FENCE,
YES.
20:03:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WE HAVEN'T REQUIRED A FENCE ALONG THAT
LINE.
20:03:19 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THE CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE A FENCE.
THE CODE REQUIRES A FIVE-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
20:03:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ALL RIGHT.
I'LL HEAR FROM THE PETITIONER.
THANK YOU.
20:03:33 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
20:03:37 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THANK YOU.
20:03:37 >>LUIS VIERA:
PETITIONER?
20:03:45 >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.
JOSEPH DIAZ.
3243 HENDERSON BOULEVARD, SUITE 310.
IF YOU'LL RECALL, THIS MAP THAT MARY JUST SHOWED YOU, I CAN
SEE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS ZONED RS-50, BUT I'M GOING TO SHOW
YOU THAT ON THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE, THERE IS A DUPLEX THAT IS
ERECTED.
ON THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE, THE CITY OF TAMPA HAS A COMMERCIAL
STRUCTURE.
ON THIS PIECE, WHICH IS THE ADJOINING PIECE, THE ONE ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS THE
PIECE THAT FACES ST. CLAIR IS SINGLE-FAMILY, AND THE PIECE
THAT FACES ROBLES IS A TWO-STORY DUPLEX.
THIS IS THE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA OWNS
TO THE WEST OF OUR PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE DUPLEX THAT IS CATTY-CORNER TO OUR PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE AS IT FACES
ST. CLAIR, AND THIS IS THE BACKSIDE OF THAT SAME WHICH IS
TWO APARTMENTS -- ONE UP AND ONE DOWN.
ON THE PIECE IMMEDIATELY EAST TO OUR ADJOINING PARCEL, THERE
IS THIS STRUCTURE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT
CLEARLY, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS WOULD SAY A AND THIS
WOULD SAY B, AND THAT IS TWO UNITS IN THAT, EVEN THOUGH THIS
IS AN RS-50.
AT THE CORNER OF ROBLES AND TALIAFERRO, YOU'VE GOT A DUPLEX,
TWO STORY.
THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE, ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY
APPRAISER'S OFFICE, THE MAIN STRUCTURE, THE TWO-STORY HOUSE
WAS BUILT IN 1925.
IN 1965, THE THEN OWNER WENT TO THE CITY OF TAMPA TO ERECT
AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AT THAT TIME, THE CITY RECOGNIZED THAT THE TWO-STORY
RESIDENCE WAS BEING USED AS A DUPLEX AND ALLOWED THE
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BE USED AS A REPS BUT PUT A PROVISO THAT
IT HAD TO BE OCCUPIED BY THE OWNER, THAT YOU COULDN'T RENT
IT.
SO THE NET EFFECT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WE'RE TRYING
TO MAKE IT SO WE CAN MAKE THAT FREE-STANDING DETACHED
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE RENTABLE.
STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS.
ALL THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED IT.
ALL OF THEM HAVE FOUND IT CONSISTENT.
THE COUNTY HAS REVIEWED IT.
THEY FOUND IT CONSISTENT.
THEY HAVE ASKED FOR SOME MODIFICATIONS BETWEEN THE FIRST AND
THE SECOND READING.
WE'RE OKAY WITH ALL OF THEM EXCEPT, LET ME CLEAR UP, BECAUSE
I HAD POINTED OUT TO MARY, PLANNING HAVE ASKED FOR A CHANGE,
THE ONE ABOUT THE SIDEWALK.
PLANNING HAD ASKED THAT WE MOVE THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALONG
THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.
TRAFFIC HAD COME IN AND SAID WE DON'T WANT YOU TO PUT THAT
SIDEWALK, REMOVE IT.
I WANTED OUT TO MARY, THERE'S NO WAY CAN I COMPLY WITH BOTH
OF YOU.
I EITHER MOVE IT OR REMOVE IT.
SHE AGREED WE WOULD ASK FOR A WAIVER, THERE'S GOING TO BE NO
SIDEWALK ALONG THE BACK OF ROBLES.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, ALL THE MODIFICATIONS THAT THEY WANT
WE'RE WILLING TO DO AND HAVE NO OBJECTIONS WITH.
IF YOU WANT TO ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE MORE THAN
GLAD TO ANSWER.
20:07:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
YES, SIR.
20:07:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MR. DIAZ, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
ARE THEY INDICATING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY INTO THE
SIDEWALK FUND?
20:07:44 >> THAT IS CORRECT.
20:07:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I JUST WANTED THAT ON THE RECORD.
20:07:49 >> THAT'S PART OF JONATHAN'S RECOMMENDATION.
20:07:52 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANYONE ELSE?
20:07:55 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
HOW MANY UNITS ARE PRESENTLY THERE?
20:07:57 >> THREE.
20:07:58 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
YOU'RE CHANGING IT TO THREE?
20:08:02 >> UP, DOWN AND FREE-STANDING.
20:08:06 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE.
THANK YOU, SIR.
20:08:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO, NO, I'M JUST TURNING IT ON.
20:08:11 >>LUIS VIERA:
GETTING READY.
IF ANYONE IS HERE TO PUBLICLY COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 7,
PLEASE COME FORWARD.
20:08:20 >> HI.
KELLY GRIMSDALE.
NORTH 9th STREET.
ALSO PRESIDENT OF VM YBOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE VM YBOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AS
WELL AS MY OWN BEHALF, WE'RE ASKING TO YOU DENY THE REQUEST
TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 801 EAST SAINT CLAIR AS A
MULTIFAMILY.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE LISTING, THE PROPERTY WAS VACANT
FROM AT LEAST 3/17/2017 THROUGH 5/1/2018 WHEN THE SALE WAS
FINALIZED.
PER PAST CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATIONS, IT APPEARS THAT THE
PROPERTY WAS VACANT MUCH LONGER THAN JUST THIS ONE YEAR.
PER THE CURRENT CODE, ANY PROPERTY THAT IS VACANT FOR MORE
THAN 180 DAYS LOSES ITS GRANDFATHERED-IN STATUS.
I BELIEVE THE PURPOSE OF THIS CODE WAS TO PROTECT
NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH AS OURS WHERE UNSCRUPULOUS OWNERS MAY
HAVE SPLIT UP PROPERTIES IN THE PAST WITHOUT GETTING THE
PROPER ZONING VARIANCE.
IF GRANTED, THIS ZONING VARIANCE WOULD ESTABLISH AN
UNDESIRABLE PRECEDENCE, AS OTHER OWNERS WILL SEE THIS AS A
GREEN LIGHT TO MAKE THEIR ILLEGALLY SPLIT PROPERTIES LEGAL.
THIS PARTICULAR OWNER HAS A HISTORY OF PURCHASING
PROPERTIES, MOSTLY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND THEN
OPERATING THEM AS ILLEGAL ROOMING HOUSES OF SORTS, WITH MOST
HAVING DONE WORK -- OR MOST HAVING WORK DONE WITHOUT
PERMITS.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES RESULT IN CODE ENFORCEMENT
VIOLATIONS, DRAINING OUR LOCAL RESOURCES AND ADDING NO
POSITIVE VALUE TO THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
SEVERAL OF THE PROPERTIES I AM REFERRING TO ARE 3,000 NORTH
FLORIDA AVENUE, 3023 NORTH FLORIDA AVENUE, 106 EAST
FLORIBRASKA WHICH WAS TORN DOWN, 3008 NORTH NEBRASKA AND 410
EAST OAK AVENUE.
PER CODE ENFORCEMENT INSPECTOR I TALKED WITH YESTERDAY, MAIN
HOUSE ON ST. CLAIR PROPERTY WHICH WAS SPLIT INTO TWO UNITS
YEARS AGO IS ALREADY SET UP AS TWO SLEEPING ROOMS PER FLOOR
WITH TWO SETS OF BUNK BEDS IN EACH ROOM.
IF FILLED THIS WOULD RESULT IN 16 INDIVIDUALS IN A
2700-SQUARE-FOOT HOME CLEARLY IN VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA
FIRE CODE IN WHICH THE FIRE CODE IS BASED.
IF YOU GRANT THE OWNER'S REQUEST, WHO IS TO SAY HE WILL NOT
PROCEED WITH RENTING OUT THE BEDS LIKE THE ROOMING OUT AT
2818 AND 2820 NORTH NEBRASKA, WITHIN 254 FEET FROM THIS
PROPERTY.
PAST EXPERIENCE WORKING CLOSELY WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, IT IS
VERY DIFFICULT FOR INSPECTORS TO CONFIRM IF MORE THAN FOUR
UNRELATED ADULTS ARE RESIDING IN A SINGLE HOUSING UNIT.
THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IS ALSO PROBLEMATIC.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS PARTICULAR LOT IS OF THE SIZE
APPROPRIATE FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE, NOT A TRIPLEX, WHICH
REQUIRES MORE PARKING.
THE REQUEST TO DECREASE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL
ESSENTIALLY RESULT IN CARS PARKED RIGHT ALONG THE ABUTTING
PROPERTY.
IT ALSO CREATES A VEHICULAR WAY CONNECTING ROBLES STREET AND
ST. CLAIR, WHICH IS A HORRIBLE PRECEDENT GOING FORWARD AS IT
IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE HISTORIC URBAN GRID.
FINALLY, THE MAJORITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS MADE UP OF
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
GETTING BACK TO THE CODE AND WHY PROPERTIES ARE MANDATED TO
BE RETURNED BACK TO CURRENT ZONING ONCE A PROPERTY IS
VACANT, THIS IS ALLOWS FOR THE HISTORIC FABRIC TO BE
REPAIRED AND FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD TO IMPROVE OVER TIME.
I WOULD SUGGEST HE NEEDS TO OPERATE A PROPERTY LIKE THIS IN
HIS NEIGHBOR, NEAR HIS HOME, NOT IN OTHER PEOPLE'S
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THANK YOU.
20:11:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MADAM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
20:11:39 >> JEFF ROIDT, 1210 EAST 26th AVENUE.
I CAN'T SAY MUCH MORE THAN KELLY JUST SAID.
BUT GOING TO THE PRECEDENT BEING SET, WHETHER IT BE THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD OR GRAY GABLES OR WHEREVER, IT'S FOR
IMPROVEMENT.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE STRIVING FOR IN VM YBOR.
I FEEL IF THIS IS PASSED IT WOULD BE A STEP BACK FOR
PRECEDENCE BEING SET.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
20:12:19 >> MY NAME IS CORNELIA ELIZABETH GREGHOUSE.
I AM THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE RIGHT THERE.
YOU CAN SEE THAT YELLOW LINE CONNECTS TWO HOUSES OR
STRUCTURES.
FROM THE BEGINNING OF THAT HOUSE RIGHT HERE, THERE'S TWO
MORE STRUCTURES THAT GO DOWN THAT WHOLE SIDE OF NEBRASKA.
THEY ARE ALL ROOMING HOUSES.
THEY ARE ALL IN VIOLATION OF MULTIPLE FIRE CODES, TOO MANY
PEOPLE, AND NOW THIS STRUCTURE TO MY LEFT, I WILL BE FLANKED
ON BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE OF MY PROPERTY BY ROOMING
HOUSES THAT TAKE IN SEX OFFENDERS, PEDOPHILES, DRUG ADDICTS,
ALCOHOLICS, MENTALLY ILL, AND HOMELESS.
IT'S TOO MUCH IN A VERY SMALL AREA FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD
BEING OVERWHELMED.
I FEEL AS IF WE ARE A DUMPING GROUND FOR THESE PEOPLE.
AS A COMMUNITY, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WE CAN'T TAKE MUCH
MORE OF THIS.
JUST DOWN THE STREET, THERE'S TRINITY, WHICH ALSO ADDS TO
THE CONFUSION.
EVERY SINGLE DAY I GET UP AND I HAVE TO SEE THINGS IN MY
FRONT YARD AND BACKYARD THAT I WOULD RATHER NOT SEE.
GARBAGE, DRUG ADDICTS PASSED OUT IN MY BACKYARD AND FRONT
YARD.
PEOPLE PITCHING TENTS IN MY BACKYARD.
I GO OUT EVERY DAY AND PICK UP THEIR GARBAGE.
THEIR NEEDLES, THEIR BOTTLES, THEIR CANS.
SINCE PEOPLE ALREADY LIVING IN THIS STRUCTURE THAT IS ON
ST. CLAIR, IT IS LITTERED WITH GARBAGE, VENDING MACHINES,
EMPTY BINS, TIRES, CARS, ALL KINDS OF DEBRIS.
AND THE TYPE OF PEOPLE I CAN ALREADY TELL IT'S ATTRACTING,
THERE IS A SIGN OVER THE DOOR, CALLED HOMELESS HELPING
HOMELESS.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT ENTAILS, IF THIS IS A
CHARITABLE THING BEING INSTALLED IN THIS STRUCTURE OR NOT,
BUT I JUST DON'T SEE IT HAPPENING, NOT IN THIS AREA.
AS THIS GENTLEMAN BEFORE WE JUST SAID, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO
BRING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD UP, NOT DRAG IT FURTHER DOWN INTO
THE GUTTER.
THIS IS GOING TO DO JUST THAT.
IN FACT, THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT ATTORNEY DIAZ SHOWED WAS NOT
THE SIDE OR THE BACK OF THE BUILDING THAT'S NEXT TO IT.
THAT WAS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED.
THANK YOU.
20:14:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
20:15:01 >> HI.
MY NAME IS RICARDO CROUSE.
1520.
-- 1520 EAST 21st AVENUE.
AS A RESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD,
WE STRIVE TO TRY TO WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE CITY HAS THE POWER TO HELP US OR IT HAS THE POWER RIGHT
NOW TO SET US BACK SOME MORE.
WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS AND
BASED ON THE OBSERVATIONS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING INSIDE THE
STRUCTURE IS BASICALLY WHAT SOME MAY CALL A -- SOMETHING
OPERATED BY A SLUMLORD.
NOT SOMETHING I WANT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, OR YOU WOULD WANT
IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR MR. DIAZ IN HIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS IN YOUR HANDS TO TAKE THE PRECEDENT THAT THIS IS
SETTING AND MAYBE CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS IT'S GOING
TO HAVE GOING FORWARD.
I JUST THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS DO ON A REGULAR
BASIS, AND JUST PLEASE CONSIDER THIS VERY STRONGLY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
20:16:13 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANYONE ELSE TO COMMENT ON ITEM 7?
PETITIONER, REBUTTAL?
20:16:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
A QUESTION TO STAFF BEFORE YOU GET TO.
20:16:20 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES, SIR.
GO AHEAD.
20:16:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MARY.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IS THE MAIN REASON THEY ARE IN IS
FOR THAT SMALL LITTLE 500 AND SOME DWELLING UNIT?
OTHERWISE, IS THE FRONT DUPLEX LEGAL?
TODAY?
I MEAN, FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, NOT FROM A CODE
ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE.
20:16:54 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.
I BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE SOME CODE VIOLATIONS FOR A ROOMING
HOUSE BACK IN 2018 FOR THIS CASE.
THE APPLICANT APPROACHED STAFF AND SAID THAT IT'S CURRENTLY
ZONED RS-50, WHICH IS A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED ZONING
DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD ONLY ALLOW ONE DWELLING UNIT.
THEY WANTED TO FORMALLY INVEST IT FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS
AS OPPOSED TO --
20:17:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IF IT WAS DENIED, THEN NOT ONLY THE REAR
UNIT COULD NOT BE USED BUT THE FRONT UNIT WOULD HAVE TO
REVERT BACK TO A SINGLE UNIT.
20:17:47 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
I RECOMMEND THEY COME IN AND DO A FORMAL
DECISION TO PROVE TO STAFF THAT THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS
THAT ARE OUT THERE ARE ALL NONCONFORMING, WHICH MEANS THAT
THEY WERE LEGALLY ESTABLISHED AND THEY HAVE BEEN CONTINUALLY
OCCUPIED SINCE THEY WERE LEGALLY ESTABLISHED AND HAVE NOT
LAPSED FOR A PERIOD OF MORE THAN 180 DAYS.
20:18:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THEY COULD DO THAT ON BOTH STRUCTURES,
THEORETICALLY?
20:18:08 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THE ENTIRE SITE.
20:18:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
IF THEY DIDN'T DO THAT, THEN AS OF RIGHT
NOW, IT WOULD REVERT BACK TO THE RS-50, ONE UNIT FOR THE
WHOLE PROPERTY.
20:18:20 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
RIGHT.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT, YES.
THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT HE BELIEVES IT'S A
NONCONFORMING USE.
20:18:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
20:18:31 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, SIR.
20:18:36 >> MR. DINGFELDER --
20:18:37 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'M SORRY.
NAME.
20:18:38 >> JOSEPH DIAZ.
GENTLEMEN, LOOK, I DON'T DOUBT THAT THIS LADY IS HAVING
PROBLEMS ON HER PROPERTY, BUT WHO'S TO SAY THAT PROBLEM IS
EMANATING FROM OUR PROPERTY?
WHAT YOU'RE HEARING IS ON NEBRASKA AVENUE, THEY HAVE SOME
DRUG REHAB FACILITIES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE HER PROBLEMS ARE COMING FROM.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT TIES THOSE CONCERNS THAT SHE HAS TO OUR
PROPERTY.
WHEN SHE SAID THAT THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF
US IS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, IT IS NOT.
I SHOWED YOU THE PICTURE.
THE PIECE THAT FRONTS ON ST. CLAIR IS A SINGLE UNIT, AND THE
PIECE THAT FRONTS ON ROBLES IS A TWO-STORY.
SO THERE ARE THREE RENTAL UNITS THERE.
THAT CHARACTER OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY
PICTURES OF ANY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THAT IMMEDIATE
AREA.
THE PROPERTY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US IS VACANT.
THE ONE CATTY-CORNER IS THE ONE WHERE I SHOWED YOU THE
DUPLEX.
THE TWO TO THE EAST OF US, THE ADJOINING OF THE OTHER ONE
ARE MULTIFAMILY.
THE ONE ON ROBLES AND TALIAFERRO IS A DUPLEX.
THE CHARACTER OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD MAY BE RS-50, BUT IT'S
NOT BEING UTILIZED AS A SINGLE-FAMILY IN THAT AREA.
WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THIS.
20:20:01 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
COUNCILMAN GUDES.
20:20:05 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
MARY, YOU SAID THAT THAT PROPERTY WAS
CITED, PETITIONER'S PROPERTY WAS CITED FOR A BOARDING HOME?
20:20:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES, SIR, IT'S IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
PAGE 8, THERE WAS A CODE CASE, BACK IN 2018 FOR A ROOMING
HOUSE.
20:20:28 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NO CURRENT CASES OPEN
RIGHT NOW.
20:20:31 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
20:20:36 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
THAT IS A BIG CONCERN OF MINE IN THAT AREA.
THERE ARE A LOT OF ILLEGAL, PER SE, BOARDING HOMES BEING
UTILIZED IN THAT AREA, A LOT OF THEM.
WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN THE CITY.
I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THAT AND THAT'S ONE OF MY
CHALLENGES.
BUT I DO KNOW THAT THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME IN REFERENCE TO A
LOT OF THE PROPERTIES IN THAT GENERAL VICINITY BEING USED AS
BOARDING HOMES WITH MULTIPLE RESIDENTS INSIDE OF THEM.
NOT TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE.
I MEAN MULTIPLE.
I RESERVE MY COMMENTS FOR LATER, MR. CHAIR.
20:21:20 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ARE YOU WITH THE PETITIONER REPRESENTING?
20:21:24 >> YES.
20:21:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
COME FORWARD, SIR.
20:21:26 >> MY NAME IS PERRY SULLIVAN.
ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WE'RE DOING THIS IS TRY TO BRING IT
UP TO CODE.
TRY TO CLEAN IT UP INSIDE AND OUT.
WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT WHERE IT WILL COMPLY WITH CODE WITH
ALL THE FIRE REQUIREMENTS, ALL THE BUILDING REQUIREMENTS AND
EVERYTHING ELSE IT HAS TO BE.
NO BUILDING IN TOWN YOU CAN GUARANTEE WHAT'S GOING TO GO
INSIDE ONCE THEY GET A CO.
THAT'S ACROSS THE BOARD.
YOU CAN'T DO ANY BUILDING LIKE THAT.
WE HAVE NOTHING TO DO AGAIN WITH THE VAGRANTS AND THE
PEDOPHILES AND THOSE GUYS.
BUT AS FAR AS THE PEOPLE RENTING IN OUR BUILDING, WE HAVE
CONTROL OVER THAT.
WE HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THAT.
AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO BRING IT UP TO CODE.
WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE ROOMING HOUSE DOWN AND MAKE IT
COMPLY WITH WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WE'RE DOING THIS ALSO.
20:22:22 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
SIR, ARE YOU HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT?
20:22:31 >> YES, SIR, INDEED, CONCERNING THE PROPERTY.
20:22:32 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'LL LET YOU SPEAK BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE SPOKEN
UNDER PUBLIC COMMENT.
20:22:37 >> I APOLOGIZE.
WE HAD A MESS OF PEOPLE UP FRONT.
MY NAME IS RANDY HEATH.
I AM ACTUALLY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS FOR HOMELESS
HELPING HOMELESS.
MY ADDRESS IS 801A ST. CLAIR.
I RESIDE AT THIS LOCATION.
I RESPECT WHAT EVERYONE HAD TO SAY HERE, SIR, AS FAR AS WHAT
THEY FOUND TO BE THE CONDITION OF THE HOME.
I'M RELATIVELY NEW TO TAMPA.
I'M NOT HERE TO QUESTION ZONING WHATSOEVER.
I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO DO SO.
BUT I'M CERTAINLY IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN COMPLETELY WHAT
THAT PLACE IS ABOUT.
I HEARD -- OVERHEARD THAT WE HAVE 18 PEOPLE IN THERE.
IT'S A ROOMING HOUSE AND THIS AND THAT.
SIR, I FOUND MYSELF HOMELESS ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO.
ATTEMPTED TO FIND SHELTER.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DIDN'T HAVE A DRUG PROBLEM OF ANY SORT FOR
SOMEONE TO BRING ME IN ON ANY PROGRAM.
THESE FOLKS BROUGHT ME IN.
THEY RUN A VERY TIGHT SHIP.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY ANSWER THE DOOR AND ALLOW
PEOPLE TO WALK IN.
THIS IS NOT A ROOMING HOUSE.
I PAID NOTHING.
THESE GUYS HAVE RULES AND REGULATIONS.
IF THEY DO NOT ABIDE BY THEM, THEY ARE OUT THE DOOR.
THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RESIDING THERE RIGHT NOW FEEL SAFER IN
THE CONFINES OF THE FENCE IN THE BACKYARD THAN OUTSIDE THE
FENCE.
THERE IS UNBELIEVABLE AMOUNT OF INCIDENTS THAT GO ON EVERY
EVENING OUTSIDE THE GATES OF THAT ADDRESS.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO PORTRAY.
I WANTED TO EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT HAPPENS.
I'M VERY CLOSE AND PERSONAL TO THIS.
I'M NOT GOING TO EXPLAIN HOW I GOT THERE.
IT'S MOOT.
BELIEVE ME, I DIDN'T BRING MY VIOLIN.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS I'M SORRY.
ANY TRASH OUT THERE, IF IT'S NOT CLEANED UP, WHOEVER CAUSED
THAT, THEY ARE GONE.
WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT IS SET UP TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE GO
BY THE RULES.
THERE ARE NOT DRUNKS IN THERE.
IF ANYONE IS FOUND WITH ALCOHOL WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THOSE
GATES, I'M SORRY.
THAT'S AGAINST THE RULES.
SO THERE'S A LOT MORE TO THIS.
AS FAR AS THE ZONING, PLEASE, DO WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO.
I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO TRY AND GET IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT.
I HONESTLY CAN'T STAND HERE AND LISTEN TO SOMEBODY TALK
ABOUT WHERE I'M GOING HOME TONIGHT.
THAT'S THE FACTS.
AND I WELCOME ANYONE, ANYTIME TO PLEASE COME OUT AND SEE FOR
YOURSELF.
CODE ENFORCEMENT WAS OUT YESTERDAY.
MR. PARKER.
HE SAID, RANDY, COME ALONG.
OKAY.
I FOLLOWED ALONG, AND SURE ENOUGH, EVERYTHING WENT FINE.
THEY DIDN'T FIND ANY PROBLEMS.
EVIDENTLY, MY TIME IS UP OR 25 SECONDS. AS I SAID, I
RESPECT THEIR OPINION.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT, BUT I HAVE FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE.
THANK YOU.
20:25:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
20:25:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY THE HEAD OF THE
ORGANIZATION BUT YOU'VE BEEN THERE A LITTLE WHILE.
IS THE ORGANIZATION A TENANT RENTING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY,
CONTROLLING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, INCLUDING THE BACK
BUILDING?
20:25:45 >> NO, SIR, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
THERE'S NO ONE THAT IS A GUEST.
I DO SAY GUEST, IN THAT HOUSE WHILE THEY ARE IN A
TRANSITIONAL PERIOD TO GET BACK ON THEIR FEET.
IT IS HOMELESS HELPING HOMELESS.
THEY ARE HOMELESS BUT THEY ARE NOT PAYING RENT IF THAT'S
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
20:26:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THE ORGANIZATION, IS THE ORGANIZATION THE
TENANT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY?
20:26:08 >> YES, SIR.
20:26:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND INCLUDING THE BACK UNIT?
20:26:11 >> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YES, SIR.
I'M SORRY TO TOSS THAT IN.
BUT, YES, SIR, WE OPERATE OUT OF THAT BACK ROOM AS WELL.
20:26:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THERE ARE FOLKS LIVING IN THE BACK
UNIT.
20:26:21 >> NEGATIVE.
IT'S MORE OF AN OFFICE STORAGE AREA.
20:26:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
20:26:25 >> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE THE TIME.
20:26:29 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES, SIR.
MARY, BEFORE YOU COME UP, PETITIONER, DID YOU HAVE ANY
REBUTTAL AFTER THAT PUBLIC COMMENT?
I WOULD THINK NOT.
NONE.
OKAY.
GO AHEAD, MA'AM.
20:26:41 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO.
JUST TO CLARIFY THE RECORD, I DID -- I'M LOOKING AT OUR
ONLINE PERMITTING SYSTEM.
THAT CODE CASE IS ACTUALLY STILL IN PROCESS.
IT HAS PASSED INSPECTION FOR ROOMING HOUSE WITH THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
THEY HAVE GONE OUT THERE, DONE AN INSPECTION TO DETERMINE
THAT IT'S CURRENTLY IN COMPLIANCE, BUT TECHNICALLY THE CASE
IS STILL IN PROCESS.
SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY THE RECORD FOR THAT.
20:27:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
20:27:06 >>BILL CARLSON:
THE USE THAT WAS JUST DESCRIBED BY THE
GENTLEMAN THAT STOOD UP, IS THAT ALLOWED UNDER THE CURRENT
DESIGNATION?
20:27:13 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT OF
RS-50, IT IS A SINGLE DWELLING UNIT.
FOUR UNRELATED PEOPLE CAN LIVE IN A SINGLE DWELLING UNIT.
20:27:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
HOW ABOUT THE PROPOSED PD?
20:27:28 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
PROPOSED PD, THEY ARE ASKING FOR THREE
DWELLING UNITS.
PER CODE, THREE UNRELATED PEOPLE CAN LIVE IN A DWELLING
UNIT.
THEREFORE, YOU WOULD HAVE 12.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU.
20:27:45 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
20:27:47 >>CATE WELLS:
CATE WELLS, CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE.
JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD, GIVEN THE TESTIMONY ABOUT
THE OPEN CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE, THAT CANNOT BE USED AS A
BASIS TO DENY THE APPLICATION.
THANK YOU.
20:28:01 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
MOTION TO CLOSE FIRST MADE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO --
20:28:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
BEFORE YOU CLOSE.
ONE MORE QUESTION TO MS. WELLS.
MS. WELLS, I NOTICE SOMETIMES MUNICIPALS GET IN A LITTLE
TROUBLE WITH PROTECTED CLASSES, LIKE ALCOHOL TREATMENT
FACILITY OR THAT SORT OF THING.
I REMEMBER BEING A LITIGANT IN LITIGATION LIKE THAT UNDER
THE ADA AND ALL.
IS HOMELESS IN ANY WAY A PROTECTED CLASS?
20:28:41 >>CATE WELLS:
THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS NOT FOR A SPECIAL
USE PERMIT FOR ANY TYPE OF USE.
IT'S REZONING FROM RS-50 TO PD.
THAT SHOULD BE THE FOCUS OF YOUR REVIEW, IS THIS APPROPRIATE
AND COMPATIBLE UNDER YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND IN YOUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS IT RELATES TO CREATING THREE DWELLING
UNITS ON THIS ONE PARCEL?
20:29:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
20:29:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
20:29:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ALSO, IF I CAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU,
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, JUST A REMINDER THAT YOU DO HAVE THE
CODE CRITERIA ON PAGES 4, 5, AND 6, PARTICULARLY SECTION
27-136, THE PURPOSES OF A PD AND ALSO THE WAIVER CRITERIA ON
PAGE 6, 27-139-4.
IRRESPECTIVE OF HOW YOU DECIDE THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE MY
RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU BASE YOUR DECISION ON COMPETENT,
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND YOU MAKE SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT
AND YOU APPLY THEM TO THE PARTICULAR SECTIONS OF THE CODE
RELATIVE TO THIS.
THAT BEING SAID, THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF STAFF BEFORE THE
HEARING WAS CLOSED.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT MR. DIAZ HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FINAL WORD.
20:29:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING FURTHER, MR. DIAZ?
OKAY, THE RECORD REFLECTS NONE.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO, I THINK
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
I'LL GO THROUGH -- I GUESS COUNCILMAN CARLSON WAS LAST.
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER, DO YOU WISH TO TAKE THIS ONE ON?
20:30:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'LL PASS.
20:30:10 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN GUDES, DO YOU WISH TO TAKE THIS
ITEM NUMBER 7 ON, SIR?
YOU'RE READING IT?
20:30:42 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I'LL PROBABLY MOVE TO DENY.
20:30:48 >>LUIS VIERA:
I WAS GOING TO SAY, I WAS GOING TO ASK
MR. SHELBY THAT, IF I ASK SOMEONE TO READ IT AND THEY CHOOSE
TO DENY IT, THEY CAN DO SO, CORRECT?
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.
GO FOR IT.
THAT'S NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.
20:31:02 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
MR. CHAIR, I'M GOING TO DENY FILE REZ
19-110.
I DON'T THINK THE PETITIONER HAS MET THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN
REFERENCE TO THE WAIVER CONDITIONS, SECTION 27-2843, THE
8 FEET BUFFER, ALSO SECTION 2, 27-284.33.
AS WELL.
THAT'S MY BASIS OF THE DENIAL.
20:31:49 >>LUIS VIERA:
DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
WE HAVE A MOTION -- MR. SHELBY, WERE YOU GOING TO SAY
SOMETHING?
20:31:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'M WONDERING, COUNCIL, I NOTICE YOU CITED
THE WAIVER SECTION, THE WAIVER CRITERIA.
WERE THERE ANY PARTICULAR FINDINGS WITH REGARD TO WHAT
WITHIN THAT WAIVER CRITERIA WAS NOT MET?
ALSO, WITH REGARD TO 27-136, DO YOU WISH TO MAKE ANY
FINDINGS RELATIVE TO THE ONE, TWO, THREE THROUGH NINE
DIFFERENT CRITERIA THERE WITH REGARD TO THE EVIDENCE THAT
YOU'VE DETERMINED IT TO BE?
I SHOULD POINT THIS OUT, THAT IF THERE'S A MOTION ON THE
FLOOR, IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY THAT
ANY PARTICULAR COUNCIL MEMBER WISHES TO REFERENCE IN SUPPORT
OF THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
20:32:46 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING TO ADD, COUNCILMAN GUDES, OR IF
ANYBODY WISHES TO AMEND, AFTER GIVING COUNCILMAN GUDES,
SINCE IT'S HIS MOTION.
TAKE YOUR TIME.
WE'RE IN NO RUSH.
20:33:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN ASSIST.
COUNCILMAN GUDES, IF I MAY.
JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROCESS, FOR INSTANCE, ON PAGE
4, YOU HAVE SECTION 27-136, WHICH ARE THE PURPOSES FOR
ALLOWING THE, IN THIS CASE, PETITION FOR A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT.
NOW, YOU SEE THE DIFFERENT CRITERIA THAT THE STAFF HAS
DELINEATED, AND THEY ARE NUMBERED ALL THE WAY FROM ONE
THROUGH NINE.
THEY ARE BASES UPON WHICH YOU CAN BASE YOUR DECISION.
THE STAFF HAS GIVEN ITS OPINION AND THOSE ARE PLACED THERE
IN ITALICS AND IN BOLD.
HOWEVER, IF DEPENDING ON THE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
YOU'VE HEARD AT THE HEARING, IF YOU AS A COUNCIL, A COUNCIL
MEMBER INDIVIDUALLY OR AS A BODY, FIND THAT THERE ARE FACTS
THAT SUPPORT A POSITION OTHER THAN WHAT STAFF FINDS OR
CONSISTENT OR INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE CRITERIA IS, YOU
CAN MAKE THAT FINDING OF FACT AND APPLY THAT CODE IN SUPPORT
OF YOUR POSITION.
20:34:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THE MAKER OF THE MOTION
WOULD LIKE, I'LL BE GLAD TO ASSIST SLIGHTLY.
OKAY.
IN REGARD TO THE WAIVER ON PAGE 6 OF THE STAFF REPORT, IT
SAYS THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE WAIVER
THROUGH THE PD PROCESS.
ITEM B ON THERE SAYS THE WAIVER IF ALLOWED WOULD NOT
SUBSTANTIALLY INTERFERE WITH OR INJURE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS
WHOSE PROPERTY WOULD BE AFFECTED BY ALLOWANCE OF THE WAIVER.
I BELIEVE WE'VE HEARD QUITE A BIT OF TESTIMONY TO THE
CONTRARY.
ALSO, IN REGARD TO THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS THAT COUNCILMAN
GUDES SPOKE TO, THAT THEY HAVE ASKED FOR THE WAIVER IN
REGARD TO THE ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY COMING IN ON ST. CLAIR AND
EXITING ON ROBLES, THERE WAS TESTIMONY THAT THAT WAS WITHOUT
PRECEDENT FOR A DRIVE AISLE TO COME ALL THE WAY THROUGH
THERE.
AND ALSO, THEY ARE LOOKING FOR PARKING SPACES TO COME ALL
THE WAY UP TO A ZERO LOT LINE, ZERO-FOOT LINE TO THE EDGE OF
THE PROPERTY.
AGAIN, THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT WAIVER TO ALLOW PROPERTY UP TO
A ZERO LINE.
THAT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO YOUR MOTION, MR. GUDES.
20:36:10 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCILMAN?
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
NAY.
20:36:26 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED WITH VIERA VOTING NO.
20:36:37 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
ITEM 8.
MARY SAMANIEGO, ITEM 8 IS REZ 19-111, ZONING REQUEST FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1210 WEST LINEBAUGH AVENUE FROM RS-50 TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
20:36:54 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE IN UNIVERSITY PLANNING DISTRICT.
EVACUATION ZONE E.
FOREST HILLS PARK IS THE CLOSEST PUBLIC RECREATION FACILITY.
BUS ROUTE 14 AND 45 SERVE THE SUBJECT SITE.
WE'RE ON WEST LINEBAUGH AVENUE, AS MARY POINTED OUT.
WEST LINEBAUGH AVENUE HAS A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES.
THIS IS NORTH BOULEVARD.
THERE IS A CHURCH AT THIS CORNER, AND THEN IT TRANSITIONS TO
THE SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED.
TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS THE FOREST HILLS
NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH YOU'LL SEE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
SUBJECT SITE IS RESIDENTIAL 20.
THAT IS THE BROWN COLOR.
RESIDENTIAL 10 IS THE ORANGE.
THIS IS RESIDENTIAL 6.
THAT'S THE YELLOW TO THE NORTH AND THAT IS THAT FOREST HILLS
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IN ORDER TO DO THE PROFESSIONAL USES WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL
20 FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, THE APPLICANT MUST MEET
LOCATIONAL CRITERIA.
ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL 20 FUTURE
LAND USE DESIGNATION IS THAT THE SUBJECT SITE MUST HAVE
ACCESS DIRECTLY ONTO A COLLECTOR ROADWAY OR HIGHER.
WEST LINEBAUGH AVENUE IS A COLLECTOR ROADWAY, SO WE DID FIND
THAT CONSISTENT WITH THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA, AND WE DID
FIND THAT THE OFFICE USE AT THIS LOCATION WOULD BE A
COMPARABLE AND COMPATIBLE USE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
SURROUNDING AREA AND WOULD NOT CAUSE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS.
THAT'S MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
20:38:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
20:38:33 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
JENNIFER SHOWED YOU AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY.
HERE IS THE ZONING MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IN GREEN.
AS JENNIFER WAS STATING, THIS HAS TO MEET LOCATIONAL
CRITERIA.
SHE EXPLAINED THAT.
YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS TO THE
NORTH, NORTHEAST, EAST, AND TO THE FAR EAST OF THE PROPERTY,
ALIGNED WITH LINEBAUGH AVENUE.
HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
CURRENTLY A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE.
THIS IS IT FROM THE SIDE STREET, WHICH IS WILLOW.
TO THE NORTH, NONRESIDENTIAL USE.
AND CATTY-CORNER TO THE NORTHEAST IS A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS
ASSEMBLY.
ANOTHER PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY DIRECTLY TO THE WEST AND
DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE TO THE SOUTH.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PD TO CONVERT THE EXISTING
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE INTO A BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
THAT WOULD BE THE SOLE USE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
EXISTING STRUCTURE APPROXIMATELY 1400 SQUARE FEET.
THE LOT IS A LITTLE OVER 7,000 SQUARE FEET.
BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING, FOR BUSINESS
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USE, FIVE PARKING SPACES WOULD BE
REQUIRED.
THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A WAIVER TO ALLOW FOR THREE
PARKING SPACES.
AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE PER THE SITE PLAN, BECAUSE THEY ARE
TRYING TO WORK AROUND AN EXISTING -- LET'S MOVE IT UP OUT OF
THE CC.
THEY ARE TRYING TO WORK AROUND AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, THERE
ARE LIMITED LOCATIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR PARKING.
SO THEY HAVE ONE PARKING IN THE GARAGE, ANOTHER ONE HERE,
AND THE THIRD ADA SPOT FACING TO THE SOUTH.
FOR YOUR REFERENCE, THIS IS LINEBAUGH AVENUE, AND THEN HERE
IS WILLOW.
ANOTHER WAIVER THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR IS COMMERCIAL ACCESS
ONTO WILLOW TO USE THIS DRIVEWAY AS OPPOSED TO COMING OUT ON
LINEBAUGH BECAUSE THERE'S SOME LIMITED SITE CLEARANCE.
THE THIRD WAIVER THAT THEY ARE ASKING IS TO ALLOW
MANEUVERING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PARKING SPACES BECAUSE
SOME OF THE PARKING WOULD HAVE TO REVERSE OUT ONTO WILLOW
STREET BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION MANEUVERING.
THE LAST WAIVER IS TO REDUCE THE USE AROUND THE SOUTH
PROPERTY LINE FROM 15 FEET WITH A SIX-FOOT HIGH TO FIVE FEET
WITH SIX-FOOT HIGH CMU WALL BECAUSE OF THE PRESENCE OF THIS
ONE PARKING SPACE.
THERE ARE SOME CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING FROM
PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
TRANSPORTATION DID FIND THIS INCONSISTENT FOR THE PARKING
WAIVER DOWN FROM 40% FROM FIVE SPACES TO 3, FOR THE ACCESS
TO A LOCAL STREET ONTO NORTH WILLOW AVENUE AS WELL AS FOR
THE MANEUVERING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THERE ARE SOME MINOR CHANGES FROM NATURAL RESOURCES BETWEEN
FIRST AND SECOND READING.
OVERALL, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF DID
FIND THIS INCONSISTENT AGAIN BECAUSE OF THE WAIVER RELATED
TO TRANSPORTATION CODE SECTIONS.
20:42:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
BEFORE WE GO FORWARD, OUR CLERKS, YOU ALL WANT A FIVE-MINUTE
BREAK?
WE'VE BEEN HERE ALMOST THREE HOURS, OR TWO AND A HALF.
YOU-ALL ALL RIGHT?
I'LL ASK IN ANOTHER THREE HOURS.
PETITIONER?
20:42:26 >> DAVID PHETHEAN, NORTH FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 110.
20:42:32 >> DAVID SCHMIDT, 13542 NORTH FLORIDA AVENUE.
ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THE PARKING
REDUCTION WAIVER, IF YOU NOTICED, THERE'S A LARGE OAK TREE
THAT SITS DIRECTLY IN THE SIDE DOOR OF OUR PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS YOUNG LADY HERE HAS THAT PICTURE
READILY AVAILABLE.
BUT YOU CAN SEE THE PICTURE IN THE PRESENTATION THAT SHE
MADE.
WHEN WE MET WITH THE TRANSPORTATION AND THE TREE PEOPLE,
THEY DIDN'T WANT US TO TAKE THAT TREE OUT.
THEY WANTED US TO PRESERVE THAT TREE.
SO IN ORDER TO CREATE THE PARKING THAT IS NEEDED, IT'S JUST
PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SAVE THE TREE AND PUT THE FIVE
PARKING PLACES IN.
THE GUY IN THE BACK THAT'S FROM THE TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT IS THE MAN THAT WE MET WITH TO -- YEAH, SEE THIS
OAK TREE RIGHT HERE.
THEY CONSIDERED THAT NOT A GRAND TREE BUT CLOSE TO BEING A
GRAND TREE.
THE ARBORIST REPORT SAID THAT THE TREE WAS HEALTHY.
IT WASN'T VIABLE.
IT WASN'T DISEASED.
THE NATURAL -- OR THE KATHY BECK'S OFFICE REALLY WANTED US
TO SAVE THAT TREE.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE PARKING REDUCTION.
AS FAR AS THE ACCESS FROM LINEBAUGH AVENUE TO -- INSTEAD OF
GOING ON TO LINEBAUGH, GOING ON TO WILLOW, WE ONLY HAVE A
FIVE-FOOT SIDE YARD ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
NOT BEING ABLE TO TAKE THIS TREE OUT AND KEEPING A 20-FOOT
BUFFER AROUND THE TREE, THERE'S NO WAY TO GET TO LINEBAUGH
AVENUE.
SO WE HAVE TO UTILIZE WILLOW, WHICH IS WHERE YOU SEE THE
DRIVEWAY THERE NOW.
20:44:27 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING ELSE?
20:44:31 >> NO.
20:44:33 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
I ACTUALLY HAVE ONE.
WHAT DO YOU ALL INTEND TO USE THIS FOR?
20:44:42 >> REAL ESTATE OFFICE.
A REAL ESTATE OFFICE.
20:44:45 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
20:44:47 >> DAVID MANAGES RENTAL PROPERTIES.
HE DOESN'T -- HE SELLS REAL ESTATE, BUT HIS PRIMARY BUSINESS
IS RENTAL MANAGEMENT.
20:44:55 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'M SORRY.
GO AHEAD.
I INTERRUPTED YOU.
20:44:58 >> NO, GO AHEAD.
20:44:59 >>LUIS VIERA:
I ASK THAT BECAUSE OF THE USE OF NORTH WILLOW.
HOW MANY FOLKS WILL BE WORKING THERE, ROUGHLY?
20:45:05 >> TWO.
20:45:06 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
20:45:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I GUESS I'LL WAIT TO SEE IF YOU HAVE
ANYBODY ELSE TO SPEAK.
20:45:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCIL?
IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 8?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
20:45:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
JUST A COMMENT.
IF THERE'S ONE GOOD REASON TO ASK FOR WAIVERS LIKE THIS,
IT'S TO SAVE A BEAUTIFUL TREE LIKE THAT, WHICH MARY JUST
TOOK OFF.
IT LOOKS LIKE A LIVE OAK TO ME.
IT LOOKS RELATIVELY HEALTHY EXCEPT FOR THAT ONE BRANCH.
I GUESS THE REPORT INDICATES IT'S HEALTHY.
SO MORE POWER TO YOU.
THANK YOU.
20:45:59 >>LUIS VIERA:
IF I MAY, SIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, FOR THE
RECORD, HAVE YOU SPOKEN WITH ANYONE IN FOREST HILLS ON THIS?
I HEARD RUMBLINGS ON IT, NOTHING BAD.
20:46:10 >> NO.
WE DID TALK TO OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, WHICH THE GUY NEXT
TO US TO THE EAST IS AN AIR CONDITIONING CONTRACTOR AND THE
PEOPLE ACROSS THE STREET ARE OFFICES.
SO -- BUT WE ALSO OWN OTHER PROPERTIES DOWN WILLOW THAT
BUFFER OUR PROPERTY.
TO BE HONEST WITH THAT ANSWER, NO, WE HAVEN'T TALKED TO ANY
ASSOCIATIONS NOR HAS ANYBODY REACHED OUT TO US AFTER WE
NOTICED EVERYBODY THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO NOTICE.
20:46:42 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECONDED I BELIEVE FIRST BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO, DO YOU WISH TO TAKE THIS ONE?
20:46:58 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I HAVE AN ORDINANCE PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING
CONSIDERATION, AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL
VICINITY OF 1210 WEST LINEBAUGH AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA,
FLORIDA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM
ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION RS-50 (RESIDENTIAL,
SINGLE-FAMILY) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,
BUSINESS/PROFESSIONAL OFFICE); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE PETITIONER HAS SHOWN MORE THAN ENOUGH PROOF AND
COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT WOULD MERIT THIS
APPROVAL.
20:47:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
20:47:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ALSO, AGAIN, PLEASE THE REVISION SHEET.
20:47:35 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
AND WITH THE REVISION SHEET.
20:47:37 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION HELD ON MARCH 5th AT 9:30 A.M.
20:47:44 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
20:47:47 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
ITEM NUMBER 9, MARY SAMANIEGO, REZONING
REZ 20-05.
IT'S A REZONING REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6460
EAST TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD FROM CU, COMMUNITY UNIT TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY AND
DAY CARE.
20:48:07 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE TRAVELING UP TO THE NEW TAMPA PLANNING DISTRICT TODAY.
THERE'S NO LOCAL HART SERVICE SERVING THE SUBJECT SITE.
IT'S ALSO NOT LOCATED WITHIN AN EVACUATION ZONE.
WEST OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS THE TAMPA PALMS ELEMENTARY,
THOUGH.
THIS IS AN AERIAL.
SO WE HAVE TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD RIGHT HERE.
THERE'S A VARIETY.
IT'S MOSTLY SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED, AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE
THE WETLAND NETWORK SURROUNDING THE SITE, WHICH IS REFLECTED
ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS WHICH WE SEE A LOT OF IN NEW
TAMPA.
PINK COLOR IS SUBURBAN MIXED USE SIX WHICH ALSO IS MOSTLY IN
NEW TAMPA.
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
FOR HOMES AND LIMITED COMMERCIAL USES.
BUT THE PROPERTY IS -- THIS USE IS ALLOWABLE WITHIN THE
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
WE DID FIND IT CONSISTENT.
THE APPLICANT IS ONLY ADDING A USE AS A PERMITTED USE WITHIN
THIS PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY.
SO WE DID NOT FIND ANY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCONSISTENCIES
WITH THIS.
WE DID FIND THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE PROVIDING A
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING USE TO THE RESIDENTS AND WILL
STRENGTHEN THE SENSE OF PLACE FOR THE TAMPA PALMS
NEIGHBORHOOD, CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICY DIRECTION.
IT IS COMPARABLE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AS
WELL.
THANK YOU.
20:49:42 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
FOR THE RECORD, HERE IS AN AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
IT'S CURRENTLY OUTLINED IN RED.
IT'S A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY CURRENTLY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ADD A DAY CARE USE.
AFTER THE APPLICANT HAS MET WITH THE -- SOME OF THE
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION, THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO AND AGREED TO PLACE A
NOTE ON THE SITE PLAN THAT WOULD STATE THAT THE DAY CARE USE
CANNOT OPERATE AS A STAND-ALONE USE AND MUST BE OPERATED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY THAT IS THE
PRINCIPAL OCCUPANT OF THE BUILDING.
THE SITE PLAN IN THE PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY CONSTRUCTED
WILL REMAIN EXACTLY THE SAME.
AGAIN, THEY ARE ASKING FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ADD A DAY
CARE USE TO THE EXISTING PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY USE.
WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED, IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED
COMMUNITY UNIT, WHICH IS AN OLD COUNTY ZONING DISTRICT THAT
THE CITY ADOPTED WHEN WE ANNEXED THIS PORTION OF NEW TAMPA
IN THE MID 80s.
THE COMMUNITY UNIT, THIS PROPERTY HAD ONE USE, ONLY A PLACE
OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY IN ORDER TO FACILITATE LEGALLY AN
ADDITIONAL USE, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THE PLAN
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
BASED ON THE EXISTING PARKING AND THE WAY OUR PARKING
REGULATIONS WORK, THE REGULATIONS DO NOT CONSIDER SHARED
PARKING, SO EACH USE MUST BE PARKED ON THEIR OWN MERITS WITH
THE COMBINATION OF A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY WITH THEIR
MAXIMUM OCCUPIES AS WELL AS THE ANTICIPATED NUMBER OF DAY
CARE STUDENTS WITH THE ASSOCIATED STAFF TO SUPPORT THEM.
A TOTAL OF 61 PARKING SPACES IS REQUIRED.
UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S ONLY 50 ON-SITE.
SO THIS RESULTS IN A 19% PARKING REDUCTION.
TRANSPORTATION DID SEE THIS PARKING REDUCTION AND FOUND IT
INCONSISTENT.
THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHANGES FOR PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING.
AND ONE COMMENT FROM NATURAL RESOURCES.
OTHER THAN THAT, OVERALL THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND
COMPLIANCE STAFF DID FIND IT INCONSISTENT BECAUSE OF THE
PARKING WAIVER.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR YOU IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
20:51:58 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
I DO.
I'M GOING TO POSE TO YOU THE QUESTION I GAVE YOU IN PRIVATE
JUST FOR THE RECORD.
SO THE USE OF THIS, JUST TO CONFIRM, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THERE
WERE SOME ISSUES THAT WERE DISCUSSED BEFORE, THIS USE, JUST
TO MAKE SURE SO MY CONSTITUENTS KNOW, THIS WILL NOT GO TO
COMMERCIAL, CORRECT?
20:52:17 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
NO, SIR.
WITH THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS WITH ANY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT, THE SITE PLAN ITSELF CONTROLS THE SITE, AND ALL
OF THE USES MUST BE LISTED ON THE SITE PLAN.
NO ADDITIONAL USES CAN BE ADDED TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
WITHOUT AMENDING THAT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
AND THE ONLY WAY TO AMEND IT TO ADD A USE IS TO COME BACK
THROUGH CITY COUNCIL THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
FOR THIS SPECIFIC SITE, THE ONLY ALLOWABLE USES THAT WERE
ADVERTISED AND ARE PROPOSED AND WILL BE ON THE SITE PLAN ARE
A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY AND A DAY CARE.
THE DAY CARE CANNOT OPERATE AS STAND-ALONE BUSINESS.
AND MUST OPERATE IN CONJUNCTION WITH PLACE OF RELIGIOUS
ASSEMBLY.
20:52:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
PETITIONER.
20:53:01 >> RYAN McCAFFREY WITH HAMILTON ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING
APPLICANT.
3409 WEST LEMON STREET, TAMPA, FLORIDA, 33609.
I WILL BE BRIEF AS MARY COVERED EVERYTHING THAT I WAS GOING
TO GO OVER.
I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE FURTHER ON THE WAIVER.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 63 PARKING SPACES.
SO THE PARKING FOR THE DAY CARE FACILITY TOTALS UP TO 13
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
THOSE 13 PARKING SPACES WILL LIKELY BE OPERATED BETWEEN 6:30
IN THE MORNING AND 6:30 P.M. FOR THE DAY CARE OPERATIONS OF
THE FACILITY MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.
AND THE CHURCH IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 48 PARKING SPACES,
WHICH WOULD OPERATE FROM 7 TO 8 P.M. ON THURSDAYS AND TEN TO
NOON ON SUNDAY.
NO OVERLAPPING TIME FRAME FOR WHEN THE PARKING SPACES WOULD
BE OPERATED THAT WOULD REQUIRE ALL 63 SPACES TO BE USED AT
ANY TIME.
THIS IS WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THE WAIVER TO REDUCE PARKING TO
THE EXISTING 50 SPACES.
WE DID MEET WITH TAMPA PALMS OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
MAGGIE WILSON THIS AFTERNOON, A BOARD MEMBER, AND THEN
WARREN DIXON WAS HERE.
HE IS THE BUSINESS CONSULTANT FOR THE TAMPA PALMS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION.
HIS CONCERN WAS REGARDING THE CU ZONING TO PD.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MARY CLARIFIED THAT BEFORE THIS,
AND THAT'S WHY HE IS NO LONGER HERE TO SPEAK OUT IN
OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING, NOT CHANGE IN USE.
MY UNDERSTANDING THAT TAMPA PALMS HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION IS
IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTED USE CHANGE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I AM HERE AND SO IS THE
APPLICANT AND OWNER.
20:54:40 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS?
20:54:46 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THERE ARE SOMETIMES INVOLVED PICK UP AND DROP-OFF WITH THE
CHILDREN.
I CAN UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE AN EXTRA LONG DRIVEWAY THAT WILL
PROBABLY ACCOMMODATE THE DROPPING OFF AND PICKING UP OF
CHILDREN.
HOW LONG IS THAT DRIVEWAY?
MY POINT BEING IS THERE'S NOT ANY PROPOSED BACKING UP GOING
TO BE ON TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD.
20:55:19 >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
I BELIEVE WE DEMONSTRATED STACKING REQUIREMENTS WITH THE
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AS A PART OF OUR APPLICATION.
20:55:24 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
20:55:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.
ANYONE ELSE?
THANK YOU, SIR.
MARY, IF YOU WISH TO --
20:55:34 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SIR, I CAN STATE IT'S ON THE SITE
PLAN.
FROM THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING TO THE CLOSEST TAMPA PALMS
BOULEVARD IS 187 FEET.
20:55:47 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE A LOT OF PARENTS
PICKING UP AND DROPPING OFF THEIR PARENTS.
20:55:52 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 9?
20:56:02 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS ROBERT ZICHT.
I LIVE AT 15926 FARRINGHAM DRIVE.
I BACK UP DIRECTLY TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY HERE'S AGO WITH THE INTENTION THAT I
KNEW THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID OWN IT, AND IT WAS SINCE SOLD
AT THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE.
I HAVE NO OBJECTION FOR THE RELIGIOUS ASPECT OF THE
PROPERTY, BUT I DO HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THE USE OF A DAY
CARE.
THREE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IS POTENTIALLY THE
NOISE.
I'M SELFISH.
MY DAUGHTER WORKS NIGHTS.
THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WORK NIGHTS.
WHEN WE HAVE A DROP-OFF FROM 6:30 IN THE MORNING UNTIL 6:30
IN THE EVENING, OBVIOUSLY, 6:30 IN THE MORNING WOULD
POTENTIALLY WAKE UP PEOPLE.
IT'S BAD ENOUGH THAT THE TRASH TRUCKS COME IN THERE AT 5:30
IN THE MORNING AND POUND THEIR TRUCKS TO EMPTY THE TRASH.
MY SECOND CONCERN IS THE PROPERTY VALUES OF MY HOUSE AND
POTENTIALLY OTHER HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AGAIN, I MAY BE A LITTLE BIT SELFISH BECAUSE I DO BACK UP TO
THE PROPERTY.
THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN GOOD NEIGHBORS.
THE KIDS COME OUT THERE AND PLAY FOOTBALL ON SATURDAY AND
SUNDAY, AND THEY HAVE ACTIVITIES, BUT HAVING ACTIVITIES
THERE ON A DAILY BASIS, I DO HAVE OBJECTION FOR MYSELF AND
OTHER PEOPLE IN MY PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD.
LASTLY, THE TRAFFIC, HAVING PEOPLE COME IN AT 6:30, THAT'S
DARK, IF WE'RE HAVING PEOPLE PICK UP THEIR CHILDREN AT 6:30,
THAT'S DARK.
I THINK THAT'S A TRAFFIC CONCERN.
I SEE NO MENTION OF ANY TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT SAY HOW MANY
CARS OR HOW MANY FAMILIES ARE GOING TO BE DROPPING THEIR
CHILDREN THERE ON A DAILY BASIS.
THIS EVENING, I THINK THE BIGGEST WORD I HEARD IS THIS
PROPERTY COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS NOT A DAY CARE.
THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.
WE HAVE FAMILIES IN THOSE AREAS.
WE HAVE YOUNG KIDS THAT ARE DRIVING CARS THAT HAVE TO WORRY
ABOUT THOSE OTHER EXTRA, I'M GOING TO SAY 50 OR 75 CARS.
THERE'S NO MENTION OF THE VOLUME OF INDIVIDUALS.
I'M AN EDUCATOR MYSELF.
37 YEARS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
I SEE THAT TRAFFIC ON TAMPA PALMS ALONE WITH THOSE CARS
BACKED UP TOTALLY.
THEY ARE BACKED UP FROM TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD ALL THE WAY UP
TO WHERE I LIVE ON FARRINGHAM DRIVE.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS SHOULD BE APPROVED.
I'M HERE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
20:58:37 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
20:58:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SIR, I'M CURIOUS OF WHERE YOUR HOME IS AS
RELATED TO THE PROPERTY.
20:58:45 >> IF YOU WANT TO SHOW ME THE MAP, I'LL SHOW YOU DIRECTLY ON
THE MAP.
BEEN A WHILE SINCE I TAUGHT.
I'M A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR.
ALL THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY IS KIND OF NEAT.
MY HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE.
AND THIS IS THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
MY MAJOR CONCERNS ARE THERE'S A LOT OF HOUSES THAT COME OUT
OF THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
THERE ARE PEOPLE VACATING THIS AREA AND GOING OUT TOWARDS
TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD.
ALSO THIS AREA, WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS INGRESS
COMING INTO THE CHURCH PROPERTY WITH THE DAY CARE.
BUT MY HOUSE IS THIS LOCATION HERE.
I BACK UP TO THE PROPERTY HERE.
20:59:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WHAT SORT OF BUFFER, WALL, FENCE,
ET CETERA, IS THERE BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR BACKYARD AND THE
CHURCH PROPERTY THERE?
20:59:45 >> THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
WE WERE TOLD WHEN WE MOVED IN THERE THAT -- WHEN I GOT
THERE, IT WAS EMPTY, THE LOT.
WHEN WE WERE TOLD WHEN WE BOUGHT INTO TAMPA PALMS, IF
ANYTHING WENT INTO THAT AREA, THERE WOULD BE A BRICK
ABUTMENT FOR THE LENGTH OF THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY LINE.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S PROBABLY 10 OR 12-FOOT VIBURNUM BUSHES
THAT ARE A BUFFER BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY IN
QUESTION.
21:00:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT A FENCE AND/OR PVC
FENCE AND/OR WALL WOULD HELP BUFFER SOME OF THE NOISE THAT
YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT?
21:00:24 >> I CAN ONLY BE HONEST.
I DO NOT THINK PVC FENCE WOULD, JUST BECAUSE OF THE NOISE.
I WOULD THINK A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE ATTITUDE OF A BRICK
WALL THAT THEY HAVE IN SOME OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE
IN THE TAMPA PALMS AREA.
21:00:41 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
21:00:43 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU FOR COMING IN AND GIVING YOUR
TESTIMONY TONIGHT.
YOU CAN KEEP THAT UP THERE, PLEASE AND THANK YOU.
CAN YOU GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE FROM YOUR BUILDING, YOUR HOME,
THE DISTANCE TO THE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY, ON THE
APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
21:01:02 >> ABOUT A NINE IRON.
ONLY ABOUT A HUNDRED YARDS AT THE MOST.
21:01:08 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
I HIT MINE 140.
21:01:11 >> YOU DO MUCH BETTER THAN I DO.
WHEN THAT WAS A VACANT FIELD, THE KIDS WOULD GO OUT THERE
AND PLAY FOOTBALL, HIT GOLF BALLS, BUT NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE
FROM MY BACKYARD TO THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
I USED TO AIM FROM MY HOUSE HERE TO THE POWER LINE SO I
COULD GO PICK UP MY GOLF BALLS.
WE'RE DEFINITELY TALKING PROBABLY FROM THE BACK OF MY
PROPERTY, PROBABLY LESS THAN 50 YARDS TO WHERE THE CHURCH
IS.
21:01:47 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU, SIR.
21:01:54 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, MA'AM.
21:01:56 >> HI.
ALGONDA CARRIS, ALSO A NEIGHBOR.
MY PROPERTY IS 15928 AT FARRINGHAM DRIVE.
I'M ALSO BORDERING ON THE BACKYARD TO THE CHURCH.
AND WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR HOUSE, WE SAID, OKAY, A CHURCH.
THAT'S OKAY.
THAT'S FINE.
WE BOUGHT IT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE REASON THAT WE HAD A VIEW,
A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A VIEW.
ANYWAY, A CHURCH IS FINE.
A DAY CARE, I DO NOT THINK THAT WE NEED ANOTHER DAY CARE.
WE HAVE GOT FIVE DAY CARES IN A THREE- TO FIVE-MILE RADIUS.
SO WE HAVE A LOT OF DAY CARES ALREADY IN OUR AREA.
NEXT TO -- AND THAT'S MY OPINION.
MAYBE IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE.
ONCE YOU DECIDE OKAY REZONING IS ALLOWED, MAYBE A BUILDING
MIGHT GO UP FOR THE DAY CARE TO FACILITATE, BECAUSE IN MY
VIEW, AND I'VE BEEN IN THE CHURCH MANY TIMES, THE CHURCH IS
NOT BIG ENOUGH TO HOST A REAL QUALITY DAY CARE.
IT'S NOT AT ALL BIG ENOUGH.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE FACILITIES IN THE CHURCH FOR A DAY CARE.
SO I THINK THEY SHOULD BUILD A DIFFERENT BUILDING FOR A DAY
CARE, IF THEY WANT TO.
HOWEVER, OUR TAMPA PALMS ASSOCIATION, IN MY VIEW, I SPOKE
WITH BONNIE AND WITH MAGGIE, THAT THEY DO NOT APPROVE IT
UNLESS IT'S AN EDUCATIONAL CHRISTIAN VALUE INSIDE THE
BUILDING.
BUT, AGAIN, I OBJECT.
I OPPOSE TO THIS PLAN BECAUSE I DO NOT THINK THAT THEY CAN
BUILD A QUALITY DAY CARE IN THE CHURCH, AND IT MIGHT BECOME
A SLIPPERY SLOPE FOR REZONING IT IN DIFFERENT PLACE.
THAT'S IT.
21:03:49 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 9?
OKAY.
APPLICANT, IF YOU WISH TO HAVE ANY REBUTTAL.
21:04:03 >> WITH RESPECT TO THE TRAFFIC, WE DID MEET WITH THE STAFF
AND AT THE PRE-APPLICATION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE
TRAFFIC FOR THE NUMBER OF DAY CARE CHILDREN THAT THERE WAS
NOT A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REQUIRED.
WE HAD A DE MINIMIS DETERMINATION AT THE PRE-APPLICATION.
WE DO PROVIDE A TEN-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE SITE PLAN
ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
IT DOES SOUND LIKE IT'S ALREADY PRETTY GROWN UP.
AND THEN ANY SUBSEQUENT USES WOULD REQUIRE TO GO THROUGH
THIS PROCESS AGAIN, AND WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CITY LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS.
AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL.
21:04:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'M LOOKING AT THE STAFF REPORT, AND YOU
MIGHT HAVE SAID THIS ALREADY.
ARE YOU SELF-LIMITING IN REGARD TO THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS?
IS THAT PART OF YOUR APPLICATION?
21:05:08 >> YES, THE PARKING COUNTS ARE BASED ON A NUMBER OF DAY CARE
CHILDREN, SO WE HAVE -- WE ARE LISTED AS 50, MAXIMUM 50 DAY
CARE CHILDREN.
21:05:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE A
LANDSCAPE BUFFER THERE.
YOU'VE HEARD SOME OBJECTIONS FROM SOME IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS
WHO INDICATE PERHAPS THEY ARE GOING TO BE WITHIN A HUNDRED
FEET OR SO OF YOUR PICKUP AND DROP-OFF LOCATION.
THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT NOISE.
ALSO, I DON'T SEE ANY PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT SHOWN HERE.
THAT'S PROBABLY NOT REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN,
BUT I KNOW THAT IF I WAS A NEIGHBOR, AND I WAS CONCERNED
ABOUT NOISE FOR 50 CHILDREN, I'D WANT TO KNOW WHERE THE
PLAYGROUND WAS GOING TO GO.
21:06:05 >> I'M GOING TO DEFER TO PASTOR FIN.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE
PROPERTY, THERE IS A FENCED IN AREA WHICH WOULD BE ON THE
OPPOSITE SIDE.
THAT'S WHERE THEY ALREADY HOST CHURCH ACTIVITIES.
21:06:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
DO YOU WANT TO POINT TO IT ON THE
OVERHEAD?
21:06:29 >> HERE'S THE SITE PLAN.
THAT WOULD BE THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.
21:06:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
PASTOR, DID YOU WANT TO TESTIFY ON THAT?
21:06:42 >> SVEN WILBIKIN.
AS HE SAID, THAT'S WHERE THE PLAYGROUND WOULD BE.
WE START WITH NINE PEOPLE.
WE HAVE ABOUT 60 TO 80 ON ANY GIVEN SUNDAY.
THIS PRESCHOOL IS FOR OUR CHURCH FAMILY STARTING OUT.
THE MAX IT CAN BE IS 50.
IT'S STARTING WITH ABOUT FIVE.
IT'S GOING TO BE A SLOW GROWTH.
AND IT IS TO SERVE OUR MEMBERS.
THERE ARE OTHER PRESCHOOLS IN THE AREA BUT THIS WILL BE A
FAITH-BASED PRESCHOOL FOR OUR CHURCH MEMBERS.
21:07:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WOULD YOU CONSIDER ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS,
WOULD YOU CONSIDER ANY TYPE OF FENCING ALONG THAT SIDE WHERE
THESE FOLKS LIVE TO HELP BUFFER ANY NOISE?
21:07:25 >> YES.
WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT.
21:07:32 >>LUIS VIERA:
MR. SHELBY.
21:07:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS ENFORCEABLE AND
WHETHER IT IS GOING TO BE PLACED ON THE SITE PLAN.
21:07:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THAT WAS KIND OF IMPLICIT -- WHERE I WAS
HEADED --
21:07:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NOTHING CAN BE IMPLICIT.
EVERYTHING MUST BE EXPLICIT.
21:07:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I GUESS IT WAS EXPLICIT THAT THE NEXT
THING COMING OUT OF MY MOUTH WAS IT NEEDS TO BE ON THE SITE
PLAN IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT.
WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, MR. SHELBY.
21:07:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IN REGARD TO MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT AND YOU
MAY WANT TO DISCUSS THAT WITH STAFF, JUST SO IT'S CLEAR FOR
THE RECORD BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING IF, AGAIN, IT IS
SOMETHING PETITIONER AGREES.
21:08:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I DON'T WANT TO DESIGN IT FOR THEM, BUT I
THINK THEY'VE HEARD THE CONCERNS.
21:08:17 >> WELL, I DID HEAR THE CONCERN.
IF YOU'RE TELLING ME WE HAVE TO BUILD A BRICK FENCE, THAT
WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US.
I DON'T THINK WE COULD AFFORD IT, FRANKLY.
IF YOU'RE TALKING A CHAIN-LINK FENCE IS NOT GOING TO STOP
NOISE.
BUT WE COULD DO A WOOD OR A PVC FENCE.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD CONSIDER.
21:08:38 >> I BELIEVE WE'D ALSO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE TAMPA PALMS
OWNER ASSOCIATION DESIGN GUIDELINES AS WELL.
WE'D HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FROM THEM.
21:08:50 >>CATE WELLS:
WITH REGARD TO THE FENCE, IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY
CODE, UNLESS THEY WERE WILLING TO PUT IT ON THERE, BUT IF
YOU'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THAT AS A CONDITION OF YOUR
APPROVAL, YOU HAVE TO ESTABLISH THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
IMPACT OF THE DAY CARE CENTER AND THAT ADDITIONAL CONDITION.
THANK YOU.
21:09:11 >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REITERATE -- I MEAN, DOING THAT NOW
DOES POSE A CHALLENGE FOR OUR CHURCH BECAUSE OF THE NUMBERS
THAT WE'RE STARTING WITH.
AGAIN, THE KIDS ARE GOING TO BE ON THE -- WE SHOWED YOU
WHERE THE KIDS WILL BE.
AND WE'RE LOOKING AT LIKE FIVE TO TEN KIDS.
IF WE START WITH FIVE OR TEN KIDS -- IF YOU'RE TELLING US
THAT WE NEED TO PUT A FENCE IN, WE WILL PUT IN A FENCE.
IF YOU'RE TELLING US -- IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME TIME TO DO
THAT, THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL.
I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU DO IT IN THESE PROCEEDINGS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
21:09:46 >> WE'D LIKE TO REQUEST APPROVAL WITH THE EXISTING BUFFERS.
21:10:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I WOULD SAY AT A MINIMUM, SINCE THEY ARE
THE ONES WHO VOLUNTEERED IT, THAT THEY SHOULD SHOW THE
PLAYGROUND ON THE SITE PLAN BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND
READING, UNLESS COUNCIL HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
IN REGARD TO THE FENCE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE NOT
NECESSARILY OFFERING IT.
21:10:31 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN CITRO, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION,
SIR?
21:10:36 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
PETITIONER, PLEASE, IF I COULD, PASTOR.
THIS TEN-FOOT SHRUBS THAT YOU HAVE, ARE THEY ON YOUR
PROPERTY LINE?
21:10:52 >> ACTUALLY, I DO NOT KNOW.
WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, THE HEDGE WAS ALREADY THERE.
I WOULD ASSUME THE HEDGE IS ON OUR PROPERTY.
21:11:06 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
WHEN THE PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY OR
CHURCH WAS BUILT IN 2006, GROUP B USE, THE CODE REQUIRES A
GROUP B USE UP AGAINST HOUSES TO HAVE A TEN-FOOT LANDSCAPE
BUFFER.
TEN-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER YOU CAN SEE WAS PLANTED FOR THIS
ENTIRE DISTANCE.
THIS DISTANCE IS 500 FEET.
SO THE ADDITION OF A DAY CARE USE IS ALSO BEING USED SO THAT
IT REQUIRES THAT TEN-FOOT BUFFER WHICH IS ON THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY TO REMAIN.
21:11:34 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
IF YOU WALL WAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED THEY WOULD
HAVE TO TEAR OUT THE PLANTING TO PUT THE WALL ON THE
PROPERTY LINE.
THANK YOU, MARY.
21:11:46 >>LUIS VIERA:
WOULD THE SHRUBBERY NEED TO BE TORN OUT FOR A
FENCE?
A WALL, YES, BUT A FENCE?
21:11:54 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
TEN-FOOT BUFFER GOES UP TO THE PROPERTY
LINE.
21:11:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
IN OTHER WORDS, IF A FENCE WERE TO BE PUT IN,
WOULD THAT HAVE TO TEAR DOWN THE SHRUBBERY, IF YOU WILL.
21:12:05 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES.
IT IS A SOLID HIGH SHRUB.
YOU COULDN'T GET THROUGH IT.
PUT THE FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TEN-FOOT BUFFER, BUT
THEN YOU HAVE A MAINTENANCE ISSUE FOR THE LANDSCAPING.
21:12:17 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE?
21:12:18 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
21:12:22 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
ANYTHING TO THE APPLICANT?
21:12:31 >> WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST APPROVAL BASED ON PROVIDING THE
TEN-FOOT BUFFER, AND WE CAN GLADLY SHOW MORE INFORMATION AS
TO THE CHILD-CARE FACILITY -- OR THE PLAYGROUND FACILITIES
ON THE EASTERN SIDE.
21:12:45 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
WHO WAS NEXT.
21:12:54 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
I BELIEVE I AM, MR. CHAIR.
FILE NUMBER REZ 20-05, MOVE AN ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR
FIRST READING, AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL
VICINITY OF 6460 TAMPA PALMS BOULEVARD IN THE CITY OF TAMPA,
FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM
ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION CU COMMUNITY UNIT TO PD
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY AND DAY
CARE, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THIS ORDINANCE, THE PETITIONER HAS MET THE BURDEN OF PROOF.
DEVELOPMENT SHOWS THE SITE PLAN MEETS THE PURPOSE OF THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING AND THAT THE WAIVERS ARE
JUSTIFIED, SPECIFICALLY THE PLAN WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY
INTERFERE OR INJURE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS AND WITH SITE PLAN
MODIFICATIONS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECONDING READING.
21:13:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT BEING THE REVISION SHEET AS WELL AS
THE PETITIONER AGREEING TO ADJUST BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND
READING ON THE SITE PLAN THE LOCATION OF THE PLAYGROUND.
21:14:00 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
WHAT HE SAID.
YES.
21:14:03 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
21:14:13 >> NO.
21:14:14 >> NO.
21:14:15 >> NAY.
21:14:17 >> ROLL CALL.
21:14:23 >>THE CLERK:
THE MOTION CARRIED WITH DINGFELDER, VIERA,
CARLSON VOTING NO.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5 AT
9:30 A.M.
21:14:45 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
NUMBER 10.
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
COORDINATION.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS REZ 20-07.
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 302 AND 306 NORTH HOWARD AVENUE FROM CG
AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR MEDICAL
OFFICE AND BUSINESS/PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
21:15:07 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE IN THE CENTRAL TAMPA PLANNING DISTRICT, WEST TAMPA
URBAN VILLAGE, MORE SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE NORTH HYDE PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE IS A BUS STOP ABOUT THREE MONTHS TO THE SORT AT THE
INTERSECTION OF NORTH HOWARD AVENUE AND WEST CARMEN STREET.
THE VILA BROTHERS PARK IS THE CLOSEST PUBLIC RECREATION
FACILITY.
LEVEL D EVACUATION ZONE.
THE SUBJECT SITE HERE IS OUTLINED IN THE PURPLE.
IT IS LOCATED ALONG NORTH HOWARD AVENUE, WEST -- THIS IS
NORTH ARMENIA AVENUE.
THIS IS THE BRYAN GLAZER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER TO THE
NORTH, AND THERE IS A FUNERAL HOME DIRECTLY ACROSS THE
STREET.
PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL USES ALONG NORTH HOWARD AVENUE
WHICH THEN TRANSITION TO THE RESIDENTIAL USES AS WE MOVE
AWAY FROM NORTH HOWARD AVENUE, WHICH IS REFLECTED ON OUR
FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS DESIGNATED COMMUNITY MIXED USE 35.
THAT'S THAT PINK COLOR ALONG NORTH HOWARD AVENUE.
SAME DESIGNATION TO THE NORTH AS BRYAN GLAZER COMMUNITY
CENTER.
RESIDENTIAL 20 IS THIS BROWN COLOR.
THEN WE HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL 10 TO THE NORTH.
THAT IS THE ORANGE.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT IS CONSISTENT, ALSO WITH OUR POLICIES AS IT RELATES TO
MIXED-USE CORRIDORS.
WE DID FIND THAT THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT IS PROVIDING A
PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL WITH PARKING
LOCATED TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
THEY ARE ALSO PROVIDING A FRONT ENTRANCE ALONG NORTH HOWARD
AVENUE, PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND CONNECTING IT TO THE
SIDEWALK WHICH IS WELL IN LINE AND VERY CONSISTENT WITH OUR
POLICY DIRECTION FOR THE MIXED USE CORRIDORS.
SO IN SHORT, WE DO FIND THAT THIS REQUEST SUPPORTS MANY OF
THE POLICIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IT IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ANTICIPATED UNDER THE COMMUNITY
MIXED USE-35 FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
21:17:14 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
AS I STATED, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT THAT'S SPANNING TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES FOR
MEDICAL OFFICE AND BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
NORTHERN PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED PD AND THE SOUTHERN
PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY IN THE CG ZONING DISTRICT THAT
TYPICALLY RUNS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE
USES UP AND DOWN NORTH HOWARD AVENUE.
HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM HOWARD AVENUE.
CURRENTLY MAINLY OPERATED AS A DAY CARE.
THAT'S THE OTHER PART OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WILL
RETAIN THE PARKING LOT.
TO THE EAST IS A -- AN OFFICE USE, AND THEN OTHER SMALL
OFFICE USES, TYPICALLY AT A RESIDENTIAL SCALE.
AND THEN THIS IS A MULTIFAMILY DWELLING DIRECTLY TO THE
NORTH.
I'LL GO TO THE SITE PLAN.
THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT -- MOVE IT UP A LITTLE BIT -- IS
PROPOSING.
TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING.
AGAIN, WITH A MIX OF MEDICAL OFFICE AND BUSINESS
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
MIXED STATED ON THE SITE PLAN AS WELL AS IN THE STAFF
REPORT.
ONLY A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THE BUILDING CAN BE USED FOR
MEDICAL OFFICE BECAUSE THE PARKING CRITERIA IS SO HIGH.
THEY'VE AGREED TO THAT AND NOTED ON THE SITE PLAN.
THE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE 6,730 SQUARE
FEET MAXIMUM, AGAIN, TWO-STORY.
THE PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE TO THE NORTH TWO FEET, SOUTH FIVE
FEET, WEST 30 FEET, AND EAST FIVE FEET.
YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HOWARD AVENUE
AND NORTH B STREET.
HERE IS THE BUILDING.
THERE WOULD BE AN ALLEYWAY THAT WILL BE PAVED WITHIN THE
PROPERTY LIMITS, AND THEN PROPERTY, ADDITIONALLY PARKING TO
THE NORTH.
BECAUSE OF A GRAND TREE ON-SITE IN THIS LOCATION, THE
APPLICANT HAS ELECTED TO DO PERVIOUS PAVERS FOR THE PARKING
SPACES THAT WILL COMPLY WITH THE PROTECTED RADIUS THAT HAS
BEEN REVIEWED AND SIGNED OFF ON BY OUR NATURAL RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT.
AS FAR AS WAIVERS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS
APPLICATION, THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE WEST TAMPA OVERLAY.
THERE ARE FIVE WAIVERS BEING REQUESTED.
ONE INCREASE THE SIZE FOR THE EASTERN BUILDING SIGNAGE TO
INCREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE FROM 25
SQUARE FEET TO 45 SQUARE FEET AND ALSO INCREASE THE TEXT
HEIGHT.
PARKING REDUCTION OF 22% FROM 36 SPACES TO 28% -- 28 SPACES.
TRANSPORTATION DID FIND THAT PARKING WAIVER REDUCTION
INCONSISTENT TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE TRAFFIC TO
ACCESS A LOCAL ROAD, NORTH B STREET THROUGH THE ALLEYWAY, AS
WELL AS THE ALLEYWAY, THIS IS A LOCAL STREET.
SO THAT REQUIRES A WAIVER.
AND A WAIVER FOR THE USE TO USE BUFFER IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS.
THERE'S SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY.
BECAUSE OF THE PLACEMENT OF TRYING TO GET AS MUCH PARKING
INTO THE PROPERTY AS POSSIBLE, BUFFER REDUCTIONS FROM
15 FEET IN THESE LOCATIONS DOWN TO 8 FEET.
BUT THEY ARE PROPOSING A COMPOSITE WELL AS WELL AS IN THESE
LOCATIONS HERE.
THE LAST WAIVER THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IS FOR THE VEHICLE
USE BUFFER.
TECHNICALLY, THEIRS IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EIGHT-FOOT BUFFER
BETWEEN AN ALLEY AND PARKING SPACES.
AGAIN, IN AN ATTEMPT TO INCREASE PARKING AS WELL AS SOLID
WASTE PROVISION, VEHICLE USE BUFFER AREA REDUCTIONS FROM
EIGHT FEET DOWN TO SIX ALONG NORTH HOWARD AVENUE, EIGHT FEET
DOWN TO ZERO DOWN AT THE NORTH PARKING LOT.
TO THE ALLEY AND 8 TO SEVEN FEET AND FIVE FEET RESPECTIVELY
IN RELATIONSHIP TO NORTH B.
SEEING THAT THERE ARE REVISIONS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND
READING RELATED TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE WAIVERS, AS I STATED,
TRANSPORTATION DID FIND THIS INCONSISTENT BECAUSE OF THE
LOCAL STREET ACCESS AS WELL AS THE 22% PARKING REDUCTION.
NATURAL RESOURCES DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT BUT THEY DID HAVE
SOME REVISIONS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING.
OVERALL, THE CITY OF TAMPA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE
STAFF DID FIND THIS INCONSISTENT, PRINCIPALLY BECAUSE OF THE
ACCESS TO THE LOCAL STREET AND THE PARKING REDUCTION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR ME AT THIS TIME?
21:22:27 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
WITH THE PARKING AREA TO THE NORTH ACROSS
THE ALLEY, IS THAT CONSIDERED OFF-SITE PARKING?
21:22:35 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
NO, SIR.
IT IS NOT.
AS FAR AS REQUIRING A SPECIAL USE APPROVAL -- NO, IT'S NOT
CONSIDERED OFF-SITE.
WHEN ONE COMES IN FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, YOU CAN HAVE
MULTIPLE PIECES OF PROPERTY, THEY CAN BE BISECTED OR
BIFURCATED BY A DRIVEWAY OR EVEN A ROAD, BUT IF IT COMES IN
AS ONE SITE PLAN THROUGH A PD, IT'S CONSIDERED ONE ZONING
LOT.
21:23:04 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT FOR ME.
THANK YOU.
21:23:08 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
ANYTHING ELSE?
21:23:18 >> COUNCIL MEMBERS.
JAKE CRAMER WITH STEARNS, WEAVER, MILLER.
I'D LIKE TO GET STARTED WITH MY CLIENT TELLING YOU A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT HIS BUSINESS FIRST.
THANK YOU.
21:23:29 >> JIM McILWAIN.
I'M A PEDIATRIC DENTIST.
I ARRIVED IN TAMPA AND SET UP PRACTICE IN 1978.
OUR PRIMARY OFFICE IS RIGHT NEXT TO ST. JOE'S.
I'VE BEEN BLESSED OVER THE YEARS WE HAVE ADDED OTHER
PEDIATRIC DENTISTS, THREE GENERAL DENTISTS AND AN
ORTHODONTIST.
MOST OF THEM ARE HERE WITH ME TONIGHT.
THEY ARE JUST AS INTERESTED AS I AM.
WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THE MOVE SOUTH.
AND WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TO CONTINUE THE
SERVICE AND THE GOOD QUALITY OF WORKMANSHIP THAT WE'VE
CREATED OVER THE PAST 40 YEARS.
WE'RE LOOKING TO BUILD SOMETHING FOR THE NEXT 40 YEARS, SO
IT'S A BIG JOB.
BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT A SUPER GROUP TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
THANKS FOR HAVING US TONIGHT.
21:24:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SITTING HERE ALL NIGHT IS WORSE THAN
HAVING YOUR TEETH PULLED, RIGHT?
[ LAUGHTER ]
21:24:41 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
21:24:42 >>BILL CARLSON:
MARTY, CAN YOU ANSWER A CONFLICT QUESTION.
ALL THREE OF MY KIDS GO TO HIS DENTISTRY.
IS THAT A CONFLICT OR NOT?
21:24:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YOU HAVE NO FINANCIAL STAKE PARTICULARLY IN
THE OUTCOME OF THE PETITION BEFORE YOU.
LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU CAN BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL OR DOES THE
PERCEPTION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST PUT YOU IN A POSITION
WHERE YOU FEEL IT WOULD BE BEST THAT YOU DO NOT PARTICIPATE
AND ABSTAIN?
21:25:17 >>BILL CARLSON:
I'M OKAY, AS LONG AS THERE'S NO ETHICAL RULE
AGAINST IT.
21:25:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NO, I DON'T SEE ANY, BASED ON MY
PROFESSIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS, YOU DO NOT HAVE
WHAT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF A VOTING CONFLICT, ASSUMING THAT
YOU CAN BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL AND DO NOT LET THAT IMPACT
YOUR DECISION IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL SETTING.
21:25:54 >> JAKE CRAMER AGAIN FOR THE RECORD.
ALSO A CLIENT.
[ LAUGHTER ]
IT'S GETTING LATE, SO I WON'T BELABOR ALL OF THIS
PRESENTATION.
THE GENERAL LOCATION, WE'RE IN AN URBAN VILLAGE.
WE'RE IN THE AREAS WHERE COUNCIL IS TRYING TO GET DENSITY.
LOOKING FOR MIXED USES.
THIS IS A GREAT LOCATION FOR IT.
WE'RE ON NORTH B AND HOWARD.
AGAIN, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY MIXED USE POLICY.
THESE POLICIES ARE REALLY ENCOURAGING TRUE MIXED USE
REDEVELOPMENT.
THEY ARE ENCOURAGING PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES, BUILDING
FACADES THAT ARE ATTRACTIVE AND FACING THE STREET.
AND, LOOK, YOU'RE STARTING TO GET IT ALONG NORTH HOWARD.
THIS STRETCH OF HOWARD DOES GET A LITTLE BIT OF A BAD RAP,
BUT IT IS TRANSITIONING.
HERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES AND WE'RE HOPING TO CONTRIBUTE TO
THAT.
THIS IS THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING.
WE WORKED PRETTY EXTENSIVELY WITH THE COMMUNITY ON THIS.
WE HAD MEETINGS WITH NORTH HYDE PARK ASSOCIATION.
THEY SUBMITTED A LETTER IN SUPPORT.
MY CLIENT APPEARED BEFORE THE WEST TAMPA CRA.
THEY DIDN'T TAKE AN OFFICIAL POSITION BUT GOT VERY POSITIVE
FEEDBACK THERE AND INFORMATION ON APPLYING FOR A FACADE
GRANT.
I'M NOT SURE THAT I'VE EVER HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE, BUT MY
CLIENTS KNOCKED ON DOORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MEET THEIR
HOPEFULLY FUTURE CLIENTS.
AND, IN FACT, THEY DID SUCH A GOOD JOB, THEY HAVE A NEW
CLIENT WHO IS GOING TO THEIR OFFICE NOW IN ANTICIPATION OF
THEM COMING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE REQUESTING SEVERAL WAIVERS.
THIS IS A TIGHT SITE.
WE'VE ONLY GOT A HUNDRED FEET OF DEPTH.
WE EXPLORED A NUMBER OF OPTIONS.
CHRIS IS OUR ENGINEER WITH AURORA.
WE LOOKED AT A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
SOME OF THE PARKING IS GOING TO BE UNDER THE BUILDING.
SOME OF THE PARKING, AGAIN, UNDER THE BUILDING.
WE HAVE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES ON THE FRONT AND REAR.
WE'VE GOT AN OVERHANG TO COMPLY WITH THE WEST TAMPA OVERLAY,
SO REACTIVATE THE STREET, GIVE THE PEDESTRIANS A LITTLE BIT
OF SHADE COVER, BUT IT'S A TIGHT SITE, AND WE DID OUR BEST
TO WORK WITH STAFF AND MAXIMIZE THE PARKING.
WE LOOKED AT RAISING THE ENTIRE BUILDING SO THAT WE COULD
HAVE PARKING COMPLETELY UNDERNEATH IT, BUT WITH THE
ENGINEERING, WE REALLY DIDN'T GAIN ANY SPACES THAT WAY AND
WE LOST THE REACTIVATION OF THE STREET.
21:28:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MR. CRAMER, YOU HEARD MUCH OPPOSITION?
21:28:44 >> WE HAVEN'T.
WE DID RECEIVE SEVERAL CALLS AND NO OPPOSITION.
IN CONCLUSION, TAKING YOUR HINT, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD,
LOOKING FOR BALANCED REDEVELOPMENT, REACTIVATING A MIXED USE
CORRIDOR AND INTRODUCING A NEIGHBORHOOD-SERVING USE.
THANK YOU.
21:29:05 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS?
IS ANYONE HERE TO COMMENT PUBLICLY ON ITEM NUMBER 10?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
21:29:17 >> GOOD EVENING, ONCE AGAIN.
BRENDA LINDSEY, NORTH HYDE PARK CIVIC ASSOCIATION.
HE DID NOT TALK TO US.
HE TALKED TO NORTH HYDE PARK ALLIANCE AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHO HE TALKED TO, BUT HE HAS NOT COME TO OUR
ASSOCIATION TO ADDRESS US AT ALL.
I GOT -- WE WERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
BUT WE'D LIKE -- SINCE I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE, I NEED TO
TAKE THE ASSOCIATION MORE INFORMATION.
SO IF WE CAN POSTPONE THIS UNTIL HE CAN MEET WITH US,
BECAUSE WE ARE THE CIVIC GROUP IN NORTH HYDE PARK.
THE ALLIANCE IS A BUSINESS ENTITY.
WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M OPPOSED TO IT AT THIS POINT.
21:30:00 >>LUIS VIERA:
MA'AM, I'M SORRY.
DID YOU GIVE YOUR NAME.
21:30:03 >> BRENDA LINDSEY.
21:30:06 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 10?
OKAY.
21:30:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, WE CAN
HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AT ANOTHER TIME OUTSIDE OF THIS
HEARING, BUT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RECORD AND FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE IS NO OBLIGATION IN YOUR CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT ANY
PETITIONER HAS TO MEET WITH ANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR
ANY PURPOSE RELATIVE TO THE REZONING.
NOW, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO CONSIDER,
THERE ARE PERHAPS JURISDICTIONS THAT REQUIRE PERHAPS WHAT
WOULD BE REFERRED TO AS MAYBE A NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY
MEETING, BUT THAT IS NOT PARTICULARLY A REQUIREMENT, AND I
JUST CERTAINLY WOULD CAUTION COUNCIL TO PREDICATE ANY
DECISION ON THE FACT THAT NOTICE, HAVING BEEN LEGALLY
COMPLIED WITH, AND NOTICE HAVING BEEN SET, THE FACT THAT
THERE HAS BEEN NO COMMUNICATION.
AND THE REMINDER AGAIN THERE'S ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN
FIRST AND SECOND READING, IF THAT IS FOR THE PETITIONER'S
OPINION THEIR DESIRE.
21:31:16 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
21:31:18 >> JAKE CRAMER AGAIN.
IF I MISSPOKE, I APOLOGIZE.
WE HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE NORTH HYDE PARK
ALLIANCE.
WE WOULD SIT DOWN AS EARLY AS TOMORROW.
I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY SO WE CAN TALK WITH THEIR
ORGANIZATION BEFORE SECOND READING.
THANK YOU.
21:31:38 >>LUIS VIERA:
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, SIR.
21:31:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
ITEM NUMBER 10, FILE NUMBER REZ 20-07.
MOVE AN ORDINANCE PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING CONSIDERATION,
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF
302, 306 NORTH HOWARD AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION CG COMMERCIAL GENERAL AND PD PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, MEDICAL OFFICE, AND
BUSINESS/PROFESSIONAL OFFICE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE DEVELOPMENT HAS SHOWN THAT SITE PLAN MEETS THE REQUIRED
ITEMS APPROVED.
PROVIDE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AS TO REVISION AND
CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY CODE,
AND IT PROMOTES SUSTAINABILITY UNDER CHAPTER 27-136.
21:32:39 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN -- YES, SIR,
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER AND THEN COUNCILMAN GUDES.
21:32:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION FOR TODAY.
OF COURSE, WE KNOW MR. CRAMER AND HE'S A MAN OF HIS WORD.
I'M SURE BEFORE HE LEAVES THE BUILDING HE'LL GET THIS NICE
YOUNG LADY'S INFORMATION AND THEY CAN GET TOGETHER AND THEN
WE'LL HEAR MORE ABOUT IT HOPEFULLY AT SECOND READING.
21:33:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
EVEN BEFORE WE VOTE, I WANT A LEGAL
OPINION, WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF ANYONE COMING HERE
REGARDING NOTIFICATIONS?
21:33:17 >>CATE WELLS:
CATE WELLS, CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE.
AS I MENTIONED DURING AN EARLIER HEARING, THERE IS NOT A
REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE FOR APPLICANTS TO MEET WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
THE NOTICE GOES OUT --
21:33:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
-- THEY MAIL OUT AND I GUESS THEY GET A
MAIL LIST OF WHAT THE ORGANIZATIONS ARE WITHIN THAT BOUNDARY
AND THEY SEND THEM LETTERS, REGISTERED LETTERS I GUESS.
21:33:37 >>CATE WELLS:
THAT IS REQUIRED IN THE AFFIDAVIT OF
COMPLIANCE WOULD BE FILED WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
AS LONG AS THE LETTERS WENT OUT TO -- THE NOTICES WENT OUT
TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET AS WELL AS THE REGISTERED
NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS.
WHAT WE HEARD THIS EVENING IS THAT NOTICE LETTER WAS
RECEIVED.
THE PURPOSE OF THAT LETTER IS TO ALLOW THE RECIPIENT THE
CONTACT INFORMATION TO, IF THEY WISH, TO INQUIRE AND GET
MORE INFORMATION.
THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AS WELL TO TAKE STEPS TO GET MORE
INFORMED, IF THAT'S THEIR DESIRE.
21:34:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
21:34:10 >>CATE WELLS:
THANK YOU.
21:34:12 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA -- COUNCILMAN GUDES.
MY APOLOGY.
21:34:21 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I'M GOING TO --
21:34:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
MICROPHONE.
21:34:28 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TONIGHT,
BUT LIKE MY COLLEAGUE, MR. DINGFELDER SAID, MR. CRAMER TO
MEET WITH THE NORTH HYDE PARK ASSOCIATION BEFORE SECOND
READING.
THEY ARE STRONG AND GOOD SUPPORT ORGANIZATION IN THAT AREA.
IF YOU COULD DO THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
I KNOW IT IS A MANDATE.
YOU ARE A MAN OF YOUR WORD AND WILL DO THAT.
21:34:49 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION.
AND ANYONE ELSE?
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, SECONDED BY BELIEVE BY
COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
21:35:02 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5th AT
9:30 A.M.
21:35:09 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
NOW, WE ARE APPROACHING ABOUT 9:35.
I DON'T CARE WHAT OUR CAL RIPKEN CLERKS SAY, WE'LL TAKE A
FIVE-MINUTE BREAK, BECAUSE YOU NEED A BREAK.
WE'LL BE BACK IN FIVE MINUTES.
RECESS.
[RECESS]
[ SOUNDING GAVEL ]
21:43:42 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
21:43:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
HERE.
21:43:48 >> GUDES?
21:43:49 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
HERE.
21:43:49 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
HERE.
21:43:51 >> MIRANDA?
CARLSON?
21:43:53 >>BILL CARLSON:
HERE.
21:43:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
HERE.
WE ARE ON TO ITEM 11.
IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON ANY REMAINING ITEMS AND YOU HAVE
NOT BEEN SWORN IN, PLEASE STAND UP, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO DO SO,
AND BE PREPARED TO BE SWORN IN.
[OATH ADMINISTERED BY THE CLERK]
21:44:31 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
NUMBER 11 IS REZ 20-08.
IT'S A REZONING REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525
NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY FROM PD TO PD FOR ALL COMMERCIAL
INTENSIVE USES.
21:44:52 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE BACK IN WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE
WESTSHORE EMPLOYMENT CENTER.
HART ROUTE 36 AND 45 PROVIDE TRANSIT SERVICE ADJACENT TO THE
SUBJECT SITE.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE EVACUATION ZONE E.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED IN THE PURPLE.
IT'S LOCATED ALONG NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
THERE IS A LOT OF INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL USES ALONG THIS
PORTION OF NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY.
CAR DEALERSHIPS, ET CETERA.
BEHIND THE SITE IS ARBOR POINTE APARTMENTS.
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND THEN TO THE NORTH, THIS IS THE YANKEES TRAINING FACILITY
AND THEN WE HAVE SOME AIRPORT USES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE IS REGIONAL MIXED USE 100.
AGAIN, THAT IS AN INCREDIBLY INTENSIVE FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION WITHIN THE CITY OF TAMPA.
BEHIND IT, THE ARBOR POINTE APARTMENTS, THIS IS RESIDENTIAL
35.
WE ALSO HAVE RESIDENTIAL 20 IN THE AREA AND RESIDENTIAL 10.
THE BLUE ARE THE PUBLIC USES, THE AIRPORT AND THAT TRAINING
FACILITY.
WE DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THEY ARE JUST REQUESTING TO ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE
USES AND NOT PROPOSING ANY STRUCTURAL OR SITE MODIFICATIONS.
THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT IS RECOGNIZED AS THE MAJOR
EMPLOYMENT CENTER, INCLUDING REGIONAL COMMERCIAL USES, SO WE
DID FIND ALLOWING COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES IS KEEPING
WITHIN THIS VISION OF THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT.
AS I STATED BEFORE, REGIONAL MIXED USE 100 IS A VERY
INTENSIVE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
WE DID FIND THAT THIS WAS COMPARABLE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE
SURROUNDING AREA AS WELL AS CONSISTENT WITH THE UNDERLYING
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU.
21:46:43 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
I HAVE A REVISED STAFF REPORT TO HAND OUT.
I LEFT A WAIVER OUT OF THE STAFF REPORT.
SO I'VE CORRECTED IT.
IT'S FOUND ON PAGE 2.
IT'S BEEN UNDERLINED.
SO FOR THIS APPLICATION, CURRENTLY ZONED PD.
WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS APPROVED IN 2001, IT WAS CASE
Z-01-44.
IT WAS APPROVED FOR RESTAURANT USE AND STRIP SHOPPING CENTER
USE.
THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO RETAIN THE EXISTING
SITE EXACTLY AS IT WAS CONSTRUCTED, EXACTLY AS IS.
HOWEVER, THEY WANT TO EXPAND THE LIST OF USES TO ANYTHING
THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CI ZONING DISTRICT.
THE CI ZONING DISTRICT USE IS PERMISSIBLE, AGAIN, AS
JENNIFER STATED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS IS RMU 100 LAND USE CATEGORY WHICH IS THE MOST
INTENSIVE LAND USE CATEGORY IN THE ENTIRE CITY.
CI USES ARE APPROPRIATE IN THAT LAND USE CATEGORY.
AGAIN, THE EXISTING SITE IS TO REMAIN AS IS.
THEY JUST WANT TO EXPAND THE LIST OF USES BEYOND THE STRIP
SHOPPING CENTER AND RESTAURANT TO CI USES.
BECAUSE OF THE ANTICIPATED MIX OF USES THAT COULD OCCUR ON
THE PROPERTY, A TOTAL OF 30 PARKING SPACES WOULD BE
ANTICIPATED TO BE REQUIRED.
THEY DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT USES COULD GO IN THERE, BUT WE
TEND TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF BEING CONSERVATIVE WHERE WE TRY
TO ANTICIPATE THE MOST EXTREME OR HEAVILY PARKED USES GOING
IN.
WITH THAT EVALUATION, WE CAME UP WITH 30 PARKING SPACES AND
THERE ARE 240 -- SORRY, 300 PARKING SPACES.
AND THERE ARE 249 SPACES ON-SITE.
17 PERCENT PARKING REDUCTION THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING.
TRANSPORTATION DID FIND THAT INCONSISTENT BECAUSE THERE'S A
PARKING REDUCTION.
SIX OF THE ORIGINAL WAIVERS CARRIED FORWARD FROM THE
ORIGINAL PD, AGAIN FROM Z-01-44.
AND THEN THEY ARE ASKING FOR APPROXIMATELY 26, 27 ADDITIONAL
SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE FOR THE MAIN BUILDING TO AS WELL AS
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNS FROM ONE TO THREE WITHIN THE
ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
VERY MINOR CHANGES FROM STORMWATER, AND PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING,
NATURAL RESOURCES -- TRANSPORTATION DID FIND THE 17% PARKING
REDUCTION INCONSISTENT, AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE ANTICIPATED
MIX OF USES WITHIN THE STRIP SHOPPING CENTER AND THE ANCHOR
STORE.
THEN NATURAL RESOURCES JUST HAD SOME COMMENTS ABOUT TO
DECIDE WHEN IT GOES TO PERMITTING FOR ANY NEW USES.
OVERALL, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMPLIANCE STAFF DID FIND
THIS INCONSISTENT BECAUSE OF TRANSPORTATION'S INCONSISTENCY
FOR THE 17% PARKING REDUCTION.
21:50:00 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY QUESTIONS?
21:50:04 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THANK YOU.
21:50:09 >>LUIS VIERA:
PETITIONER?
21:50:12 >> GOOD EVENING.
ELISE BATSEL WITH STEARNS WEAVER.
401 EAST JACKSON STREET.
I WAS GOING TO HAVE A WHOLE PRESENTATION TONIGHT, BUT
INSTEAD I'M GOING TO SUBMIT MY PRESENTATION INTO THE RECORD
AND JUST HIGHLIGHT THOSE THINGS AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
THAT YOU MAY HAVE WITH YOUR APPROVAL.
THIS SITE IS REALLY BASICALLY AN ATTEMPT TO RETENANT AN
EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER.
THE ANCHOR TENANT WHICH USED TO BE A LARGE GROCERY OF OVER
40,000 SQUARE FEET HAS BEEN GONE FOR A YEAR AND A HALF.
AS YOU KNOW, RETAIL IS A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT THESE DAYS
THAN IT USED TO BE.
YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE
ALREADY AROUND THIS PROJECT.
CHICK-FIL-A IS HERE.
THIS IS THE STADIUM UP HERE DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH, NORTH OF
COLUMBUS AVENUE.
THERE ARE TWO ISSUES THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT.
HERE IN THIS LARGE BOX IS THE EXISTING VACANT GROCERY STORE
SPOT.
THE EXISTING TENANT, OTHER SMALLER TENANTS ARE ALONG HERE
BUT ALSO A VACANT SPOT ALONG THE SMALLER PORTION OF THE
SHOPPING CENTER.
SO IN HOPING TO RETENANT, THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A LARGE
FITNESS FACILITY THAT WANTS TO RETENANT THE GROCERY STORE
SPACE AND THAT IS WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR A PARKING WAIVER.
QUICKLY, HERE IS THE CURRENT CONDITION.
YOU CAN SEE HERE THIS WOULD BE THE NEW FITNESS FACILITY,
WHICH USED TO BE THE GROCERY STORE.
ALONG HERE ARE THE OTHER USES WITHIN THE SHOPPING CENTER,
HERE AGAIN ANOTHER VACANCY.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY CHANGES TO THE FACILITY AT ALL
OTHER THAN SOME UPGRADES OF LANDSCAPING AND SOME FACADE
IMPROVEMENTS.
LET'S TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE PARKING WAIVER, BECAUSE I
KNOW THAT'S AN ISSUE.
THE CENTER HAS BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2003 WITH A VARIETY OF
PERMITTED USES.
ALMOST TREATED LIKE A STRIP SHOPPING CENTER.
THERE IS A NAIL SALON, PERSONAL SERVICES.
THE EXISTING 249 SPACES HAVE TYPICALLY BEEN ADEQUATE WHEN
THE FACILITY WAS FULLY ENGAGED.
THE WAIVER IS 70%, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LARGE
PROJECTS IN THE AREA, ESPECIALLY WITHIN -- AREAS IN THE CITY
OF TAMPA.
I DID HEAR YOU, MR. DINGFELDER.
TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN THE BACK GAVE ME THE ITE TRIP
GENERATION.
IF YOU PLUG THE NUMBERS WITH THE MOST INTENSE USES, ADDING
FITNESS FACILITY, THE RESTAURANTS, THE RETAIL, WE WOULD IS
HE MOST INTENSE IT WOULD REQUIRE 232 SPACES WHEN FULLY
ENGAGED, AND WE HAVE 249 SPACES ON-SITE.
HOWEVER, UNDER THE CURRENT PARKING REGULATIONS, AND THE
REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE ARE
REQUIRED TO ASK FOR A WAIVER FOR THE SAME USES.
THE SECOND WAIVER IS SIGNAGE.
THAT SIGNAGE WOULD BE FOR THE FITNESS FACILITY.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THERE WOULD BE A SIGN IN THE MIDDLE AND
TWO SMALLER SIGNS ON EACH SIDE.
THE WESTERN FACADE OF THE SPACE ONLY WOULD ALLOW FOR 207
SQUARE FEET.
THE WAIVER IS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL 27 SQUARE FEET.
AND THAT WOULD BE THE EXACT SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WOULD BE
REQUIRED FOR THE SIGNS ON THIS PARTICULAR RENDERING.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PARKING WAIVER, STAFF AND THE
PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
I THINK THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED IF YOU
DID NOT APPROVE THIS ARE THE DUCKS THAT MOVED IN ON-SITE.
WITH MORE PEOPLE, THEY WILL HAVE TO RELOCATE.
WE ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
AND WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR
APPROVAL.
THANK YOU.
21:54:11 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ANY QUESTIONS?
IS ANYONE HERE TO PUBLICLY COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 11?
IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN GUDES, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?
COUNCILMAN CARLSON -- READING THIS ONE, SIR?
21:54:54 >>BILL CARLSON:
JUST BROUGHT UP MEMORIES OF SHOPPING AT SAVE
AND PACK BACK IN THE '80s.
FILE REZ 20-08, ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR FIRST HEARING
CONSIDERATION, ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL
VICINITY OF 2525 NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY IN THE CITY OF
TAMPA, FLORIDA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1
FROM ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,
STRIP SHOPPING CENTER AND RESTAURANT TO PD PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ALL CI USES; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
21:55:18 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN -- YES, SIR.
21:55:22 >>BILL CARLSON:
AS THE APPLICANT HAS MET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF
TO PROVIDE COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF DEVELOPMENT
AS CONDITIONED AND SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN AS CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF CITY CODE.
21:55:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
AS WELL THE REVISION SHEET BETWEEN FIRST
AND SECOND READING.
21:55:35 >>BILL CARLSON:
AND INCLUDING THE REVISION SHEET BETWEEN
FIRST AND SECOND READING.
21:55:38 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON,
SECONDED BY MANISCALCO.
ANY IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
21:55:44 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON MARCH 5th AT
9:30 A.M.
21:55:51 >>LUIS VIERA:
THAT'S THE LAST ITEM, CORRECT?
JUST KIDDING.
21:56:03 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO.
THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS NUMBER 12, REZ 19-94,
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6603 SOUTH TRASK STREET FROM INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
21:56:20 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF.
WE'RE IN THE SOUTH TAMPA PLANNING DISTRICT WITHIN THE PORT
TAMPA CITY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE IS A HART BUS STOP NEAR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT THE
INTERSECTION OF WEST FERN AVENUE AND SOUTH MANHATTAN AVENUE.
HUNDRED FEET SOUTH OF THE SITE IS THE PORT TAMPA PARK AND
THE PORT TAMPA COMMUNITY CENTER.
THIS IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN A LEVEL A EVACUATION ZONE WHICH
WILL BRING ME TO MY NEXT POINT.
IT IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
ONCE AGAIN, I BROUGHT THIS MAP TO SHOW HOW THE COASTAL HIGH
HAZARD AREA IS MAPPED THROUGHOUT THE CITY, SO THE COASTAL
HIGH HAZARD AREA FOR THE RECORD IS THAT GREEN HATCHED.
WE CAN KIND OF SEE HOW IT INTERACTS WITH THE SOUTH TAMPA
PENINSULA.
SO THEN NEXT, I HAVE THE SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED HERE IN
GREEN.
THE GREEN HATCH AGAIN IS THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, SO WE
CAN SEE THE CLEAR LINES, HOW THE PARCEL, THE COASTAL HIGH
HAZARD AREA IS ON THE PARCEL.
THE SUBJECT SITE ONCE AGAIN IS LOCATED IN SOUTH TAMPA.
I APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THE ZOOMING IN AND OUT.
IT IS OUTLINED IN THE PURPLE.
THESE ARE APARTMENTS, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE
RAILROAD TRACKS.
THIS HAS THE SAME FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AS THE SUBJECT
SITE BEFORE YOU TODAY HAS, WHICH I'LL EXPLAIN IN A LITTLE
BIT.
WE HAVE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, A PARK, AND THEN SCHOOLS TO THE
NORTH.
FUTURE LAND USE IS TRANSITIONAL USE 24.
THAT IS THIS ALMOST THE SALMON COLOR.
ACROSS THE WAY, THESE APARTMENTS WERE ALSO DEVELOPED UNDER
THAT SAME FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF TRANSITIONAL USE
24.
THE GREEN IS RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE.
THAT TYPICALLY DESIGNATES PARKS.
THE BLUE IS THE PUBLIC, THOSE ARE THE SCHOOLS I MENTIONED
EARLIER.
WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL 10 IN THE ORANGE, WHICH IS THE
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THEN
RESIDENTIAL 20 IN THIS BROWN.
TRANSITIONAL USE 24, DESCRIBED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS
HAVING NO CLEAR IDENTIFIABLE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
IT IS THE CATEGORY THAT HAS BEEN IN OUR PLAN SINCE ITS
INCEPTION, MY PROFESSIONAL UNDERSTANDING.
IN SOUTH TAMPA, THERE HAS BEEN A TREND THAT STAFF HAS
EVALUATED THAT THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE DESIGNATED
TRANSITIONAL USE 24 HAVE MOVED FROM THE INDUSTRIAL USES IN
THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING TO MORE RESIDENTIAL USES, SUCH AS
THERE'S AN EXAMPLE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE SUBJECT
SITE.
THAT HAS BEEN WHAT WE HAVE WITNESSED OCCURRING IN SOUTH
TAMPA WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT YOU, THE COUNCIL, TO TWO
POLICIES ON THE COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA.
CM POLICY 1.1.3 AND 1.1.4.
1.1.3 STATES 50% OR MORE OF THE PARCEL LAND LOCATED IN
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, ENTIRE PARCEL SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED.
STAFF PULLED THE NUMBERS AND 52% OF THE PARCEL IS LOCATED
WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
FURTHER, CM POLICY 1.1.4 STATES THAT IF THE SITE PLAN, IF A
PORTION OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS IN IT, THEN
THE ENTIRE PARCEL SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN IT AND A REVIEW OF
THE SITE PLAN WOULD CLARIFY THAT, THAT THE BUILDING
FOOTPRINTS ARE WHAT'S ON THAT BOUNDARY OF THE COASTAL HIGH
HAZARD AREA.
AGAIN, HOWEVER SINCE THE TRANSITIONAL USE 24 HAS ALLOWED FOR
THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, WE HAVE PLANNED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL
IN THIS AREA OF THE CITY, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ONE OF THE
ALLOWABLE USES FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
WE DID FIND IT CONSISTENT.
WE DID FIND THAT IT WOULD BE SENSITIVE TO THE SURROUNDING
RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN THE PORT CITY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE
DO CITE POLICIES THAT THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ENCOURAGES NEW HOUSING ON VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED LAND TO
ENSURE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF HOUSING IS AVAILABLE TO MEET
THE NEEDS OF TAMPA'S PRESENT AND FUTURE POPULATION.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE MORE POLICY CONTEXT IF THE
COUNCIL DESIRES.
THAT DOES CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
22:00:37 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
22:00:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YES, MA'AM.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
ABOUT 20 SOMETHING YEARS AGO, YOUR PREDECESSOR,
MR. CHIARAMONTE GAVE ME A PLANNING EDUCATION AS A YOUNG
ATTORNEY.
HE OFTEN SPOKE TO CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY AS ONE OF
THE IMPORTANT ASPECTS WHEN EVALUATING PROPERTIES.
DO YOU AGREE THAT THAT'S STILL AN IMPORTANT CRITERIA IN YOUR
PROFESSION?
22:01:15 >> COMPATIBILITY, YES.
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT HOW YOU MEAN BY CONSISTENCY.
22:01:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'LL TAKE COMPATIBILITY.
CAN YOU PUT THE AERIAL UP -- THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH THAT
SHOWS THE -- THAT RAILROAD TRACK IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
BARRIER HAVING -- MR. GUDES, HAVING SPENT A LOT OF TIME DOWN
AT ROBINSON IN HIGH SCHOOL, WE'RE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THAT
AREA.
I BELIEVE, AND THAT RAILROAD TRACK IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
BARRIER IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING ON ON ONE SIDE VERSUS
WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE OTHER SIDE.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, I WOULD VENTURE A GUESS LOOKING AT THE
FOLIAGE THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX
THROUGH THAT RAILROAD TRACK.
WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?
I MEAN, WE CAN SEE IT FROM THE AERIAL THAT THE APARTMENT
COMPLEX IS THERE.
BUT IF YOU'RE STANDING OUT ON THAT FIELD OR WHATEVER WAS
THERE BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL PARCEL AND YOU LOOK ACROSS
THERE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THOSE APARTMENTS,
RIGHT?
22:02:19 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
PERSONALLY, STAFF DIDN'T GO ONTO THE SITE
TO THAT EXTENT, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT.
BUT IT APPEARS FROM THE AERIAL THAT THAT MAY BE THE CASE.
22:02:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY.
I'LL TAKE THAT, TOO.
THEN MY LAST PART, QUESTION, IS LET'S LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING
ON, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACK IN TERMS OF EVERY
SINGLE -- EVERY SINGLE PARCEL THAT I CAN SEE THERE.
IT APPEARS TO ME, AND THERE MIGHT BE A FEW EXCEPTIONS, BUT
IT APPEARS TO ME THAT VIRTUALLY 90% OR MORE IS ALL
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
22:03:07 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
IF I MAY, CAN I PUT THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP BACK UP TO ILLUSTRATE.
22:03:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YOU CAN ANSWER MY QUESTION FIRST JUST --
DON'T GO TIGHT.
I WANT TO BE BACKED OUT.
JUST IN TERMS OF WHAT I'M SEEING THERE LOOKS LIKE A HECK OF
A LOT OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
THE MAJORITY OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
I THREW OUT A NUMBER, 90% SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, THERE MIGHT
BE A SMIDGEN OF MULTIFAMILY UP ALONG MANHATTAN, PERHAPS.
BUT THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION OF THAT AREA THERE.
22:03:46 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
I DO SEE A MIRROR, AND I WOULD SAY THAT
THIS IS RESIDENTIAL 20.
IF THEY ARE DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, THERE IS
POTENTIAL FOR THAT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME TO NOT BE A
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ANYMORE UNDER THE FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION.
22:04:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE EXISTING MAP THAT
SHOWS THE AERIAL THAT SHOWS THE ROOFTOPS.
22:04:08 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
I UNDERSTAND, BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD I
NEED TO MAKE THIS POINT, FOR THE RECORD.
22:04:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK YOU AND YOU CAN
COME BACK WITH WHATEVER ELSE YOU WANT.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITION TODAY, AND I DON'T
KNOW IF YOU DID THE ANALYSIS, PROBABLY NOT, BUT THE EXISTING
CONDITION TODAY THAT I'M LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF ROOFTOPS IS
A HECK OF A LOT OF SINGLE-FAMILY AND NO MULTIFAMILY ON THAT
SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACK.
WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?
22:04:33 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
I WOULD HAVE TO SEE A ZONING MAP.
I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT A ZONING MAP AND LOOK AT THE ZONING.
BUT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TELL BECAUSE SOME OF THESE COULD
BE DUPLEXES.
I DON'T KNOW AND PROFESSIONALLY I CANNOT SAY WITH CERTAINTY.
22:04:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'LL GIVE YOU THAT.
SOME OF THEM MIGHT BE DUPLEXES BUT WE'RE NOT SEEING
MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX, CORRECT?
22:04:53 >>JENNIFER MALONE:
CORRECT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT PLANNED FOR
THAT EITHER.
22:04:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY.
THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH.
THANK YOU.
22:04:59 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
ANYTHING ELSE?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
22:05:13 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
MARY SAMANIEGO, PLANNING DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
HERE'S AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AGAIN, THEY ARE ASKING FOR A REZONING FROM PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT -- FROM INDUSTRIAL GENERAL TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
THEY ARE PROPOSING 24 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNIT -- SORRY,
240 MAXIMUM MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS WITHIN FOUR BUILDINGS
AND A CLUBHOUSE.
THE TOTAL SITE ACREAGE IS 10.51 ACRES OF PROPERTY, CURRENTLY
OCCUPIED BY WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION USE AND IS LOCATED AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH WALL STREET AND WEST McCOY
STREET INTERSECTION.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE WEST WITH
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Z 11-46 ZONING DISTRICT DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE EAST, NORTH AND SOUTH IN THE
RS-50 ZONING DISTRICT AND RM-16 AND RS-60.
HERE IS A ZONING MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL.
TO THE SOUTH IS RS-50 ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS A DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.
THIS PROPERTY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS ZONED RM-16, WHICH IS
A MULTIFAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.
CURRENTLY, RS-60 TO THE NORTH AND ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS
TO THE WEST AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY.
22:06:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ASK A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE SHE GOES.
MARY, THANK YOU.
VERY FAINTLY, AM I SEEING LINES THAT GO THROUGH THERE THAT
WOULD INDICATE THAT THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PLATTED OUT AS
SINGLE-FAMILY?
22:07:02 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, SIR?
22:07:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YEAH.
I FEEL LIKE I'M SEEING 50-FOOT PLAT LINES THERE.
22:07:10 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES, IT APPEARS THAT THOSE ARE OLD PLAT
LINES.
22:07:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WITH TRASK BEING PLATTED TO COME THROUGH
THERE.
22:07:17 >>MARY SAMANIEGO:
YES, SIR.
HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I KNOW THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE WILL GO INTO MORE
DETAIL.
AGAIN, THEY ARE ASKING FOR 240 UNITS.
HERE ARE THE FOUR MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT BUILDINGS, THE
CLUBHOUSE, SURFACE PARKING LOT, RETENTION FACILITIES, SOLID
WASTE FACILITY AND ONE INGRESS AND EGRESS SITE LOCATED OFF
OF McCOY.
THE PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
NORTH IS A 30-FOOT SETBACK.
SOUTH IS 25 FEET.
EAST IS 40 FEET.
AND TO THE WEST THE SETBACK IS 90 FEET.
THE MAXIMUM PROPOSED HEIGHT IS 60 FEET IN TOTAL WITH THE
COMBINATION OF BEDROOMS AND DWELLING UNITS, 420 PARKING
SPACES ARE BEING REQUIRED AND 421 ARE BEING PROVIDED.
ALL VEHICULAR ACCESS LIKE I SAID WILL EXIT AND ENTER WITH
ONE DRIVEWAY ON TO WEST McCOY STREET.
THERE ARE SOME MINOR CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND
READING FROM PLANNING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
AS WELL AS TRANSPORTATION.
STORMWATER HAS ONE NOTE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED.
AND NATURAL RESOURCES DID FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH SOME
MODIFICATIONS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING.
OVERALL, THIS APPLICATION IS NOT REQUIRED OR REQUESTING ANY
WAIVERS TO ANY PROVISION IN THE CITY OF TAMPA LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO THEY ARE MEETING ALL APPLICABLE STANDARDS WITH THIS
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THEY ARE BRINGING BEFORE YOU.
SAYING THAT, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE STAFF HAS
FOUND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
SHOULD IT BE THE PLEASURE OF CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE
APPLICATION, FURTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE PLAN MUST BE
COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING
OF THE ORDINANCE AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
22:09:19 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPLICANT, PLEASE.
22:09:28 >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.
CAMI CORBETT, 101 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 3700.
I AM REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT OWNER, KR TAMPA TRASK 2019,
LLC, AND MANAGING MEMBER OF THE ENTITY.
MR. GERARD KEATING IS ALSO HERE WITH ME ALONG WITH MR. BRIAN
METZLER WITH PENLER, WHO IS OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNER, AND ALL
OF OUR EXPERTS THIS EVENING.
MS. ALEXIS CRESPO, OUR LAND USE PLANNER.
SHE'S WITH WALDROP ENGINEERING.
MR. STEVE HENRY, WHO IS OUR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER.
MR. RICKY PETERIKA, WHO IS OUR ARBORIST.
AND MR. TRENT STEVENSON, WHO IS OUR ENGINEER WITH LEVEL UP.
IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ASK
MS. CRESPO TO COME UP AND BEGIN HER PRESENTATION.
22:10:11 >> GOOD EVENING.
ALEXIS CRESPO WITH WALDROP ENGINEERING REPRESENTING THE
APPLICANT.
I WILL SUBMIT MY RESUMÉ INTO THE FILE FOLLOWING MY
PRESENTATION THIS EVENING.
I AM A CERTIFIED PLANNER WITH THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
CERTIFIED PLANNERS.
I HAVE BEEN PRACTICING LAND USE PLANNING IN FLORIDA
APPROXIMATELY 15 YEARS.
THERE WERE EXCELLENT QUESTIONS ON COMPATIBILITY AND WE HOPE
TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS FOR YOU THIS EVENING.
IF I COULD HAVE THE PowerPoint PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
I WANT TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE PROPOSED -- MAY I HAVE THE
PowerPoint PRESENTATION?
THANK YOU.
YOU'VE SEEN THE AERIAL.
WE DISCUSSED ALL THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN AROUND US.
THIS IS AN INFILL INDUSTRIAL SITE IN A RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE POINT MADE EARLIER.
THE USE, THE IG ZONING DISTRICT IS NO LONGER CONSISTENT AND
IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THIS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE DO HAVE SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED HOMES TO OUR EAST.
WE HAVE PUBLIC USES, SCHOOLS, THE ARTERIAL ROADWAY NETWORK
TO OUR WEST AS WELL AS OUR NORTHEAST.
WE ALSO HAVE RAILROAD LINES.
THIS IS A DIVERSE TRANSITIONING AREA, AND WE SUBMIT THAT
THROUGH OUR PROPOSED DESIGN WHICH MEETS ALL OF YOUR LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA.
WE HAVE ADDRESSED THOUGHTFULLY COMPATIBILITY WITH THE
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHY IS THIS PROJECT DIFFERENT?
YOU HAVE SEEN PROJECTS SOUTH OF GANDY OVER THE PAST SEVERAL
MONTHS.
WE'RE ON A FIRST-NAME BASIS WITH MOST PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE
THIS EVENING, HAVING MET WITH THEM SINCE JUNE OF 2019.
SO WE SUBMIT TO YOU THIS PROJECT IS DIFFERENT.
WE MET EARLY AND FREQUENTLY WITH THE COMMUNITY.
WE REDESIGNED THIS SITE THREE, FOUR TIMES TO ADDRESS
COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS AND TO ADDRESS EVERY ITEM BROUGHT
BEFORE US THROUGH THIS LENGTHY PROCESS.
IN DOING SO, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ELIMINATE ALL WAIVERS FROM
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND WE HAVE ACHIEVED CONSISTENCY
FROM YOUR STAFF IN REGARDS TO THOSE REGULATIONS.
THIS SITE IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR IG ZONING ANY LONGER.
YOU'VE SEEN OTHER SITES THAT FRONT ON COLLECTOR ROADWAYS
THAT ARE ON THE PERIPHERY OF THE COMMUNITY.
THIS SITE IS NOT IN THAT POSITION AND IS CERTAINLY
APPROPRIATE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AS OPPOSED TO THE IG ZONING
DISTRICT THAT CURRENTLY IS TODAY.
A KEY COMPONENT ALSO MAKES THIS DIFFERENT IS AGAIN THE
THOUGHTFUL DESIGN.
WE HAVE CARVED OUT PUBLIC PARK SPACE AT THE CORNER OF WALL
STREET AND McCOY IN ORDER TO INVITE THE COMMUNITY INTO THE
PROJECT AND FOR THEM TO HAVE A HAND IN WHAT WE HOPE TO
CREATE ON THIS SITE.
AND WE'VE ALSO PREPARED A SITE-SPECIFIC HURRICANE
PREPAREDNESS PLAN TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT 52% OF THE SITE
IS WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA.
I'LL GET THAT INTO THE RECORD A LITTLE BIT LATER.
I WON'T BELABOR THIS.
IT IS LATE.
WE AGREE WITH YOUR STAFF IN TERMS OF OUR CONSISTENCY WITH
YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
YOUR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT.
THIS IS TO ALLOW FOR APPROPRIATE REDEVELOPMENT.
IT IS TO ADDRESS CONDITIONS OF COMPATIBILITY TO ALLOW FOR
DIFFERING USES, MULTIFAMILY TO SINGLE-FAMILY, THEY CAN
COEXIST TOGETHER WHEN DONE THOUGHTFULLY AND IN ACCORDANCE
WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN A WAY THAT CAN PROTECT
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THESE ARE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE.
YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THIS AERIAL, IT IS ELEVATED.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS ELIMINATES THE POINT MADE EARLIER,
BUT CERTAINLY YOU CAN SEE THE NEIGHBORING MULTIFAMILY
APARTMENTS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT VEGETATION, AND THE
DILAPIDATED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING EXISTED THERE FOR MANY YEARS
AND BEEN OVERRUN WITH HOMELESS PEOPLE DUE TO THE PREVIOUS
OWNER, MR. KEATING HAS CLEANED UP THE PROPERTY SINCE
ACQUIRING IT THIS PAST SUMMER.
BUT CLEARLY, A USE THAT DOESN'T BELONG WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOUR STAFF HAS OUTLINED THE TU-24 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY
THAT APPLIES.
THIS ALLOWS FOR 24 UNITS PER ACRE AS WELL AS AN F.A.R. FLOOR
AREA RATIO OF 1.5.
TODAY, WITHOUT ANY ZONING APPROVALS, THIS SITE CAN BE
REDEVELOPED WITH OVER 600,000 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL
USES.
CERTAINLY NOT REPORTING THAT THAT INTENSITY WOULD BE LIKELY
ON THE SITE, BUT IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT CAN BE DONE
TODAY WITHOUT ANY ZONING APPROVALS FROM THIS COUNCIL.
BASED ON THAT IG ZONING DISTRICT WHICH, AGAIN, IS NOT
COMPATIBLE.
THE IG USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT, THIS CERTAINLY HAS BEEN A
SLEEPING GIANT.
UNDER UTILIZED MORE THAN A DECADE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NOT BEEN BOTHERED BY IT.
SHOULD IT BE REVITALIZED, THE USES THAT CAN GO THERE ARE
MANUFACTURING, GAS STATION, OPEN STORAGE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT
AND VEHICLE REPAIRS.
ALL OF THAT WITHOUT ANY APPROVALS BY THIS BOARD.
IN TERMS OF THE IG REGULATIONS, AGAIN, THAT APPLY TO THE
PROPERTY TODAY BY RIGHT, THERE ARE VERY MINIMAL SETBACKS IN
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR INDUSTRIAL USES THAT COULD BE
DEVELOPED.
OUR PROPOSED PD IN SOME CASES QUADRUPLES THE REQUIRED
SETBACKS THAT ARE IN PLACE TODAY.
WE WORKED DILIGENTLY TO GET THAT 40-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK
SO THE CLOSEST BUILDING TO ANY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO
OUR EAST IS WELL WITHIN THE SITE, GIVING US PLENTY OF ROOM
TO BUFFER AND LOCATE GRAND TREES OR PRESERVE GRAND TREES IN
THOSE AREAS.
WE ALSO HAVE ENHANCED REAR AND FRONT SETBACKS.
OF PARTICULAR NOTE IS OUR PROPOSED F.A.R.
RATHER THAN THE 1.5 OR OVER 600,000 SQUARE FEET, WE'RE
PROPOSING JUST .46 FLOOR AREA RATIO.
WE'RE ALSO LIMITING OUR BUILDING HEIGHT TO ANYWHERE FROM 15
TO 5 FEET BELOW THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT TO DATE IN IG
ZONING.
IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH, WE HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF
RESPECT FOR THE FOLKS IN THIS ROOM.
THEY ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITY.
THEY HAVE VALID CONCERNS ABOUT WANTING PLANNING TO OCCUR
SOUTH OF GANDY.
WE SUBMITTED A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, AND BEFORE
DOING SO, MET WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND MET WITH THEM AGAIN
AND AGAIN.
WE'VE GONE TO THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION OF PORT TAMPA FOR THREE
MEETINGS SINCE JUNE, WE ALSO HOSTED TWO NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMUNITY OUTREACH WITH OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, AS WE
NOTICED SOME OF THE FOLKS ON WALL STREET WEREN'T COMING TO
THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, SO WE DID REACH OUT
PERSONALLY AND HOST THOSE MEETINGS AND AGAIN MODIFIED OUR
PLAN TO ADDRESS CONCERNS AND ITEMS WE HEARD THERE.
WE DO FEEL MADE IT THE BEST PLAN POSSIBLE THAT'S COMING
BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE ENHANCEMENTS THAT WE HAVE WORKED ON
BASED UPON THE INPUT WE RECEIVED?
WE LIMITED THE BUILDING HEIGHT TO THREE STORIES.
THERE'S ONE FOUR-STORY BUILDING THAT IS THE CLOSEST
STRUCTURE TO THE CSX RAIL LINE, AND THE FARTHEST FROM THE
SINGLE-FAMILY USES TO OUR EAST.
WE ALSO CARVED OUT THE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE GREENSPACE.
THEY WERE INTERESTED IN A GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL COMPONENT
ALONG McCOY STREET JUST DUE TO THE MARKET TRENDS AND THE
VISIBILITY THAT COMMERCIAL USES NEED, IT WASN'T APPROPRIATE
TO PUT COMMERCIAL WITHIN THE SPECIFIC SITE.
THAT WOULD BELONG ON MANHATTAN OR WESTSHORE, WORKING WITH
THEM, UNDERSTANDING THEY WANTED ACTIVITY, STREET LEVEL
INTERFACE WITH McCOY, WE DID CARVE OUT THAT CIVIC SPACE.
WE ENHANCED OUR BUFFERS ALONG PERIMETER BOUNDARIES,
PARTICULARLY THOSE ABUTTING THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
WE ARE PRESERVING MORE GREENSPACE THAN REQUIRED BY YOUR
CODE, AND WE HAVE WORKED TO PRESERVE ALL NON-HAZARDOUS GRAND
TREES ON THE SITE.
THIS IS A VIEW OF THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU SAW.
WE HAVE 240 MULTIFAMILY UNITS WITHIN FOUR BUILDINGS.
SURFACE AS WELL AS COVERED PARKING FOR RESIDENTS.
WE HAVE ACCESS FROM McCOY STREET, ONE POINT OF INGRESS AND
EGRESS.
IT WOULD BE A GATED ENTRY.
EIGHT-FOOT-WIDE BUFFERS ALONG THE PERIMETER WITH DECORATIVE
FENCING.
WE WOULD BE INSTALLING AND IMPROVING SIDEWALKS ALONG McCOY
STREET AS WELL AS WALL STREET.
CLUBHOUSE AND POOL LOCATED INTERNAL TO THE SITE FOR
RESIDENTS.
THAT LABELING DENOTES OUR THREE-STORY BUILDINGS WITH THE
FOUR-STORY BUILDING BEING THE FARTHEST AWAY AGAIN FROM THE
SINGLE-FAMILY.
WE HAVE AN INTERNAL DOG PARK AMENITY.
AGAIN, ALL NON-HAZARDOUS GRAND TREES ARE BEING PRESERVED.
MANY OF THEM ARE ALONG THAT PERIMETER SHARED WITH WALL
STREET AND OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST TO PROVIDE EXCELLENT
BUFFERING AND COVERAGE.
AND THEN OUR 40-FOOT SETBACK FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE.
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER IS WHERE WE'RE DOING A COVERED PAVILION
AREA, SEATING, BENCHING THAT WOULD BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
THERE IS A GRAND TREE IN THAT LOCATION THAT WOULD ADD TO
THAT COMMUNITY FEATURE.
IN TERMS OF COMPATIBILITY, WE UPDATED OUR ARCHITECTURAL
THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS TO CREATE AN OLD-FLORIDA TYPE FEEL
BUILDING THAT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND GET AWAY FROM SOME OF THE MONOLITHIC
ARCHITECTURE YOU SEE ALONG WESTSHORE AND THE MARINA
DISTRICT.
SO WE CERTAINLY SUBMIT TO THE COUNCIL THAT THIS WILL ONLY
ENHANCE COMPATIBILITY UPON THOSE EXISTING CONDITIONS TODAY
AND WHAT CAN BE REDEVELOPED ON THE SITE UNDER THE CURRENT
ZONING IN PLACE.
WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO STEVE.
22:19:55 >> GOOD EVENING.
STEVE HENRY, LINKS AND ASSOCIATES.
WEST LAUREL, TAMPA, 33607.
I AM A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF
FLORIDA WITH 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC.
ONE THING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MOBILITY POLICY 1.1.1
STATES THAT THE AREA SOUTH OF FLETCHER AVENUE IS CONCURRENCY
EXCEPTION AREA.
OBVIOUSLY, THIS PARCEL FALLS WITHIN THAT AREA.
SECOND, THAT THE POLICY 1.1.2 STATES THAT YOU HAVE TO
MITIGATE THE IMPACTS, PROPOSE TO MITIGATE IT.
WE ARE MITIGATING OUR IMPACTS THROUGH THE PAYMENT OF OUR
MITIGATION FEE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY.
IT'S BEEN DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR PROCEDURES MANUAL.
BASED ON THAT, YOUR STAFF HAS REVIEWED IT AND HAS APPROVED
THAT ANALYSIS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT WE'VE GONE ONE STEP FURTHER, AND WE HAVE
DONE ACTUALLY A HURRICANE EVACUATION EVALUATION FOR THE
PROJECT.
THIS IS BASED ON THE METHODOLOGY OUTLINED IN THE FLORIDA
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
AND BASED ON THAT CODE, WHAT THEY LOOK AT IN IMPACT TO A
HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTE IS 25% OF THE LEVEL OF SERVICE E
CAPACITY OF THOSE HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTES.
IF YOU EXCEED THAT, THEN YOU HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON
THOSE HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTES.
THIS PROJECT WOULD HAVE A .81% IMPACT ON HURRICANE
EVACUATION ROUTE.
BASED ON FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, AN INSIGNIFICANT
IMPACT ON HURRICANE EVACUATION.
22:21:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ARE YOU HANGED US THAT DOCUMENT, THAT
EVALUATION?
22:21:28 >> I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
ABSOLUTELY.
WOULD YOU LIKE A COPY?
22:21:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
ABSOLUTELY.
IF YOU'RE RELYING ON IT.
THANK YOU, STEVE.
22:21:44 >> IN ADDITION TO THAT, AS INDICATED, THE PROPERTY IS
CURRENTLY ZONED IG, WHICH WOULD ALLOW 692,000 SQUARE FEET.
SO WHAT THIS IS, IT IS A TRAFFIC COMPARISON OF WHAT WE'RE
PROPOSING VERSUS WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED ON THE PROPERTY
BASED, BY RIGHT, BASED ON THE CURRENT ZONING.
THE GREEN SHOWS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
THE BLUE SHOWS WHAT COULD BE BUILT THERE AND THE TRAFFIC
THAT MIGHT BE GENERATED BY THAT.
IN THE A.M. PEAK HOUR, OUR PROJECT IS 81 TRIPS.
THE IG COULD BE 485.
IN THE P.M. PEAK HOUR, YOU'VE GOT 103, OUR PROJECT.
THE PROPOSED WOULD BE 436.
SO WE'RE SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT
COULD BE GENERATED BY THE PROPERTY TODAY BY RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT BACK OVER.
22:22:46 >> CAMI IS GOING TO BE HANGED OUT THE SITE-SPECIFIC
HURRICANE PREPAREDNESS PLAN THAT WE PREPARED FOR THIS SITE.
WE ADDRESSED SOME OF THE CONCERNS WE HEARD REGARDING
HURRICANE EVACUATION TIME.
AND THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THE SHELTER MITIGATION IMPACT FEE
WE WILL BE PAYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE FOR BEING IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
THE PLAN INCLUDES A DISCLAIMER.
WHEN ANYONE COMES IN TO LEASE A UNIT, THEY WILL BE NOTIFIED
THAT THEY ARE WITHIN A HURRICANE EVACUATION ZONE AND BE
PROVIDED WITH PLANS AND INFORMATION REGARDING EVACUATION.
THERE WILL BE AN ANNUAL HURRICANE EDUCATION SEMINAR, AND
PROBABLY MOST SIGNIFICANTLY, THE PLAN, THE DEVELOPER AND
EVENTUAL OPERATOR OF THE APARTMENT WILL PROVIDE
TRANSPORTATION TO ALL RESIDENTS IN THE EVENT OF AN
EVACUATION ORDER OCCURRING.
SO WE SPELLED THAT OUT.
THAT CAN BE FURTHER IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION
PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, AND IT IS A WELL-THOUGHT-OUT WAY TO
ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE SITE WOULD BE EVACUATED.
22:23:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I'VE GOT A QUESTION.
MR. HENRY WAS UP THERE A SECOND AGO.
MR. HENRY, YOU CITE TO FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE RULE 73C
AS IN CHARLIE.
THAT IS THE BASIS OF YOUR EVALUATION IN YOUR REPORT.
22:24:09 >> YES.
22:24:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I JUST LOOKED UP THAT PROVISION IN
FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT
IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S ALL ABOUT DRIs, DEVELOPMENT OF
REGIONAL IMPACTS.
LET ME FINISH.
IS THIS A DRI?
22:24:26 >> NO, IT IS NOT.
22:24:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS YOU KIND OF WENT
GROPING INTO THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TO FIND ANYTHING ABOUT
HURRICANE EVACUATION, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU CAME UP WITH?
22:24:37 >> WELL, WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR WAS ANY KIND OF EVALUATION
OR ANY KIND OF CRITERIA THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO
IDENTIFY WHAT THE IMPACT IS OR TRYING TO IDENTIFY AND
QUANTIFY WHAT THE IMPACT IS ON A HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTE.
22:24:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
HAS THE CITY RECOGNIZED THIS APPROACH FOR
THIS TYPE OF PROJECT?
22:24:59 >> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THIS IS THE ONLY CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE
SEEN THAT HAS BEEN OUT THERE TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY A
METHODOLOGY TO LOOK AT YOUR IMPACT ON HURRICANE EVACUATION.
IF THERE IS ANOTHER CRITERIA, I'M HAPPY TO LOOK AT IT, BUT
THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT I'VE EVER SEEN
AS FAR AS EVALUATING THE IMPACT ON HURRICANE EVACUATION
ROUTES.
22:25:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
EVEN YOUR REPORT, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
HONESTY, EVEN YOUR REPORT SAYS -- I'LL ALWAYS APPRECIATE
YOUR HONESTY AND I TELL YOU THAT, BUT EVEN YOUR REPORT SAYS
TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT REGIONAL IMPACT ON HURRICANE
EVACUATION IMPLIES DRIs, WHICH TO ME, MY LITTLE BIT OF
EXPERIENCE SEEMS TO BE A WHOLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL.
22:25:38 >> IF WE WERE 24.9 AND SAYING WE WEREN'T, BUT WE WERE .8% AS
OPPOSED TO 25%.
MONUMENTAL DIFFERENCE IN WHETHER IT'S SIGNIFICANT OR NOT.
BUT THIS GIVES THE CRITERIA TO LOOK AT AND METHODOLOGY TO
DETERMINE WHAT THE TRIPS ARE AND WHAT THE IMPACT IS.
THAT'S WHY WE'VE USED THE CRITERIA.
22:26:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
22:26:03 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES, SIR.
ANYTHING FURTHER, PETITIONER? HOW MUCH TIME DID THEY HAVE
LEFT?
22:26:10 >> 29 SECONDS.
22:26:12 >>LUIS VIERA:
IF YOU NEED A MINUTE.
22:26:13 >> NO, I WOULD SAY THAT AGAIN COUNCIL THIS EVENING -- YEAH,
THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING, AS YOU'RE AWARE, BUT MAYBE FOR
MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE AND MAYBE PEOPLE WHO ARE VIEWING
FROM HOME, WE KNOW THAT COUNCIL IS SITTING IN ITS
QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING SEAT THIS EVENING, AND ITS
ROLE IS MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON THE EXISTING
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND EXISTING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
POLICIES TODAY, WHETHER OR NOT THIS APPLICANT HAS SATISFIED
ITS BURDEN TO SHOW IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
IT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN A LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION THAT YOU ALL
SERVE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS AND
FUTURE POLICIES IN THE FUTURE AND WE'LL RESERVE TIME FOR
REBUTTAL.
22:26:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
22:26:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I HAD A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE PLANNER.
22:26:59 >> ALEXIS CRESPO.
22:27:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YES, MA'AM.
SPEAKING OF COMPATIBILITY, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR AICP
CREDENTIAL VERY MUCH.
IF THIS DEVELOPER CAME TO YOU A YEAR AGO AND SAID I WANT TO
PUT 60 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON THIS BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO ME
THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 60 PLATTED LOTS HERE, WOULD YOU HAVE
TOLD THEM THAT THAT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE REST OF THE
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD?
22:27:30 >> SINGLE-FAMILY WOULD ALSO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WOULD SUBMIT THAT MULTIFAMILY IS ALSO COMPATIBLE WHEN WELL
DESIGNED.
22:27:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I UNDERSTAND.
I'M CURIOUS ABOUT SINGLE-FAMILY.
SO FROM YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, SINGLE-FAMILY COULD HAVE
BEEN COMPATIBLE WITH THIS LOCATION.
22:27:47 >> YES.
22:27:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
22:27:49 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE.
MR. SHELBY.
22:27:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MS. CRESPO, MS. CORBETT DID HAND IN YOUR
RESUMÉ.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WANTED TO MAKE THAT PART OF THE
RECORD AT THIS TIME.
22:28:01 >> YES, PLEASE.
22:28:02 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
IF ANYONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 12, PLEASE COME
FORWARD.
SO THAT WE GET A GOOD IDEA, HOW MANY FOLKS HERE ARE PLANNING
ON SPEAKING THIS EVENING, IF YOU COULD RAISE YOUR HAND.
HOW MANY OF YOU ALL HAVE SPEAKER WAIVER FORMS OR PLANNING
ON?
SO IF EVERYONE WHO IS PLANNING ON SPEAKING, IF YOU'RE ABLE
TO DO SO, PLEASE STAND UP AND LINE UP AGAINST THE WALL SO
THAT WE CAN KNOW.
THANK YOU.
22:28:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MS. ZELL HAS ONE NAME.
KATLYN SHARON, ARE YOU HERE AND WAIVING YOUR TIME?
FOUR MINUTES PLEASE.
ARE YOU MS. ZELL?
YOU DON'T HAVE A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM.
OKAY.
YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES THEN.
YOUR NAME, PLEASE.
SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE MS. ZELL.
22:28:59 >> KALI DENAULT, 7708 SOUTH SPARKMAN STREET, TAMPA, FLORIDA,
33616, PORT TAMPA CIVIC ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF A DIVIDED BOARD AND
NEIGHBORS WHO STAND ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.
WHILE I'M NOT HERE TO SAY THE BOARD COLLECTIVELY SUPPORTS
THE PROJECT, I'M ALSO NOT HERE TO SAY THAT WE OPPOSE IT.
I'VE SPOKEN AGAINST REZONING THE SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY
WHEN A PREVIOUS POTENTIAL OWNER REJECTED OUR EFFORTS TO MEET
REGARDING THE PROJECT AND DID NOT WANT OUR INPUT.
THIS TIME AROUND, THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BEFORE THIS
HEARING.
WE MET SEVERAL TIMES WITH THE OWNER.
WHAT WAS ONCE A SITE OF DEBRIS AND CRIME IS NOW CLEAN AND
CLEAR.
NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR APPRECIATION FOR
THAT AS WELL AS THEIR DISPLEASURE IN THIS PROPERTY COMING TO
LIFE AS AN INDUSTRIAL SITE.
FOR THAT REASON, SOME IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD RATHER SEE
THE SITE REZONED FOR MULTIFAMILY.
HOWEVER, AS WE HAVE EXPRESSED MANY TIMES BEFORE, THE
CONGESTION IN OUR AREA AND NORTH OF US CONTINUES TO WORSEN.
OUR ROADS ARE OVERCROWDED AND OUR SIDEWALKS ARE NOT
CONTINUOUS.
WE CANNOT SUPPORT CITY COUNCIL ADDING TO THIS CONGESTION
WHILE THE CITY DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CURRENT RESIDENTS IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS MATTER IS ABOUT REZONING FROM INDUSTRIAL TO
MULTIFAMILY, AND WE WILL NOT OPPOSE THAT AS A BOARD.
THANK YOU.
22:30:14 >>LUIS VIERA:
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
22:30:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YOU SPEAK ABOUT TRAFFIC IN TERMS OF
DAY-TO-DAY TRAFFIC.
DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS?
DOES YOUR ASSOCIATION HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT HURRICANE
EVACUATION TRAFFIC IN TERMS OF EVERYBODY SOUTH OF GANDY
TRYING TO GET OUT?
22:30:29 >> YES, ABSOLUTELY.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT MULTIPLE TIMES.
I THINK ONE FEAR BECAME REAL WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHEN
IT WAS HURRICANE MATTHEW HIT PANAMA CITY.
THAT ESCALATED VERY QUICKLY AND IT WENT FROM I BELIEVE A ONE
TO A FIVE OR TWO TO FIVE, VERY QUICKLY.
THAT'S WHEN WE REALLY STARTED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WOULD
HAPPEN IF WE WENT FROM A MILD HURRICANE TO A MAJOR
EVACUATION.
22:30:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND THE NOTION OF 331 ADDITIONAL VEHICLES
COMING OUT OF THIS PARCEL, HOW WOULD YOU EVALUATE THAT IN
TERMS OF HURRICANE EVACUATIONS?
22:31:07 >> I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HELP US.
THAT'S FOR SURE.
22:31:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU.
22:31:10 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
22:31:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MS. ZELL HAS FOUR MINUTES.
22:31:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
GO AHEAD, MA'AM.
22:31:26 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS TAMMY ZELL.
I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH THE STOP OVERBUILDING SOG GROUP.
I WANT TO START OFF BY STATING THAT I AM A DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE AT MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE, BUT I
IN NO WAY SPEAKING AS A BASE REPRESENTATIVE.
I WOULD LIKE TO USE MY TIME THIS EVENING TO PROVIDE A
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE SOUTH TAMPA TRAFFIC ISSUES
THAT STILL EXISTS TO THIS DAY.
I MOVED TO TAMPA IN MAY 2000 AND FROM THE START WAS LIVING
IN SOG.
MY FIRST DWELLING WAS AN APARTMENT AT LIGHTHOUSE BAY
APARTMENTS, LOCATED AT DALE MABRY HIGHWAY JUST SOUTH OF
GANDY.
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, I WAS AT MY JOB ON BASE WHEN WE
RECEIVED WORD THAT THE FIRST TOWER OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER
HAD BEEN STRUCK BY AN AIRPLANE.
A NUMBER OF US STOOD IN THE BREAK ROOM WATCHING THE
TELEVISION NEWS COVERAGE AND WITNESSED THE SECOND PLANE
HITTING THE SECOND TOWER.
WHEN JUST OVER 30 MINUTES LATER, WE SAW A REPORT OF THE
PENTAGON BEING STRUCK, IT DIDN'T TAKE US LONG TO REALIZE
THAT OUR LOCATION COULD ALSO BE AT RISK.
FORTUNATELY, THOSE FEARS NEVER CAME TO LIGHT, BUT THE
EFFECTS OF THAT TERROR ATTACK IMMEDIATELY IMPACTED
MacDILL'S SECURITY POSTURE.
NOW, WHAT MANY MAY NOT REMEMBER FROM THIS TRAGIC DAY IS THAT
THE GULF COAST WAS ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF TRACKING A
POTENTIAL HURRICANE THAT WOULD BECOME TROPICAL STORM
GABRIELLE THAT STRUCK THE VENICE AREA A FEW DAYS LATER.
ON THE FOLLOWING DAYS OF THE ATTACK, WE ALL RETURNED TO WORK
TO DO OUR HURRICANE PREPARATIONS.
ALSO ON THAT DAY, MacDILL BEGAN ENFORCING 100% ID
CHECKS, WITH THE STICKER ON THE WINDSHIELD NO LONGER BEING
SUFFICIENT TO GAIN BASE ACCESS.
DESPITE LIVING TWO MILES FROM THE MAIN GATE, I ROLLED OUT OF
MY APARTMENT COMPLEX THE NEXT MORNING INTO A SOLID BLOCKADE
OF TRAFFIC DUE TO THE SLOW PROCESS OF CHECKING ID.
THAT DAY IT TOOK ME NEARLY TWO HOURS TO GET TO WORK.
I LATER HEARD REPORTS OF TRAFFIC ON DALE MABRY STRETCHING
BACK TO THE LOWE'S STORE, NOT TO MENTION THE LOGJAM OF
VEHICLES ON THE CROSSTOWN AND EVERY OTHER ARTERY HEADING
SOUTH.
FOR THE WEEKS TO COME, AS THE BASE AND ALL PERSONNEL COMING
TO WORK ADJUSTED TO THIS NEW REALITY, THE STREETS CONTINUED
TO BE CLOGGED WITH TRAFFIC.
MANY BUSINESSES SUFFERED DUE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS BEING UNABLE
TO READILY GET TO THEIR STORES.
I'M SHARING THIS EXPERIENCE WITH YOU TONIGHT TO SHOW YOU HOW
AN EVENT OR CRISIS THAT IS NOT EVEN DIRECTLY HAPPENING ON
MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE OR WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY CAN STILL
HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.
SOUTH OF GANDY IS AT THE BOTTOM OF A FUNNEL.
AND AT THAT TIP IS MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE THAT HAS THE
EQUIVALENT OF A SMALL TOWN, ABOUT 22,000 PEOPLE FLOWING IN
AND OUT OF THE GATES EACH DAY.
THIS NOW BEING COUPLED WITH THE EXPLOSIVE POPULATION GROWTH
OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS OR SO IS A CONTINUAL TRAFFIC
NIGHTMARE FOR NOT ONLY THE PEOPLE HEADING TO AND FROM
MacDILL BUT ALSO FOR THE SOG RESIDENTS THAT ARE MERELY
TRYING TO DO THEIR DAILY ERRANDS.
BACK IN 2005, AS CITED IN AN ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE TAMPA
BAY TIMES, THEN MAYOR PAM IORIO REQUESTED A MORATORIUM ON
FURTHER DEVELOPING OF THE SOUTH OF GANDY AREA UNTIL ROAD AND
SCHOOL ISSUES COULD BE ADDRESSED, AS WELL AS FINDING A WAY
TO BRING IN MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THOSE CONCERNS WERE BROUGHT ABOUT AS A MEANS OF BETTER
SUPPORTING THE MacDILL POPULATION AT A TIME THAT BASE
CLOSURES WERE BEING CONSIDERED ACROSS THE NATION.
THE FINANCIAL CRISIS IN 2008 HELPED STAVE OFF THIS
DEVELOPMENT FOR A TIME.
BUT ONCE THE DUST SETTLED AND ADMINISTRATIONS CHANGED,
NOBODY SEEMED TO REMEMBER THE NEED FOR BETTER ROADS AND
SCHOOLS OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR
ASSERTED ITS DOMINANCE.
I ASK YOU TO KEEP THIS HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE IN MIND EACH
AND EVERY TIME A DEVELOPER COMES BEFORE YOU SEEKING APPROVAL
FOR MORE APARTMENTS OR TOWNHOME COMPLEXES SOUTH OF GANDY OR
WHEN ROAD MEDIAN PROPOSALS ARE MADE THAT ONLY WASTE MONEY BY
GIVING THE ILLUSION LIKE SOMETHING IS BEING DONE INSTEAD OF
ACTUALLY FIXING THE PROBLEM.
UNTIL THE ROADS AND FLOW OF TRAFFIC ARE SERIOUSLY LOOKED AT
OR MORE EMPHASIS ON AFFORDABLE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING IS
MADE, THE CONTINUED GROWTH OF POPULATION IS UNSUSTAINABLE
AND WILL ONLY BE MORE DETRIMENTAL TO SOG, ESPECIALLY DURING
TIMES OF CRISIS NOT ONLY LOCALLY BUT NATIONWIDE AS WELL.
THANK YOU.
22:35:24 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
22:35:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MRS. BENNETT HAS SIX NAMES.
MIKE FENTON?
SONYA SULLIVAN?
SONYA?
I'M SORRY, THANK YOU.
ANDA MADDOX.
JOHN MADDOX.
THANK YOU.
JOHN MORRISON.
THANK YOU.
LISA MARIE CHESTNUT?
6 PLUS 3 IS --
22:36:30 >> MY NAME IS CAROL ANN BENNETT.
I LIVE IN VIRGINIA PARK.
I GREW UP SOUTH OF GANDY.
WHEN MY CHILDREN WERE YOUNG, I USED TO SAY, WHAT WOULD THE
HEADLINES SAY NOW THAT I AM PARENTING?
CAN I DASH OUT TO THE FARM STORES AT 9:00 AT NIGHT SINCE IT
WILL ONLY TAKE LIKE TEN MINUTES?
WHAT WILL THE HEADLINES SAY?
CHILD LEFT ALONE IN HOUSE.
DIES IN FIRE WHILE MOTHER IS RUNNING ERRANDS.
I GUESS THAT MILK WILL HAVE TO WAIT.
I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER SOME HEADLINES.
TAMPA CITY COUNCIL DENIES REZONING REQUEST, BASED ON EFFECT
OF EVACUATION TIME. .
TAMPA CITY COUNCIL STANDS UP TO DEVELOPERS, WILL NOT APPROVE
OUT OF CONTROL GROWTH THAT MAY JEOPARDIZE SAFETY.
BIG HEADLINES.
CITY OF TAMPA SUED BY DEVELOPERS.
CITY COUNCIL SAYS THEY WILL NOT INCREASE DENSITY UNLESS
ROADWAYS CAN EVACUATE IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY BUT THERE ARE
FEW RESTRICTIONS ON DEVELOPMENTS THAT WILL INCREASE
POPULATIONS.
THEN THESE HEADLINES.
THOUSANDS OF TAMPA RESIDENTS RIDE OUT HURRICANES IN THEIR
CARS BECAUSE GROWTH OUTPACED INFRASTRUCTURE AND EVACUATION
WAS IMPOSSIBLE.
AND MY PERSONAL NIGHTMARE, THIS ACTUALLY WAS THE HEADLINE IN
HOUSTON AFTER HURRICANE HARVEY WHICH KILLED 88 TEXANS.
DEATH TOLL RISES AS FLOOD WATER RECEDES.
OVERBUILDING CITED AS THE CAUSE. THERE WERE PLENTY OF
HEADLINES ABOUT HOUSTON'S EFFORTS TO EVACUATE FOR HURRICANE
RITA AND HEADLINES WHEN THEY DID EVACUATE FOR HARVEY BECAUSE
THEY REALIZED THEY HAD BUILT A COASTAL CITY THAT COULD NOT
BE EVACUATED AND CONSEQUENTLY PEOPLE DROWNED IN THE FLOODS.
THIS IS SOME REPORTING AN HURRICANE RITA. THE EVACUATION
WAS A DISASTER IN ITSELF IN SEARING HEAT CARS CRACKED WITH
WINDOWS DOWN, AIR CONDITIONING OFF TO SAVE PRECIOUS
GASOLINE, THE TRAFFIC JAM STRETCHED FOR OVER 100 MILES AND
WENT FOR OVER A DAY AND A HALF.
GASOLINE WAS NOT TO BE FOUND ALONG THE INTERSTATE AND CARS
THAT RAN DRY MADE THE GRIDLOCK EVEN WORSE.
ABANDONED VEHICLES LITTERED THE SHOULDER LANES.
MORE THAN 100 EVACUEES DIED IN THE EXODUS.
THE DEATH TOLL FROM THE STORM ITSELF WAS A FRACTION OF THE
DEATH TOLL OF THE EVACUATION.
EXPLAINING HOUSTON'S DECISION NOT TO EVACUATE FOR HURRICANE
HARVEY. THIS IS REPORTING ABOUT HURRICANE HARVEY.
HOUSTON MAYOR SAID IF YOU THINK THE SITUATION RIGHT NOW IS
BAD, YOU GIVE AN ORDER TO EVACUATE, YOU ARE CREATING A
NIGHTMARE.
FOR THE CORE, EVACUATIONS CAN BE UNTENABLY EXPENSIVE.
FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THEY CAN BE IMPOSSIBLE.
OFFICIALS MUST CONSIDER RESIDENTS OF NURSING HOMES AND
HOSPITALS WHO MIGHT BE PUT AT RISK IF MOVED.
AND THEN WHERE ARE PEOPLE GOING TO STAY WHILE THEY ARE GONE?
THE HEAD OF FEMA DID NOT QUESTION THAT HOUSTON SHOULD NOT BE
EVACUATED.
I DON'T WANT PEOPLE DYING IN THEIR CARS.
HOUSTON'S UNBRIDLED GROWTH IS A PRIMARY FACTOR.
GROWTH ITSELF IS NOT A PROBLEM.
BUT IT CAN CREATE BENEFITS TO CITIES.
BUT POORLY PLANNED GROWTH CAN CREATE PROBLEMS AND EVEN LEAD
TO DISASTERS.
THE EXPANSION HAS LED TO SHORT-TERM FINANCIAL REWARDS FOR
DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS.
DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS HAVE NOT SHARED THE RISK PRESENTED
BY FLOODING.
THESE COSTS ARE MOSTLY PASSED ON TO RESIDENTS AND THE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.
CRITICS SAY LOCAL LEADERS HAVE BEEN PRO DEVELOPER.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVE OF POPULATION OF SOUTH
TAMPA WILL BE 78,000 IN 2040.
ON APRIL 1st, 2019, ALMOST A YEAR AGO, THE POPULATION
WAS 91,412.
THAT'S AN INCREASE OF 23,109 RESIDENTS IN JUST NINE YEARS.
THAT IS A 33.8% POPULATION EXPLOSION.
IN JUST NINE YEARS THE POPULATION IS TWO AND A HALF TIMES
GREATER THAN IT WAS PROJECTED TO BE IN 30 YEARS.
ON PAGES 3, 4 AND 14 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT SAYS
PROVISION MAP INDICATES WHERE HIGHER DENSITY SHOULD OCCUR
AND WHERE NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD REMAIN UNCHANGED AND STABLE.
THERE ARE SIX LEVELS, SOUTH TAMPA IS ONE, NO SIGNIFICANT
CHANGE, SHOULD REMAIN UNCHANGED AND STABLE, LIMITED GROWTH.
IS 34% UNCHANGED OR STABLE OR INSIGNIFICANT OR LIMITED
GROWTH?
THIS PROJECT VIOLATES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PAGES 3, 4 AND
14.
THIS IS THE OFFICIAL HURRICANE EVACUATION MAP.
ALL OF SOUTH TAMPA IS IN AN EVACUATION ZONE.
AND THERE ARE ONLY TWO WAYS OUT.
THIS WAY, RIGHT HERE, IS GOING TO BE A PARKING LOT FILLED
WITH ALL THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT OF PINELLAS COUNTY.
AND THIS IS DALE MABRY.
THINK OF THIS LITTLE PENINSULA AS A BOTTLE OF COKE AND THE
ONLY WAY OUT IS THE BOTTLENECK AT THE TOP.
THIS IS A SIGN ON DALE MABRY.
THIS IS ANOTHER SIGN ON DALE MABRY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT SAYS ROAD UNDERWATER.
THIS SIGN WAS THERE FOR WEEKS AND WEEKS, JUST A NORMAL PART
OF LIFE WHEN WE HAVE NORMAL RAINFALL.
PAGE 226 OF THE PLAN SAYS NO NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON EVACUATION
TIMES AND SHELTER DEMANDS.
PROPOSALS THAT WILL INCREASE EVACUATION TIMES SHALL MITIGATE
SUCH AS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, AGREEMENTS WITH HART TO
PROVIDE EVACUATION SERVICE, OR EMERGENCY VAN POOLS.
THIS PROJECT IS IN EVACUATION ZONE A.
YET I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PROJECT FOR
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE SO EXCELLENT AS TO BE
IMPACT.
I DIDN'T HEAR AGREEMENTS WITH HART TO PROVIDE EVACUATION
SERVICE OR PAYMENTS FOR LEGISLATION VAN POOLS.
THIS POLICY VIOLATES 1.2 AND 1.25.
THIS PROJECT IS IN THE HIGHLY FRAGILE AND REGULATED COASTAL
HIGH HAZARD AREA.
ON PAGE 224 IT SAYS THEY ARE SEEING NO NET GAIN IN
POPULATION IN COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
I REPEAT, NO NET GAIN IN POPULATION.
THE PLAN REITERATES THIS ON PAGE 225.
A NO NEGATIVE INCREASE OVERALL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY WITHIN
THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
ON PAGE 223 IT SAYS PROVIDE SAFE EVACUATION AND SURE A
PRIORITY IS PLACED ON EVACUATION ROUTES.
34% MORE PEOPLE MEANS MORE MONEY HAS TO BE SPENT ON
INFRASTRUCTURE.
WHO IS PAYING FOR THAT?
ARE THEY PAYING THE FULL TAB FOR THE IMPACT ON OUR
INFRASTRUCTURE OR AM I PAYING FOR THAT?
BECAUSE IF I AM, THAT AMOUNT IS A SUBSIDY TO THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE MUCH WEALTHIER THAN I AM CAN BECOME EVEN MORE WEALTHIER
THAN I AM.
THIS VIOLATES 1.7.1 AND 1.7.2.
AGAIN ON PAGE 223 THE CITY'S COASTAL PLANNING AREA IS NEARLY
BUILT OUT.
96% DEVELOPED.
THIS WAS WRITTEN YEARS AGO.
WHERE DO WE STAND NOW?
PROJECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL RATE OF GROWTH FROM 2007 TO 2040 IS
.47%, THAT'S LESS THAN HALF A PERCENT.
THE ACTUAL ANNUAL GROWTH RATE HAS BEEN 3.76%.
THE AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE IS 18 TIMES HIGHER THAN WHAT
WAS PROJECTED.
DID ANYONE COME TO YOU AND SAY, WHOA, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DID NOT ANTICIPATE THIS EXPLOSION.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS.
NOW IS THE TIME TO LOOK AT IT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.
AS A RESULT OF THE '04 AND '05 HURRICANE SEASON THE FLORIDA
LEGISLATURE THROUGH HOUSE BILL 7121 REQUIRED THE PROVISION
OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO UPDATE ALL REGIONAL EVACUATION
STUDIES IN THE STATE AND TIE INTO THE STUDIES OF GROWTH
MANAGEMENT.
THE INTENT IS PERFECTLY CLEAR.
THE FLORIDA LAW LEGALLY REQUIRES YOU TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT
OF GROWTH ON EVACUATION.
IT LEGALLY REQUIRES YOU TO DEVELOP RESPONSIBLY.
HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY DO THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE NECESSARY
INFORMATION?
HAS ANYONE UNPACKED THESE EVACUATION STUDIES AND TOLD YOU
WHAT THE DATA SHOWS FOR OUR FLOOD PRONE PENINSULA?
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIRES AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF NEW
DEVELOPMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EVACUATION TIMES.
HAS ANYONE PRESENTED YOU WITH THAT REVIEW AND USED IT TO
PROVE THAT THE STATE INCREASED THE DENSITY ON THIS LITTLE
PENINSULA?
I KNOW THEY HAVEN'T BECAUSE THAT REVIEW HAS NOT BEEN DONE.
YET THEY TELL YOU IT'S SAFE.
[BELL SOUNDS]
BASED ON -- NO ONE HERE CAN ANSWER THE MOST OBVIOUS AND
BASIC QUESTION, HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN BE SAFELY EVACUATED OFF
OF THE SMALL FLOOD PRONE SOUTH TAMPA PENINSULA?
HOW CAN YOU MAKE A DECISION TO SANCTION MORE GROWTH WITHOUT
THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION?
HEADLINES ARE COMING.
HOW CAN YOU RESPOND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE DATA YOU NEED?
THANK YOU.
22:45:30 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE.
22:45:31 >> MY NAME IS JEAN STROMYER. I LIVED SOUTH OF INTERBAY FOR
29 YEARS.
I ASK CITY COUNCIL TO DENY THE APPLICATION TO REZONE AS
REQUESTED BECAUSE IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
WE HAVE A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION THAT NONE OF TAMPA HAVE.
SOME OF YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF TAMPA AND MacDILL AIR
FORCE BASE DID A JOINT LAND USE STUDY.
THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY WAS TO FOSTER COOPERATIVE
LAND USE PLANNING AND TO PROVIDE A POLICY FRAMEWORK
COMPATIBLE WITH DEVELOPMENT MEASURES DESIGNED TO PREVENT
URBAN ENCROACHMENT, SAFEGUARD THE MILITARY MISSION AND
PROTECT THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.
THE JLUS STUDY PROCESS ENCOURAGED A COOPERATIVE SPIRIT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF TAMPA AND MacDILL AND TOTALS USED TO
REPRESENT A GUIDE FOR THE PUBLIC, NOT DEVELOPERS, TO DO LAND
USE IN THE STUDY AREA.
THE COMMUNITY GOALS WERE TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF
THE RESIDENTS LIVING OR WORKING NEAR MacDILL AIR FORCE
BASE.
I DO BOTH.
PROMOTE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING FOR LONG-TERM LAND USE
COMPATIBILITY SURROUNDING MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE AND THE
COMMUNITIES AND TO MAINTAIN THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF THE
CITY OF TAMPA.
THE MILITARY GOALS WERE TO SAFEGUARD THE MILITARY MISSION
AND PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC TO
MINIMIZE THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES BY BASE OPERATIONS AND TO
RESTRICT LAND USES THAT ARE DEEMED TO BE INCOMPATIBLE FOR
MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE OPERATIONS.
THE LAND ADJACENT TO MacDILL HAS 6700 INDIVIDUAL PARCELS
THAT WERE INITIALLY DEVELOPED IN THE '40s AND '50s, THEN
IN THE '90s, AND OF COURSE NOW.
THE STUDIES STATE BETWEEN THE YEARS OF 1990 AND 2000 TAMPA
EXPERIENCED AN 8.4% POPULATION GROWTH AND HAS CONTINUALLY
GROWN SINCE.
THE JLUS STUDY SAYS THAT OPERATION OR ABILITY AND ACTIVITY
OF A MILITARY INSTALLATION IS PARAMOUNT TO BOTH LOCAL AND
NATIONAL SECURITY.
WE HAVE -- IT'S THE SOCOM CENTCOM HERE.
A MAJOR CONSIDERATION IN DETERMINING AN INSTALLATION'S
FUTURE VIABILITY IS THE EXTENT TO WHICH URBAN ENCROACHMENT
HAS OCCURRED.
MOREOVER, MISSION CONSTRAINTS CAUSED BY DEVELOPMENT
ENCROACHMENT ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE MILITARY VALUE OF AN
INSTALLATION.
MacDILL HAS COEXISTED FOR 79 YEARS SINCE ITS
ESTABLISHMENT.
IT HAS PERSISTENTLY MAINTAINED THAT THE NEED TO MANAGE
ENCROACHMENT IS CRITICAL TO THE VIABILITY OF BASE OPERATIONS
AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE LOCAL RESIDENTS.
URBAN DEVELOPMENT NEAR THE PERIMETER OF MacDILL IMPACTS
OPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS, TRAINING AND READINESS MISSIONS
AND COULD THREATEN ITS FUTURE VIABILITY.
WE UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO REDEVELOP DOWN THERE BECAUSE
IT'S GREAT.
BUT DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE CONTROLLED AND COMPATIBLE WITH
THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND YOU, SIRS, ARE THE
GATEKEEPERS.
THANK YOU.
22:48:46 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU.
NEXT SPEAKER.
22:48:47 >> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS GYWANA LEONARD. I RESIDE AT 4902 WEST INGRAM
STREET.
I'M COMING AS A CONSTITUENT BECAUSE I LIVE IN THE SOUTH OF
GANDY, AND MY MAIN CONCERN IS FLOODING.
OVER THE PAST SIX YEARS THAT I HAVE LIVED IN THE HOME, WE
HAVE EXPERIENCED FLOODING ON WESTSHORE, ON DALE MABRY, AND
ON BAYSHORE, AND TRYING TO EVACUATE OR EITHER JUST LEAVE ON
THOSE STREETS IS VERY DIFFICULT.
I'M ALL ABOUT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, BUT I DO FEEL THAT
THIS SHOULD BE A BALANCE WITH THE ROAD STRUCTURES WHERE
THERE'S A BALANCE WHERE YOU ARE REPAIRING THE ROADS AND
MAKING THE ROADS MORE EFFICIENT AND SAFE FOR THE VOLUME OF
PEOPLE THAT MOVING IN THOSE AREAS SOUTH OF GANDY.
SO I REALLY WOULD ASK THAT YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION
PLANNING AND DEVELOPING IN AREAS, BUT ALSO LOOKING AT THE
STORMWATER ASSESSMENT TAX THAT WE ARE PAYING TO USE THAT TO
ACTUALLY DEVELOP THESE AREAS WHERE THE REZONING IS BEING
APPROVED.
AND I THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.
22:50:03 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU.
NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
22:50:06 >> SHAWN BROWN.
I AM BORN AND RAISED HERE IN TAMPA PROUDLY, 32 YEARS, AND
GET PAID NOTHING TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT.
WHAT IS BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION IS SIX LETTERS THAT HAVE
BEEN WRITTEN BY RESIDENTS WITHIN 250 FEET OF THIS
DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT, IN ADDITION TO
SOME TABLES AND FACTUAL STUDIES, EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE DONE
TO SUPPORT OUR ARGUMENTS.
I'M HERE ALONG WITH MANY CONCERNED CITIZENS TO DISCUSS THE
ONGOING ATTEMPTS TO OVERBUILD SOUTH OF GANDY AND THE
RAMIFICATIONS IT IS HAVING ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR EVERY
PERSON.
FIRST AND FOREMOST THE MISSION OF THE GROUP IS FLOAT TO
CEASE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SOUTH OF GANDY.
WE UNDERSTAND EACH PARCEL IS ALREADY ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL
AND INDUSTRIAL USES.
THE ISSUE OUR GROUP HAS IS THE TYPE OF ZONING SOUGHT,
PARTICULARLY MULTIFAMILY WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS
OF THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS ADOPTED ON FEBRUARY 20,
2016.
IN THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TALKS ABOUT MAINTAINING
NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY INCLUDING SUSTAINABLE MIX THAT
PROVIDES GOODS AND SERVICES WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF
RESIDENTS, ENHANCED NEIGHBORHOODS, LIVABILITY AND STABILITY.
IN ADDITION, IT TALKS ABOUT A CENTRAL PART OF ACHIEVING MORE
SUSTAINABLE LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS WILL BE PROVIDING MORE
CONVENIENT ACCESS TO GOODS AND SERVICES.
THESE CHARACTERISTICS SHOW THAT THERE WILL BE GROWTH
OPPORTUNITIES IN SOUTH TAMPA WHICH IS STABILITY.
THE MARKET IN THIS AREA -- IN THE PAST FEW YEARS THE CITY
HAS ALLOWED 2,748 MULTIFAMILY FAMILY UNITS IN THIS AREA.
ACCORDING TO RESEARCH -- AS OF RIGHT NOW, SOME OF THESE
DEVELOPMENTS ARE STILL BEING CONSTRUCTED -- NONE OF THESE
UNITS MORE THAN THREE MILES APART FROM THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT AT 6603 SOUTH TRASK.
I WILL PUT THIS CHART UP HERE TO SHOW TALKING ABOUT HERE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A FIVE STORY DEVELOPMENT CALLED THE
POINT OF WESTSHORE THAT IS CONSISTING OF 44 UNITS THAT IS
ONLY .8 MILES AWAY FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS QUITE DISTURBING, ADDING THAT AMOUNT OF DENSITY IN
SUCH A SHORT AREA.
AS YOU WILL SEE, THERE ARE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN VERY
CLOSE PROXIMITY WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT.
[RUSTLING PAPERS]
LET'S SEE.
OF THE 270 MULTIFAMILY UNITS ADDED TO THIS AREA IN THE PAST
FEW YEARS NONE ARE CONSIDERABLE AFFORDABLE FOR LOWER INCOME
FAMILIES WHICH IS A MAJOR ISSUE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA.
ADDING ADDITIONAL UNITS WILL ONLY CAUSE GENTRIFICATION OF
OUR COMMUNITY.
MANY CITIZENS OF LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK WORKING
MULTIPLE JOBS TO MAKE ENDS MEET.
AS SHOWN IN THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ON FREE OR REDUCED
LUNCHES, WHICH YOU WILL SEE RIGHT HERE, TABLE C.
YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK.
MONROE MIDDLE SCHOOL, 81.2% OF THE STUDENTS ENROLLED ARE ON
FREE OR REDUCED LUNCHES.
WESTSHORE ELEMENTARY, 73.1%.
AND [BELL RINGS] 76.1.
22:53:29 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THANK YOU.
22:53:34 >>LUIS VIERA:
NEXT, PLEASE.
AND BEFORE MRS. POYNOR COMES UP, IS NONE ELSE SPEAKING HERE
THIS EVENING?
22:53:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
TWO NAMES.
KEITH POYNOR AND STEVE MEADOWS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
GOOD EVENING.
STEPHANIE POYNOR.
I LIVE AT 7709 LANDCARE LANE IN SOUTH TAMPA.
I AM HERE TONIGHT CARRYING ON WHAT SEAN WAS DOING.
I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST OF ALL CHECK OUT THE DOCUMENT THAT I
HEAR FROM THIS NICE LADY WHO ACTUALLY LIVES WITHIN 250 FEET
OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT
ON NUMBER 2, I HIGHLIGHTED IT FOR YOU GENTLEMEN.
I AM A NATIONAL CONSULTANT WITH AN ENGINEERING FIRM THAT
SPECIALIZES IN WORKING WITH BUILDERS THAT ARE MAPPED WITH
HIGH RISK FEMA FLOOD ZONES.
THIS MAKES FOR COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE TONIGHT BUT SHE KNEW WE WOULD NOT
BE DONE IN TIME.
THERE ARE ALSO SIX LETTERS FROM FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT
I PERSONALLY WENT DOOR TO DOOR.
ALL OF THE HOUSES IN THAT 250-FOOT RANGE ARE ONE-STORY HOMES
EXCEPT TWO.
THERE ARE TWO MULTIFAMILY, TOWNHOUSES, THOSE ARE ALL SINGLE
FAMILY RANCH HOMES.
SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THREE STORY AND FOUR STORY AND SIX
STORY OR WHATEVER STRUCTURES OVER THERE.
AND I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU.
OF THE THREE, THIS IS MY THIRD TIME UP HERE. THIS IS THE
LEAST OFFENSIVE TO ME, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S GOOD.
I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO BE CONFUSED.
AND WE ARE GOING TO COVER DENSITY.
WE ARE AT 52%.
I COULDN'T TELL TODAY WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE
COMPREHENSIVE FLORIDA.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THIS CHART THAT SEAN HAD UP HERE,
72%, 76, 73, 81%, THEY DON'T SEND THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL POOR
AND COME HOME AND HAVE BIG PAYCHECKS TO PAY FOR THESE NICE
APARTMENTS.
THEY DON'T.
SO WE HAVE A STRONG NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE LIVE IN -- OH, THERE.
NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT SCHOOLS BECAUSE SCHOOLS AREN'T
SUPPOSED TO BE A CONSIDERATION.
BUT YET IT'S IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 341 TIMES.
SO WHILE THE SCHOOLS MIGHT NOT BE IMPORTANT AS A LEGAL
BASIS, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY IT'S IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN 341 TIMES.
AND ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE TERM MIXED USE
IS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 114 TIMES.
THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT MULTIFAMILY UNITS.
THEY TALK ABOUT MIXED USE.
AND SO WE IN SOUTH TAMPA, WE DON'T HAVE GROCERY STORES.
WE DON'T HAVE GAS STATIONS.
WE DON'T HAVE DOCTORS' OFFICES.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, MY HUSBAND'S BARBER IS LOOKING FOR A
NEW PLACE TO LOCATE.
WE CANNOT FIND HER ANYTHING SOUTH OF GANDY.
NOTHING IS AVAILABLE.
I HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR HER -- [RUSTLING PAPERS] OKAY.
WE ALSO HAVE ON THE FLOOD ZONE, I HAVE THE FLOOD ZONE -- OR
I'M SORRY, WE PULLED OUR COASTAL HIGH HAZARD MAP AS WELL.
SINCE IT IS 52%, I REALLY COULDN'T TELL.
THIS NICE LADY OVER HERE TOLD US WHO IT WAS.
BUT IN THE CM POLICY 1.2.3, IT SAYS ANNUAL REVIEW AND
DEVELOPMENT.
I HADN'T SEEN THAT.
I HAVE BEEN LOOKING EVERYWHERE FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.
I CAN'T FIND IT.
ACCORDING TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY EVACUATION MAP, THERE
ARE THREE SHELTERS THAT ARE DESIGNATED.
WE HAVE DESIGNATED BUS ROUTES, AND OF THOSE THREE SHELTERS,
ACCORDING TO MY RESEARCH, ONE OF THEM IS 19.8 MILES WHICH
CAN TAKE BETWEEN 45 AND 120 MINUTES IN 5 P.M. TRAFFIC.
AND MIDDLETON HIGH SCHOOL IS BETWEEN 32 AND 40 MINUTES AT
5 P.M. TRAFFIC.
AND THEN WE HAVE GOT SMITH MIDDLE SCHOOL WHICH IS 17.8
MILES.
AND IT'S A 30 MINUTE TO 100 AN HOUR 10 MINUTES AT 5:00
TRAFFIC.
IF WE HAD SOME OTHER KIND OF ISSUES, WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT
A LONGER WAIT TIME TO GET OUT FOR A HURRICANE.
SO THAT .8 IS NOT A WHOLE LOT.
I AM GOING TO GO BACK TO TRAFFIC.
I KNOW NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC.
BUT YET THE D.O.T., FLORIDA D.O.T. HAS DECIDED THAT WE HAVE
SO MUCH STINKING TRAFFIC DOWN HERE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO
RIP UP THE NEW MEDIAN THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA HELPED PAY FOR,
I THINK IT WAS $1.4 MILLION IN 2017.
THEY ARE GOING TO RIP UP THOSE MEDIANS WHICH ARE -- THEY
HAVE PLANTS IN THEM, AND THEY ARE GOING TO PUT IN SOME MORE
CEMENT, BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH TRAFFIC HEADING THROUGH
BECAUSE WE CANNOT GET UP ON MAIN ARTERIES THAT WE ARE HAVING
ACCIDENTS.
BUT THE FLORIDA D.O.T. DOESN'T MATTER.
THE TRAFFIC STUDIES, OH, I ALMOST FORGOT, THE TRAFFIC
STUDIES OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WAS DONE IN DECEMBER OF
2017.
THAT'S MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO.
WHEN WE HAD --
22:58:58 >> I WILL GIVE YOU 15 SECOND TO FINISH UP.
22:59:00 >> WE HAD 2,000 LESS PEOPLE ACCORDING TO DATA WHICH WAS
TAKEN FROM HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
SO HOW THAT TRAFFIC STUDY IS RELEVANT TODAY, I DON'T KNOW.
22:59:09 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM.
WE APPRECIATE IT.
ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 12 BEFORE REBUTTAL?
PETITIONER, REBUTTAL.
22:59:19 >> WELL, I'M SURE YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE BEEN DRINKING FROM
A FIRE HOSE JUST AS I HAVE WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED THIS EVENING.
FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU WHERE I LEFT OFF WHICH THIS
IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING AND YOUR ROLE TONIGHT IS TO
JUDGE THIS APPLICATION ON ITS MERITS AND ITS CONSISTENCY
WITH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
I HEARD MANY OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE EXPRESSED BY THE
CONSTITUENTS.
I HEARD THE TERM MORATORIUM.
I HEARD ELIMINATE CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREAS.
I HEARD STORMWATER TAXES. I HEARD CHANGE THE LAND USE
CATEGORY.
I HEARD THE MARKET IS FLOODED WITH APARTMENTS.
I HEARD AFFORDABILITY.
AND ALSO HEARD THAT THERE ARE OTHER DESIRED PIECES SUCH AS
COMMERCIAL USES.
NONE OF THOSE ARE PROPER BASIS FOR A DENIAL OF THIS SPECIFIC
REZONING APPLICATION.
THEY ARE ALL WELL WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY
TO MAKE CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU
HAVE UNDERTAKEN MANY WORKSHOPS ALREADY AND HAVE SEVERAL
PLANS TO ADDRESS ALL OF THESE ISSUES.
SO WE HAVE DEEP CONCERNS ABOUT THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF
THIS APPLICANT WHO IS A PROPERTY OWNER PROCEEDING UNDER THE
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY WHICH PLANS 24 UNITS TO THE ACRE IN
MULTIFAMILY.
IN TERMS OF THE SCHOOL NOT BEING A BASIS FOR DENIAL, THAT'S
TRUE.
THAT'S A CONCURRENCY ISSUE.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE UPDATED SCHOOL COMMENTS THAT ARE
FILED IN ACCELA, THERE IS ACTUALLY CONCURRENCY AVAILABLE AT
THE HIGH SCHOOL, MIDDLE SCHOOL AND ADJACENT ELEMENTARY
SCHOOLS.
SO EVEN AS WE STAND TODAY, THERE IS NOT A CONCURRENCY
CONCERN.
I WANT TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD
POLICIES.
I HEARD THEM QUOTED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT TIMES THIS EVENING
EARLIER, I THINK FROM COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER GENERALLY, ABOUT
LIMITING INCREASING DENSITY IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD, AND
THIS FROM SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO SPOKE THIS EVENING.
PAGE 225, WHICH IS POLICY 1.1.6, IT SAYS LIMIT NEW
DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA TO USES THAT ARE
VESTED OR SHOWN ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
AND SINCE WE HAVE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WHICH SHOWS 24
UNITS TO THE ACRE.
SO THERE IS NO PROHIBITION ON INCREASING DENSITY IN THE
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA UNDER THAT POLICY.
LIKEWISE, THE POLICY THAT WAS BEING READ FROM WHICH IS
POLICY 1.25 THAT REFERENCED HURRICANE EVACUATION MITIGATION
AND COORDINATION WITH HART, THAT IS POLICY 1.25 AND IT
SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENTS.
AND PLAN AMENDMENT AS YOU ALL KNOW IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ENDMENT. THIS IS NOT A PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ENDMENT. THIS IS A REZONING.
AND IF YOU WANT TO THE LOOK FOR DIRECTION AS TO WHAT YOU DO
WITH RESPECT TO HURRICANE RELATED ISSUES IN A REZONING, YOU
NEED ONLY LOOK TO POLICY 1.2.2 WHICH TALKS ABOUT REZONING IN
THE COASTAL PLANNING AREA WHICH THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD IS
PART OF, THAT ALL OF THOSE REZONINGS MUST MITIGATE FOR
HURRICANE SHELTER SPACE.
THE SITE PLAN HAS A NOTATION ON IT THAT WE WILL MAKE RAM FOR
SHELTER SPACE.
WE SUBMITTED INTO THE RECORD A HURRICANE EVACUATION PLAN TO
HELP MITIGATE HURRICANE EVACUATION TIME FOR THIS PARTICULAR
PROJECT.
SO WE HAVE ADDRESSED THOSE THINGS.
AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT ALTHOUGH WE HEARD FROM PEOPLE
READING FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THIS EVENING, AND WHILE
THEY MAY BE WELL INTENDED, THEY ARE NOT TRAINED PLANNERS.
YOU DO HAVE YOUR CITY AND COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
WHO HAS TESTIFIED THAT THIS PROPOSED REZONING IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT'S
EXPERTS.
AND JUST TO CORRECT THE RECORD WITH RESPECT TO THE TRAFFIC
REPORT, OUR REPORT WAS SUBMITTED AS OF JULY 2019 CONSISTENT
WITH THIS APPLICATION SO I AM NOT SURE WHERE THE OLD DATA IS
COMING FROM.
I DIDN'T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE LETTERS IN THE
RECORD THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY RESIDENTS SO I DON'T HAVE
REALLY THAT IN FRONT OF ME TO ADDRESS TO YOU.
I WILL SAY WE HAVE MET WITH THE COMMUNITY FIVE TIMES
INCLUDING SENDING SPECIFIC LETTERS TO PEOPLE WITHIN THAT 250
RADIUS, AND WE HAVE SPOKEN TO ANYONE WHO WOULD SPEAK TO US,
AND WE TRIED OUR BEST TO MODIFY OUR SITE PLAN TO ADDRESS
THOSE CONCERNS.
AND WE THINK WE HAVE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF DOING THAT AND
HAVE PROPOSED A PROJECT THAT IS COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT
WITH THIS AREA.
AND WITH THAT WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL.
23:03:41 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?
23:03:46 >>Ed Ogiba:
THANK YOU.
JUST ONE OR TWO QUESTIONS FOR THE
THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS ACTUALLY IN
THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD ZONE, HAS TO BE MORE THAN 50
PERCENT, THEN ANOTHER PROVISION THAT SAYS THAT ANY PORTION
IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AND THE ENTIRE PARCEL SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD.
HAVE YOU ALL EVALUATED THAT, AND I THINK SOMEBODY ON STAFF
SAID THEY BELIEVE IT WAS COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
DO YOU ALL DIFFER FROM THAT?
23:04:25 >> WE AGREE THAT -- SORRY.
TO ME THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION, BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
INTERPRETATION OF THE POLICIES.
WITH RESPECT TO WHAT THE CURRENT MODELS ARE WHICH IS ONE
DEFINITION OF THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD IN YOUR HIGH HAZARD
PLAN, WE BELIEVE THESE ARE ACCURATE.
WE DO SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THERE IS A COMPETING POLICY IN YOUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT SAYS THAT PROPERTIES THAT ARE MAPPED
ON THE ADOPTED MATS ARE THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE COASTAL
HIGH HAZARD AREA.
ACCORDING TO THOSE, RATHER THAN GETTING INTO THAT NUANCE
WITH YOU THIS EVENING, WE JUST WENT ALONG WITH THE ANALYSIS
BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK IT'S RELEVANT.
WE STILL THINK WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
WHETHER WE ARE 100%, 52% IN OR NOT IN AT ALL.
23:05:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU, MADAM ATTORNEY,
WANT TO BE TESTIFYING SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING YOUR
PLANNER.
23:05:25 >> OUR PLANNER PROBABLY SHOULDN'T TESTIFY TO THAT EITHER.
OUR CIVIL ENGINEER CAN TESTIFY TO THAT.
23:05:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND MY QUESTION IS PRETTY SIMPLE.
DO YOU AGREE THAT YOUR PROPERTY IS 52% WITHIN THE COASTAL
HIGH HAZARD AREA?
23:05:38 >> TRENT STEVENSON, CONSULTING, EAST JACKSON STREET.
YES, BASED ON THE CURRENT MODEL WE ARE 52%.
23:05:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU, SIR.
AND I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOUR PLANNER, MR. CRESPO, IF
I COULD.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH OUR OBJECTIVE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD
AREA, CM 1.1?
AND I WILL JUST READ IT VERBATIM.
I HAVE GOT A FEELING YOU HAVE LOOKED AT IT.
IT SAYS DIRECTED FUTURE POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS AWAY FROM
THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA SO AS TO ACHIEVE A NO NET
INCREASE IN AN OVERALL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY WITHIN THE
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
OKAY.
HOW MANY APARTMENTS ARE YOU OFFERING HERE WITH THIS PROJECT?
23:06:32 >> 240.
23:06:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO AT A MINIMUM, SO 240 ADDITIONAL
PEOPLE.
CORRECT?
23:06:41 >> THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP ALLOWS 24 UNITS GREATER OR 252 ON
THIS PROPERTY, AND WE DO INTERPRET THIS TO APPLY TO THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE 24 CATEGORY AND THE DENSITIES
ALLOCATED.
23:06:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YOU JUST GAVE ME A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF
YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THIS.
BECAUSE MY QUESTION IS QUITE SIMPLE.
ARE YOU ADDING ADDITIONAL PEOPLE TO THIS PROPERTY FOR
RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES?
23:07:16 >> THAT IS CORRECT.
BUT THAT IS NOT MY INTERPRETATION OF HOW THAT APPLIES.
23:07:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I UNDERSTAND YOU ARE DOING A LEGAL
INTERPRETATION OR EVEN A PROFESSIONAL INTERPRETATION IS
FINE, OKAY.
WE CAN DIFFER ALL DAY IN TERMS OF WHAT THIS OBJECTIVE MEANS.
I LOOK AT IT PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
IT SAYS NO NET INCREASE IN OVERALL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
OKAY.
YOU HAVE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY THAT HAD NO RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY.
AGREED?
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY THAT WAS THERE HAD NO RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY.
AGREED?
23:07:48 >> I DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT INTERPRETATION.
NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE.
JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE TU-24 DOES HAVE --
23:07:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT.
I AM ASKING THE QUESTION.
THE EXISTING ZONING THAT YOU CITED OVER AND OVER AGAIN, THE
INDUSTRIAL ZONING HAD NO RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
CORRECT?
23:08:08 >> THE ZONING DOES NOT, OBJECTIVE 1.1 DOES NOT RELATE TO
THEM.
IT RELATES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE.
23:08:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I THINK AT THIS POINT -- YOU ARE NOT
ANSWERING MY QUESTION AND WE CAN PROBABLY GO ROUND AND
ROUND.
AND MY QUESTION IS QUITE SIMPLY, DOES THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING
HAVE A RESIDENTIAL DENSITY?
23:08:29 >> THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT DOES NOT, NO, SIR.
23:08:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY.
AND NOW WE ARE ADDING ADDITIONAL HOW MANY UNITS?
23:08:37 >> WE ARE REQUESTING 240 UNITS.
23:08:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
240 UNITS.
A MINIMUM OF 240 PEOPLE ASSUMING EVERYBODY THERE IS SINGLE.
OKAY?
THAT IS AN INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
CORRECT?
23:08:52 >> THAT IS CHANGING FROM INDUSTRIAL TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICT.
23:08:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WHICH IS WHAT YOU ARE ASKING.
YOU ARE ASKING TO GO FROM INDUSTRIAL TO PD.
AND THAT PD INCLUDES 200 SOMETHING UNITS.
SO THAT'S AN INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
AND THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
23:09:10 >> FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT, YES, SIR.
23:09:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
OKAY, THANK YOU.
23:09:15 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING FURTHER?
23:09:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
YES.
I DON'T KNOW WHO NEEDS TO ANSWER THIS.
I'LL LET THE ATTORNEY DECIDE WHO SHOULD ANSWER THIS.
I THINK MR. HENRY SPOKE TO A DOLLAR AMOUNT, OR HE DIDN'T
SPEAK TO A DOLLAR AMOUNT BUT HE SPOKE TO MONEYS THAT WILL BE
CONTRIBUTED TO EASE THE TRANSPORTATION.
HAS THAT NUMBER BEEN CALCULATED OR SHOULD I ASK OUR STAFF?
23:09:46 >> IN OUR REPORT IT'S $16,000.
23:09:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
16,000?
AND THAT'S FOR --
23:09:57 >> THAT IS PER YOUR PROCEDURES MANUAL ON HOW THEY CALCULATE
THAT.
THAT IS THE MITIGATION FEE BASED ON PROCEDURES OUTLINED.
23:10:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THAT COMES OUT TO I THINK LESS
THAN --
23:10:10 >> THAT IS OVER AND ABOVE THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
THAT WOULD BE PAID FOR THE PROJECT.
I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
BUT THAT IS IN ADDITION.
23:10:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO THAT'S LESS THAN $500 PER UNIT?
APPROXIMATELY.
IT SOUND LIKE ABOUT $500 PER UNIT.
OKAY.
AND THE LAST ONE, AND AGAIN, ATTORNEY, YOU CAN DECIDE WHO
YOU WANT TO ANSWER THIS.
WHAT SPECIFIC MITIGATION -- WELL, I MAKE A REFERENCE TO
1.2.2 AND YOU MADE REFERENCE TO IT AS WELL, I BELIEVE.
1.2.2 SAYS THE DEVELOPER IN A REZONING -- AND I AGREE WITH
YOU, THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE, AND I AM NOT GOING TO CITE ANY
COMP PLAN PROVISIONS, I MEAN IN TERMS OF PLAN AMENDMENT, WE
ARE NOT HERE FOR PLAN AMENDMENT, WE ARE HERE FOR REZONING.
IT SAYS REZONINGS IN THE COASTAL PLANNING AREA THAT INCREASE
THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS SHALL MITIGATE THE IMPACT ON
SHELTER SPACE DEMANDS BASED UPON -- BASED ON THE SHELTER
SPACE LEVEL OF SERVICE.
WHAT SPECIFICALLY HAVE YOU GUYS DONE TO MITIGATE THAT
IMPACT?
23:11:29 >> THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ACTUALLY HAS A PROVISION THAT
REQUIRES US TO PUT IN THE SITE PLAN THAT FOLLOWS A SITE PLAN
IN THE ZONING CODE AND WE MADE THAT NOTATION ON THE SITE
PLAN.
23:11:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
TELL ME MORE.
I COULD DIG IT UP.
23:11:48 >> NO, WE'LL PULL IT UP FOR YOU.
SORRY.
WE'LL GET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR YOU.
IT'S ALSO ON THE SITE PLAN.
23:12:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
WHILE YOU ARE LOOKING, LET ME ASK A
RELATED QUESTION.
YOU WERE -- YOUR HANDOUT THAT YOU SAY YOU ARE GOING TO GIVE
TO EACH OF YOUR RESIDENTS TITLED PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR RISK
STATEMENT, AND IT SAYS EACH WILL CONTAIN A DISCLAIMER THAT
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN HURRICANE EVACUATION ZONE A,
AND THEN IT GOES DOWN A LITTLE BIT BELOW, AND IT SAYS DUE TO
THE POTENTIAL STORM SURGE, IF THE ZONE IS ORDERED TO BE
EVACUATED, ALL RESIDENTS MUST EVACUATE AT THE TIME THAT AN
EVACUATION ORDER IS ISSUED.
AND YOU GUYS ARE PUTTING THAT IN THERE AS A RISK STATEMENT
BASICALLY TO PUT EVERYBODY ON NOTICE THAT THIS IS AN
EVACUATION A ZONE AND THEY HAVE TO GET OUT.
THEY HAVE TO HIT THE ROADS AND GET OUT.
THOSE 323 VEHICLES THAT MR. HENRY ESTIMATED.
23:13:25 >> THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HIT THE ROAD THEMSELVES.
AS YOU SEE LATER ON IN THAT EVACUATION PLAN, PART OF THE
PLAN IS WITHIN FOUR HOURS OF THE EVACUATION NOTICE THAT THE
PROPERTY OWNER WILL BE PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION TO PEOPLE TO
HELP EVACUATE.
23:13:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND HAVE YOU PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE OF
NEGOTIATION WAS HART OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
COMPANY?
23:13:47 >> WE WOULD NOT -- I'M SORRY.
23:13:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
TO EFFECTUATE THAT EVACUATION?
23:13:53 >> WHAT WE ARE PROMISING AND WHAT WE ARE COMMITTING TO IS
NOT RELYING ON HART FOR THAT. WE HAVE ACTUALLY
INDEPENDENTLY CONTACTED HART. HART IS NOT EQUIPPED TO
PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES.
MOST OF THEIR EVACUATION VANS ARE COMMITTED TO THEIR SPECIAL
NEEDS SHELTER SO WE WOULD NOT BE RELYING ON THE PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TO PROVIDE THAT EVACUATION PLAN.
THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DEVELOPER IS
WHAT IS PROPOSED.
23:14:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
AND YOU WERE LOOKING FOR THE PROVISION.
23:14:17 >> IT IS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 27-282.19.
23:14:25 >> WHAT DOES IT SAY?
23:14:26 >> IT BASICALLY IS A FORMULA IF YOU REFER TO POLICY 1.21
WHICH HAS A LEVEL OF SERVICE SHELTER SPACE AT 20 SQUARE FEET
PER PERSON, SO IT'S A MULTIPLIER BY THE NUMBER OF UNITS
BASED ON NUMBER OF PEOPLE BASED ON 20 SQUARE FEET OF SHELTER
SPACE, BASED ON A FACTOR OF HOW MUCH IT COST TO BUILD THE
SHELTER SPACE, AND THAT'S DETERMINED BY THE HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OFFICE.
23:14:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
SO AGAIN, HELP ME OUT.
I AM NEW AT THIS TOO.
IT SAYS THAT IN DOING THE REZONINGS THAT INCREASE THE
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, WHICH YOU ADMIT THEY DO, SHALL MITIGATE
THE IMPACT ON SHELTER SPACE DEMANDS BASED ON THE SHELTER
SPACE LEVEL OF SERVICE.
WHAT ARE YOU ACTUALLY DOING TO MITIGATE THAT OTHER THAN
CITING TO A POLICY?
23:15:13 >> MAKING A MONETARY CONTRIBUTION.
23:15:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
MAKING A MONETARY --
23:15:17 >> THAT IS WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CALLS FOR.
THE FORMULA FOR ESTABLISHING IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
THERE IS A FACTOR THAT HAS YET TO BE DETERMINED BY -- YET TO
BE UPDATED BY THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, BUT WHATEVER THAT IS, WHATEVER THAT
NUMBER IS, PLUGGED INTO THAT FORMULA WHICH IS WHAT THIS
DEVELOPER WILL BE REQUIRED TO PAY AND IT IS ON THE SITE PLAN
THAT IS A REQUIREMENT.
23:15:42 >> WHO DO YOU CONTRIBUTE THAT TO?
23:15:44 >> THE SCHOOL BOARD, ACTUALLY.
THAT'S WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CALLS FOR.
23:15:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
23:15:51 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYONE ELSE?
OKAY.
NO FURTHER COMMENTS BY COUNCIL?
MR. SHELBY OR MRS. WELLS, ANYTHING TO SAY BEFORE WE CLOSE?
23:16:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE THE PETITIONER'S
ATTORNEY HAVE THE LAST WORD TO THESE QUESTIONS, IF THERE'S
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WISH TO ADD BEFORE THE HEARING IS CLOSED,
IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED.
23:16:10 >> AGAIN, I THINK I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT I MADE A
POINT EARLIER CLARIFYING WHICH COASTAL HIGH HAZARD, WHICH
HURRICANE SHELTER AND EVACUATION POLICIES WE THINK APPLY.
WE HAVE ALSO GONE OVER AND ABOVE THAT PROVIDING THIS
ADDITIONAL MITIGATION.
AND AGAIN TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS DOCUMENTATION AND
EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED INTO THE RECORD THAT WE
HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW, IF THAT'S GOING TO BE
A BASIS FOR COUNCIL'S DECISION THIS EVENING, WE WOULD LIKE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT.
23:16:40 >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU.
ANYTHING FURTHER?
MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?
WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCILMAN CITRO. SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL?
23:16:55 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
AN ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR FIRST
READING CONSIDERATION, AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE
GENERAL VICINITY OF 6603 SOUTH TRASK STREET IN THE CITY OF
TAMPA, FLORIDA AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1
FROM ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IG INDUSTRIAL GENERAL TO
PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY, PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE PETITIONER HAS SHOWN THAT THERE ARE NO WAIVERS,
COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND I SEE THAT REALLY
EVERYTHING APPEARS TO BE IN ORDER.
23:17:33 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
23:17:35 >> I'M WAITING FOR A SECOND IS ALL.
23:17:46 >>LUIS VIERA:
NO SECOND?
OKAY.
THE MOTION DIES.
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL?
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
23:17:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I AM GOING TO MOVE TO DENY REZONING 19-94 DUE TO THE FAILURE
OF THE APPLICANT TO MEET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF TO PROVIDE
COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AS
CONDITIONED AND SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CITY CODE AND SPECIFICALLY I
BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO MEET ITS BURDEN TO SHOW
THAT THE CHANGE FROM INDUSTRIAL GENERAL TO PD FOR
MULTIFAMILY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN POLICIES, IN REGARD TO POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
AND IN REGARD TO THE OBJECTIVE I MENTIONED A MINUTE AGO,
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, CM OBJECTIVE 1.1, AND I WANT TO
STRESS THIS FOR A SECOND, THAT THE OBJECTIVES COME FIRST.
IF YOU DON'T MEET THE OBJECTIVES, WE CAN GO DOWN AND THAT'S
WHAT THE PETITIONER IS TRYING TO DO IS GO DOWN AND PICK AND
CHOOSE WHAT POLICIES UNDER THE OBJECTIVE THEY WANT TO MEET.
BUT IF YOU DON'T MEET THE OBJECTIVES, TO ME YOU ARE OUT OF
THE BALLGAME.
SPECIFICALLY CM OBJECTIVE 1.1 BY SAYS DIRECT FUTURE
POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS AWAY FROM THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD
AREA. CHHA. SO AS TO ACHIEVE A NO NET INCREASE IN OVERALL
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY WITHIN THE CHHA.
THESE PETITIONERS OWN EXPERT ULTIMATELY TESTIFIED THAT THIS
IS AN INCREASE OF AT LEAST SEVERAL HUNDRED SOULS IN THAT
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA.
THEY ALSO ADMITTED THAT THEY ARE WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH
HAZARD AREA BECAUSE THE PROJECT HAS AT LEAST 52% OF THE
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CHHA.
AND THEREFORE WITH THE NET INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
WITHIN THAT, THEY ABSOLUTELY CANNOT AND DO NOT MEET
OBJECTIVE 1.1.
FURTHERMORE, 1.2.2, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE
ADEQUATELY MITIGATED THE IMPACT ON SHELTER SPACE, COASTAL --
LET'S SEE, THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO MEET ITS BURDEN OF
SHOWING THAT THE CHANGE FROM INDUSTRIAL GENERAL TO PD
COMPLIES WITH SECTIONS 27-136 (5 AND 6) OF THE CITY CODE AND
SETS FORTH THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT INCLUDES REQUIREMENT
OF THE REZONING, MAXIMIZING PRESERVATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES AND ENCOURAGES APPROPRIATE WITH THE EXISTING
GEOGRAPHY AND SPECIFICALLY ON MAJOR 4 OF THE STAFF REPORT
OUR NATURAL RESOURCES FOLKS INCLUDED A CONCERN ABOUT
GRADING, G-R-A-D-I-N-G, GRADING REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF
FILL, SOIL, AT THIS SITE LOCATION.
THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN, DIDN'T
EVEN COME UP IN THEIR PRESENTATION.
IN REGARD TO CONSISTENCY AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY
COMPATIBILITY, THE EVENING STARTED OUT WITH THE PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF, MELISSA TESTIFYING TO THE FACT THAT ON
THIS SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACK, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE
RAILROAD TRACK, THAT THIS ENTIRE PROPOSED PROJECT OF
MULTIFAMILY, THREE STORY AND FOUR STORY BUILDINGS WAS 100%
SURROUNDED BY SINGLE-FAMILY AND POSSIBLY A FEW DUPLEXES,
ALTHOUGH SHE COULDN'T REALLY FIND ANY, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT
THE MAP, AND THE MAP CLEARLY SHOWS HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN THIS IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA.
THEREFORE, THE CONCLUSION, THE NATURAL CONCLUSION IS THIS
MULTIFAMILY PROJECT OF SEVERAL HUNDRED UNITS IS INCOMPATIBLE
WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
23:22:20 >>LUIS VIERA:
ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?
23:22:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
I THOUGHT THERE WAS ONE OTHER.
23:22:25 >>LUIS VIERA:
TAKE YOUR TIME.
23:22:38 >> I BELIEVE THAT'S IT.
I APPRECIATE THE PROFESSIONALISM OF THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL
AND ALL HER EXPERTS.
I APPRECIATE THE TIME OF THE CITIZENS WHO CAME IN THIS
EVENING TO EXPRESS THEIR CONCERN ABOUT EVACUATION.
SPEAKING OF WHICH, THE CITIZENS WHO HAVE THE MOST
EXPERIENCE, AND MAY NOT BE EXPERTS, BUT THEY HAVE THE MOST
EXPERIENCE ABOUT THE DAY-TO-DAY TRAFFIC CONDITIONS TESTIFIED
OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS OF
HURRICANE EVACUATION, AND SOME OF WHICH WERE BASED UPON
PRIOR EXPERIENCES AND PRIOR HURRICANES, OR AT LEAST CLOSE
CALLS.
AND THAT TESTIMONY HAS COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN MY
MIND AS WELL.
23:23:26 >>LUIS VIERA:
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER.
A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
23:23:33 >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED WITH VIERA AND MANISCALCO
VOTING NO.
23:23:40 >>LUIS VIERA:
VIERA AND MANISCALCO.
OH, I'M SORRY.
23:23:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
5-2.
23:23:51 >>LUIS VIERA:
OKAY.
REPORTS, MOTIONS.
COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER?
COUNCILMAN GUDES?
23:24:03 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
I WOULD LIKE --
23:24:05 >>LUIS VIERA:
ONE SECOND IF I MAY.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS, BUT IF YOU COULD --
[SOUNDING GAVEL]
WE STILL HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES LEFT IN THE MEETING SO IF YOU
ALL ARE LEAVING, PLEASE SPEAK OUTSIDE.
WE APPRECIATE IT.
AND WE KNOW IT'S LATE AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY
HERE STAYING SO LATE.
THANK YOU.
STIR, GO AHEAD.
23:24:23 >>ORLANDO GUDES:
MAKE A MOTION TO GIVE THE TAMPA
METROPOLITAN TAMPA CHAPTER OF DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY
INCORPORATED FOR PROGRAMS IN THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THIS COMMENDATION AT A REGULARLY
SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING ON MARCH 19.
23:24:42 >>LUIS VIERA:
AND HOW ARE WE ON THAT DATE WITH REGARD TO
COMMENDATIONS AND ALL THAT?
23:24:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARCH 19th?
MARCH 19th, YOU HAVE ONE COMMENDATION PRESENTLY.
THIS ADDS A SECOND.
23:24:54 >>LUIS VIERA:
YOU GOT IT.
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GUDES.
SECONDED BY -- WE WILL GIVE IT TO DINGFELDER.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO?
23:25:11 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION,
RETROACTIVE, FOR A COMMENDATION I PRESENTED THIS LAST SUNDAY
TO NIKOLAUS DEFURIO WHO OBTAINED THE RANK OF EAGLE SCOUT.
23:25:21 >>LUIS VIERA:
AND THAT WAS A YOUNG MAN WITH DOWNS SYNDROME?
I SAW THAT ON FACEBOOK.
AND I SENT TO THE BRANDON AND I SAID, HEY, LET'S GET IN
CONTACT.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE LIVES IN THE CITY OR WHATNOT.
SO GOOD JOB.
23:25:35 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
IN MY DISTRICT.
23:25:39 >>LUIS VIERA:
THAT'S A TREMENDOUS ACHIEVEMENT FOR ANYBODY.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ALL OPPOSED?
ANYTHING ELSE?
23:25:47 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
TWO VERY QUICKLY.
DEANNE DAVIS, WHO IS ONE OF THE HARDEST WORKING EMPLOYEES
FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA, IS RETIRING ON MARCH 6.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT ON MARCH 5 WE GIVE HER A
COMMENDATION FOR HER HARD WORK.
23:26:03 >>LUIS VIERA:
YES, SIR.
HOW ARE WE DOING WITH COMMENDATIONS?
23:26:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NONE ON MARCH 5th AS WE SPEAK UNTIL
NOW.
23:26:11 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
AND ALSO ONE MORE MOTION.
23:26:14 >>LUIS VIERA:
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
OKAY.
23:26:18 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
ON APRIL 16 I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO
INVITE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY AND
SOLAR ENERGY LOAN FUND TO GIVE A PRESENTATION ABOUT CLEAN
ENERGY SOLUTIONS INCLUDING SOLAR, ELECTRICAL VEHICLES,
CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY, AND FINANCED
MODELS TO TAKE PLACE AGAIN ON APRIL 16th, 9 A.M.
23:26:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HOW MUCH TIME, SIR?
23:26:45 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
TEN MINUTES.
23:26:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE
SCHEDULED.
WAS THAT APRIL AGAIN?
23:26:52 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
APRIL 16.
23:26:55 >>LUIS VIERA:
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
23:27:02 >>JOSEPH CITRO:
NOTHING FURTHER.
THANK YOU.
23:27:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
ON NOVEMBER 21, 2019 I MADE A MOTION FOR
THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO RESEARCH THE CITY'S ABILITY TO USE A
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION TO RAISE FUNDS TO CREATE A POOL OF
MONEY TO SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
I WOULD LIKE TO DELAY THAT TILL MARCH -- FROM FEBRUARY
20th, SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 20th, TO MARCH 19,
2020.
23:27:26 >> SECOND.
23:27:28 >>LUIS VIERA:
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
23:27:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
A MOTION FEBRUARY 6th REGARDING A
COMMENDATION FOR KATHY BECK WHO IS RETIRING, AND SHE'S DONE
A FANTASTIC JOB AS YOU ALL KNOW.
HOWEVER, I THOUGHT SHE WAS GOING TO RETIRE LATER ON.
I PICKED FEBRUARY 20.
WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR OF THESE. IF I COULD DO IT ON
FEBRUARY 20, I THINK SHE'S LEAVING THE NEXT DAY.
23:27:53 >>LUIS VIERA:
FOR MS. BECK WITHOUT A DOUBT.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
ALL RIGHT.
YES, SIR, COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
23:28:02 >>BILL CARLSON:
LAST WEEK I ABSTAINED FROM A VOTE.
I AM FILING MY FORM.
ALSO, FOLLOWING UP FROM THIS MORNING, FROM THE D.O.T.
PRESENTATION, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE CITY
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION
THAT THE CITY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES, THE
YBOR CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, FDOT, APPEAR BEFORE
COUNCIL TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS OF THE PROPOSED PLANS
FOR THE 14th 15th STREET EXIT.
23:28:35 >> SECOND.
23:28:36 >> YES, SIR.
23:28:40 >>BILL CARLSON:
I DIDN'T PICK A DAY.
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT DATE.
SORRY.
23:28:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU WISH TO HAVE
SPEAKING AND LONG DO YOU THINK IT WILL TAKE?
23:28:49 >>BILL CARLSON:
IT WILL JUST BE A COMBINED REPORT, PROBABLY
TEN MINUTES. I HOPE.
23:28:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
DID YOU WANT THAT UNDER STAFF REPORTS, AT
A 10:30 TIME OR --
23:28:57 >>LUIS VIERA:
I'M SORRY, I THINK WE HAVE 100 ITEMS NEXT
WEEK.
23:29:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
FEBRUARY 20th DOES LOOK RATHER LONG.
WITH REGARD TO COMMENDATIONS.
23:29:09 >>BILL CARLSON:
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE NEXT WEEK BUT WHAT
ELSE IS AVAILABLE?
23:29:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARCH 5th.
AT 9 A.M.
9:00 A.M.
ABOUT HOW LONG?
23:29:24 >>BILL CARLSON:
TEN MINUTES OR LESS.
NOT INCLUDING QUESTIONS.
23:29:27 >>LUIS VIERA:
DID YOU SECOND THE MOTION?
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CITRO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
ANY OPPOSED?
ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?
AND ONE THING IF I MAY.
I MENTIONED MR. BILL HAMLAN PASSING ON.
I WANT TO PRESENT HIS FAMILY THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 5 A
COMMENDATION FOR HIS SERVICE AT A TIME TO BE NOTED.
AND WHEN IT DOES I WILL LET EVERYBODY KNOW WHEN IT'S COMING.
23:29:57 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR?
23:30:02 >> MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE.
23:30:04 >>LUIS VIERA:
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO. SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN -- YOU NODDED, SO I'LL GIVE IT TO YOU --
COUNCILMAN GUDES.
ALL IN FAVOR.
GENTLEMEN, HAVE A GOOD EVENING AND THANK EVERYBODY FOR YOUR
HARD WORK.
[MEETING 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.
ANY PERSON WHO NEEDS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDINGS MAY NEED TO HIRE A COURT REPORTER.